California Proposition 118, Require Two-Thirds Legislative Vote and Voter Approval for Redistricting Plans Initiative (June 1990)

California Proposition 118
Election date June 5, 1990
Topic Ethics rules and commissions and Redistricting policy
Status Defeated
Type Combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute

California Proposition 118 was on the ballot as a combined initiated constitutional amendment and state statute in California on June 5, 1990. It was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported requiring a two-thirds legislative vote and voter approval to approve state legislative and congressional redistricting plans and adding the Joint Legislative Ethics Committee to the state constitution.

A "no" vote opposed requiring a two-thirds legislative vote and voter approval to approve state legislative and congressional redistricting plans and adding the Joint Legislative Ethics Committee to the state constitution.

Election results

California Proposition 118
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		1,615,163	32.99%
No		3,281,177	67.01%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Proposition 118 was as follows:

“

Legislature. Reapportionment. Ethics. Initative Constitutional Amendment and Statute.

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary for this measure was:

“

Amends state constitutional provisions governing redistricting procedures and criteria for Senate, Assembly and Congressional offices. Redistricting plan requires two-thirds vote of each house, approval by voters. Reschedules elections for all senatorial offices to second, sixth, tenth years following national census. Amends Constitution to create Joint Legislative Ethics Committee, directs Legislature establish ethical standards. Amends and adds statutes to: prohibit participation in legislation when legislator has personal interest; require legislators report gifts, honoraria of $50 or more; prohibit receipt of gifts from sources employing lobbyists; prohibit lobbying by former legislators for one year. Summary of Legislative Analyst's estimate of net state and local government fiscal impact: Limit on redistricting expenditures to one-half of costs of last redistricting (adjusted for cost-of-living changes) could reduce state costs by several millions of dollars each decade. However, requirement of electorate vote and possible court reapportionment could increase state costs, offsetting part or all of savings. Costs of legislative ethics provisions are probably minor.

”

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.

Constitutional changes

California Constitution
Preamble
Articles
I • II • III • IV • V • VI VII • VIII • IX • X • XA XB • XI • XII • XIII • XIII A XIII B • XIII C • XIII D • XIV • XV • XVI • XVIII • XIX • XIX A • XIX B • XIX C XX • XXI • XXII XXXIV • XXXV

Proposition 18 would have made these constitutional changes:

• Amending Section 2 of Article IV
• Amending Section 5 of Article IV
• Amending Section 1 of Article XXI
• Adding a new article that would have been called Article XXI A to the California Constitution.

Fiscal impact

The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:

“

The measure provides that the amount of public expenditures by the Legislature for redistricting shall be no greater than one-half of the amount that the Legislature spent in developing and adopting the redistricting plans that were based on the 1980 census, adjusted for changes in the cost of living. This provision could reduce state costs by several millions of dollars each decade. However, the provision requiring the electorate to vote on the reapportionment measures and the possible subsequent reapportionment by the courts could increase state costs, thereby offsetting part or all of the above savings. The costs of this measure associated with the conduct of Members and former Members of the Legislature are probably minor.

”

Support

Supporters

Ballotpedia did not locate a campaign in support of the ballot measure.

Arguments

• Arguments in Favor of Proposition 118, Voter Information Guide: "Proposition 118 will end a corrupt system where lobbyists use legal payoffs such as speaking fees, gifts, and lavish expense payments to purchase loopholes in laws meant to safeguard the average citizen, to procure exemptions from the regulations that protect the environment, and to buy tax loopholes that shift the tax burden to working people."
• Arguments in Favor of Proposition 118, Voter Information Guide: "Proposition 118 will cut the cost of redistricting and keep politicians from manipulating your vote to ensure their reelection."
• Arguments in Favor of Proposition 118, Voter Information Guide: "Proposition 118 is a grassroots movement to restore honesty and integrity to California politics. Nearly a million Californians already support this effort to rebuild the state's devastated political system and put an end to corruption. You can bring it about by voting yes on Proposition 118."

Opposition

Opponents

Organizations

• California Common Cause

Individuals

• President of the California Teachers' Association, Ed Foglia

Arguments

• Arguments Against Proposition 118, Voter Information Guide: "Proposition 118 is a blatant attempt to fool voters into believing they have voted for ethics reform. Proposition 118's ethics is little law with lots of loophole."
• Arguments Against Proposition 118, Voter Information Guide: "[Proposition 118] pretends to ban special interest money and gifts. But this 'ban' contains massive loopholes. Under Proposition 118, legislators could receive $100,000 from special interests to talk about fly fishing or basketweaving, or any other topic not related to government—all they have to do is disclose it."
• Arguments Against Proposition 118, Voter Information Guide: "Proposition 118 imposes a new requirement that allows a minority number of legislators to dictate how our legislative districts are to be designed. This means a few powerful legislators will determine who we the voters are allowed to vote for. This might sound like a good idea. But when applied to redistricting, a 2/3rds vote will result in back room dealing, and even more gerrymandering! The reason is simple. A 2/3rds vote means that 81 legislators must vote for the plan instead of 62. And incumbent politicians will not vote for a plan unless their seats are safe!"

Path to the ballot

In California, the number of signatures required for an initiated constitutional amendment is equal to 8 percent of the votes cast at the preceding gubernatorial election. For initiated amendments filed in 1990, at least 595,485 valid signatures were required.

See also

1990 Measures

• 1990 Measures
• State legislative elections on the ballot
• Redistricting policy on the ballot
• Ethics rules and commissions on the ballot
• 1990 legislative sessions

California

• California ballot measures
• California ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• Full text of Proposition 118
• Official State Voter Guide