Growing Pains
March 6, 2008
California speakership battle divides APA Caucus: After a raucous month of Democratic assembly members jockeying for the powerful speaker position, Assemblywoman Karen Bass was sworn in as the first minority woman speaker on Feb. 28.
The good news: This current crop of Democratic APA legislators is so talented that four out of six were mentioned as potential speaker candidates: Mike Eng, Ted Lieu, Fiona Ma and Alberto Torrico (the Republican APA members were not in play because the leader of each house is elected by the caucus of the majority party). Both Ma and Torrico made the top contender list.
The bad news: The speakership battle created sharp divisions among the small cadre of Democratic APA members. Mary Hayashi and Ted Lieu declared early for front-runner Karen Bass. Members Mike Eng and newly elected Warren Furutani, representatives of Southern California districts, were uncommitted until the last moment for multiple reasons: geographic representation, relationships with the two APA candidates and respect for the current speaker.
The strategic moves behind the assembly speaker position.
__________________________________________
With the early selection of Northern Californian Sen. Darrell Steinberg for Senate president pro tem, tradition dictates that the Assembly speaker should come from Southern California so there is a regional balance of power between the leadership of both houses. While both Ma and Torrico were running strong races, they were handicapped because they were from Northern California.
The end results: The well-liked Speaker-elect Bass, D-L.A., won because of her strong leadership experience serving as the majority floor leader. She also had the backing of Speaker Fabian Nunez, who played a major role in delivering the final votes for Bass. As early supporters of Bass, one can assume that Hayashi and Lieu will be rewarded with prize committee chairmanships or leadership roles.
Torrico will most likely continue his leadership role since he is politically savvy, has gained an impressive legislative record and has raised a lot of money to help the leadership of the house. As chair of the API Legislative Caucus, he dedicated much time and effort to elect APA legislators. He was instrumental in helping the API Caucus gain stature and respect within the state Legislature. Although he terms out in 2010, he has already filed papers to run for county supervisor. He is young and has a bright future.
Ma is considered a star among her freshman class. Her personal style has made her popular with staff and media. She is well-respected by legislators, both Democrat and Republican. She also pays close attention to her district. Associations, community groups and lobbyists enjoy working with her, so her electability factor and fund-raising capabilities are very sound. She has been successful in identifying legislation that has gained her national attention. I would not be surprised if she surfaces again as a candidate for speaker the next time around in 2009-2010.
This community should appreciate Ma and Torrico’s efforts in competing for one of the most powerful political positions in California. Their candidacies have already changed the image of APA legislators — from being seen as part of the team to a potential leader of the team.
In hindsight: At the height of the speakership battle, the two candidates — who have been among the most active in helping move the API Legislative Caucus forward — felt disappointments and frustrations regarding loyalty and lack of support from the API Caucus.
Perhaps some of these painful disappointments could have been avoided if the API members had come together at the beginning of the speakership contest to strategize how the caucus could best influence this selection process, as well as openly communicate the factors that would govern each individual’s choice for speaker.
I am concerned that some of the existing ill feelings as a result of this process may linger and weaken the caucus at a time when its influence should be growing, with the prospect of five additional members elected in 2008.
Therefore, I would urge the leadership of the API Caucus to take this time to regroup, and determine how to work together more effectively and strengthen its unity and influence for the future. The bottom line: A divided caucus is a weak caucus that no one takes seriously.
Comments
Got something to say?