There’s an awful lot of hustle and bustle this week on the issue of redistricting. And now, a joint conference committee will debate the issue, as well as possible changes to the state’s term limits law, and how to move forward– if at all– on any of it.

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D-LA) and Senate President Don Perata (D-Oakland) have agreed to set up a special conference committee on the issues, which some staffers say could meet as soon as tomorrow. Meantime, Perata told reporters in a hastily arranged news conference today that the only actual piece of legislation on redistricting, SCA 3 by Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) will apparently be voted on by the full Senate on Monday. That, however, is separate from the work of the conference committee, as Perata says it reflects a committment he made to Sen. Lowenthal to let the legislation get its day on the floor.

Confused? So are a lot of people. At the heart of the debate is the fact that some Democrats are not thrilled about any plan to hand over their control of drawing political districts. Some like to remind those within earshot that Proposition 77, on the same issue, was creamed at the polls last November.

Redistricting reformers, however, have continued to search for a proposal that will attract enough votes, and have gotten some help in lobbying legislators this week from Governor Schwarzenegger. The reform groups and the governor apparently like some of SCA 3, but not all of it. In particular, they are pushing to get rid of most of the language giving the Legislature a role in selecting the citizen commission that would actually draw the new political maps.

But mention “redistricting” at the Capitol, and the discussion almost always comes back to term limits– and the possibility that changes to the 1990 term limits law will also become part of the deal.

The most talked about change would shorten a legislator’s career from 14 years to 12 years, but allow all of that to be served in one chamber, rather than the current combo of the six years in the Assembly and two in the Senate.

And here’s where it gets dicey. For some legislators who are not enamored with redistricting reform, a term limits extension might be the price for a “yes” vote. But because all of these changes still have to be approved by voters… and because polls show voters strongly oppose any change in the term limits law… some observers suggest that term limit reform would end up being the ‘poison pill’ that would kill redistricting reform.

In other words… either way the vote on election day goes, the skeptical legislators win.