On this weekend’s newsmagazine edition of The California Report, there are a couple of segments worth noting on all things political.

First is my story on the balancing act faced by Governor Schwarzenegger in the next few weeks when it comes to dealing with a few pieces of controversial legislation. Most notably, that includes AB 32, the greenhouse gas bill that would move the state towards a new system of capping carbon emissions. The governor has come out in support of the concept, but has been working behind the scenes to modify the bill. Interestingly enough, neither environmentalists nor the business community seem to be happy with the suggested changes. And as you’ll hear in the story, Schwarzenegger’s far from the first governor to be caught in such a pickle.

Also this weekend, my colleague Scott Shafer interviews Joe Mathews, political reporter for the Los Angeles Times and author of The People’s Machine: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of Blockbuster Democracy. The book, which was recently released, takes a pretty fascinating look behind the scenes at the beginnings of the Schwarzenegger era and follows him through last year’s disastrous 2005 special election.

Both segments, and more, are here.

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.

Backers of this fall’s $37 billion dollar infrastructure bond package are touting a formal endorsement of the proposals by U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein.

The San Francisco Democrat, often thought of as the most popular elected official in the state, today endorsed the alphabet soup of measures at the top of the November ballot– Propositions 1-A, 1-B, 1-C, 1-D, and 1-E. A release from the campaign quotes Feinstein as saying the bonds will mean “steady improvements that will help sustain California’s economy and our quality of life for the long term.”

Bond supporters are just beginning their organized campaign. And on some of the issues, most notably the housing bond (1-C) and the education bond (1-D), polls so far have shown many voters are initially skeptical.

Governor Schwarzenegger has asked state energy officials to, in the words of a news release from his office, “closely monitor” the state’s gas prices in the wake of British Petroleum’s shutdown of its Alaskan oil field operations.

The governor sent word to the California Energy Commission to keep an eye on the situation. According to the governor’s office, 20% of the crude oil used in California refineries in 2005 came from Alaska’s North Slope. Schwarzenegger also sent a letter today to federal officials asking them to expedite the investigation of BP’s oil pipeline, and to also expedite any shipments of oil from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve to the West Coast, should the reserve be tapped.

The high price of gas continues to show up in public polling as a big issue with voters. And you might remember that several months ago, Schwarzenegger asked the state’s energy commission to look into the reasons for the spike in prices during the spring of 2006. The interim report, which was issued in June, merely confirmed that prices were higher than normal. The final report is expected to be released one week from tomorrow.

On this weekend’s newsmagazine edition of The California Report…

My colleague Scott Shafer has an in-depth discussion of the problems in the state’s prisons… talking to both the interim director of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Jim Tilton, and Robert Weisberg, director of the Stanford University Criminal Justice Center.

Also, a look at organic farming blues in northern California… and hookah smoking bars in California? (If you don’t know what a hookah is, well, another reason to tune in).

Air times and stations can be found here. Have a good weekend. –JM

The much discussed idea of removing the Legislature from the process of political map drawing is again the subject of some intense discussions at the Capitol.

On Thursday, Governor Schwarzenegger met privately with a group of strong supporters of redistricting, including former Senate GOP Leader Jim Brulte, former Democratic Assemblymember Fred Keeley, and Proposition 77 author/recall proponent Ted Costa. A senior advisor to the governor said in the meeting, Schwarzenegger pledged to spend much of next week trying to win passage of a redistricting proposal. The one most under discussion is SCA 3 by Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach). State elections officials have suggested that any additional items for the November ballot should be approved by the Legislature by next Friday… a tight timeline.

But as reported yesterday (here), there’s still some skepticism in the Legislature, especially among some Senate Democrats who balked at the plan in a closed-door caucus last month (a meeting that just happened to take place after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld much of the Texas legislature’s political map drawing authority, in a case from 2003).

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland), who had intended to have already moved SCA 3 forward, jokingly told reporters yesterday that “my predecessor (John Burton) always warned me about having caucuses.”

Schwarzenegger apparently wants to give it another push. However, most everyone agrees that two issues must be worked out: can the proposal to hand over district drawing power wait for the 2008 ballot? And to put it there, will enough legislators need a ’sweetener’ for this deal– namely, a modification of the state’s 16-year-old term limits law?

An administration official confirms term limits were talked about in the private meeting yesterday, mainly to see whether the issue does in fact need to be part of the deal. And as for a 2006 ballot measure versus a 2008 ballot measure… Perata said yesterday that he favors 2008,while an aide to the governor said Schwarzenegger is “open” to other options.

The campaign of Democratic gubernatorial challenger Phil Angelides seems to have settled on a strategy they like for the time being: attempting to paint Arnold Schwarzenegger as the proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing.

It began with recent accusations of the governor flip-flopping on various issues (the Democratic party has even created a webpage of the same name); today, Angelides tried to hammer home the theme in regards to the current debate over increasing the minimum wage.

Schwarzenegger supports a one-time deal for hiking the minimum wage by a buck to $7.75, through a two-step increase over nine months. But he has vetoed legislative attempts at a minimum wage hikes the last two years, because those proposals included a mechanism for future automatic increases based on the cost of living– the so-called “indexing” proposal that’s often talked about.

At a downtown Sacramento restaurant this morning, Angelides essentially tried to dismiss the governor’s interest in the issue as being based on election year politics, not policy. That’s when he referred to the governor as “the fake Democrat” in this year’s race.

Angelides vowed that as governor he would sign a minimum wage bill that includes the indexing proposal, a better deal for low-wage workers than a second Schwarzenegger term. “If he’s re-elected,” said Angelides, “there won’t be another increase in the minimum wage for four years.”

After the Angelides event, Team Arnold staffers put out a quick press release to argue that automatic minimum wage increases in other states have led to some unintended consequences (though one source quoted by the campaign– a self-described “nonpartisan” DC think tank– has been financially linked to a powerful restaurant industry lobbyist on Capitol Hill). A statement from a spokesman for Schwarzenegger criticized Angelides’ position as indicative of a candidate who favors “auto-pilot spending.”

And that’s a pretty good sign of where the race stands in early August: Schwarzenegger trying to paint Angelides as a liberal big spender, and Angelides trying to paint Schwarzenegger as a ‘Johnny Come Lately.’ It will be interesting to see which attack plan, if either, works with voters.

They’re back.

If members of the California Correctional Peace Officers Association were feeling better about Governor Schwarzenegger, the return of what I call the “Sign Guys” might… well… be a sign that all is not well.

This afternoon, an SUV pulling a large billboard trailer could be seen driving a loop around the streets near the Capitol.

On both sides of the billboard were messages about Schwarzenegger.

On one side, a large photo of the governor’s head had been placed atop a weather vane that appeared to be spinning from one direction to the next, with the caption, “Thar He Blows.” On the other side, there was another large Schwarzenegger photo– with the phrase, “The Devil Is In The Details.”

The Sign Guys were last seen in 2005, when numerous prison guards took turns driving a similar billboard around the Capitol; that one featured a large less-than-flattering paparazzi photo of a swimsuit-clad Schwarzenegger on vacation in Hawaii.

In recent months, various news reports, and even a federal court-appointed investigator, have implied that the governor’s top advisers have been trying to patch things up with the guards. But the Schwarzenegger administration has yet to strike a deal on a new contract with the CCPOA; in fact, talks seem to have stalled. And on top of that, the governor’s massive prison reform proposals are expected to be introduced in the Legislature on Monday. And as such, the timing of the Sign Guys doesn’t seem like an accident.

I flagged down the two gentlemen in the SUV, confirmed that they were from the union, and asked whether the sign was about either of these issues, or both.

“It’s about him in general,” said the driver, who smiled and drove away.

The traveling message may be nothing more than a poke in the eye. But the guards union has long been a political powerhouse in California. And one of the current parlor games for politicos revolves around trying to guess what the CCPOA will do this election cycle: will the union keep its checkbook closed? Or will it launch a repeat of 2005 and go after the governor with millions of dollars in campaign activities?

The Sign Guys aren’t saying.

For reporters that have grown, let’s say, complacent with the slow pace around the Capitol during the summer recess, Senate President Don Perata (D-Oakland) provided some nuggets of news today on the minimum wage, redistricting, prison reform, and more.

Without further ado, the highlights from his afternoon news conference…

* Minimum Wage: In what sounded like a break from many of his fellow Democrats, Perata told reporters he’d be willing to abandon efforts to attach a mechanism for future automatic minimum wage increases (known as “indexing”) if the hourly wage goes up by more than the current proposal of an extra $1 an hour. “I would trade indexing for a buck-and-a-half, I’ll just tell you that flat out,” he said. Labor unions and others have maintained that future increases linked to the cost of living are essential. The issue is currently under discussion both through legislation at the Capitol, and a special committee of the state’s Industrial Welfare Commission (which meets tomorrow morning).

* Redistricting: The Senate leader all but squelched any hope for supporters of a redistricting proposal to be on the November ballot. Perata, who has continually sounded doubts that the issue is really a pressing one for average citizens, said he now wants the current bill– SCA 3 by Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach)– to get out of his chamber in 2006, but with amended language that places it before the voters in 2008. “I frankly feel it would be a huge mistake putting it on this November’s ballot,” he said. Perata explained the delay on the fact that lawmakers still need to sort out the details, and also that the November ballot is already “congested” with a lot of other propositions. And Perata went on to say that he thinks SCA 3still suffers from the same problem as did last year’s defeated Proposition 77: that retired judges would still be a part of the redistricting process (though in this instance, they would not draw political maps– rather, they would choose the panel of citizens who would draw the maps).

* Term Limits: Perata also seemed to scuttle any notion of a proposal this year to modify the state’s term limits law, regardless of whether it is linked to redistricting (as has been the buzz at the Capitol for months). “If it’s done by the Legislature,” he said, “it will be tremendously scrutinized” by the public.

* Prison Reform: With a special session looming to consider Governor Schwarzenegger’s package of prison reform proposals, Sen. Perata sounded enthusiastic about some ideas (more efforts to rehabilitate) and less so about others– most notably, focusing on new prison construction when there are still prison jobs that can’t be filled. “We are woefully understaffed,” he said. “So if you’re talking about building [two] new prisons, that’s terrific. Where are you gonna get the 4,000 new prison guards that would bring those prisons, and the rest of them, up to strength?” Perata hinted that a problem this large may not have solutions that can be pushed through the legislative process in the one month left of the 2005-06 session. “There’s been, I think, a little too much thinking on the run,” he said. “I’m for people taking a deep breath.”

* New Indian Gaming Compacts: And in a response to the future of any new Indian gaming agreements being ratified by legislators in August– specifically efforts to revise some tribes’ existing deals– Perata said there’s very little time left. “They’re gonna have to get negotiated [by the governor], and to us, fast,” he said. So how long do the various tribes and the governor have, according to Perata? “To err on the side of safety, [August] 14th or the 15.” Not much time, indeed.

[4:45 pm NOTE: The Perata briefing also touched on the issue of driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants, with the senator at one point referencing the people who complained to the governor about illegal immigrants in a town hall event a little more than a week ago. Perata was clearly annoyed. “You’ve got all these crackers down in… San Diego, taking on the governor,” he said. This afternoon, he appeared to have a change of heart about those words, sending out a statement that said, in part: “While I am concerned about the coarse and divisive tone used by a small minority in the driver’s license debate, I believe that the vast majority on both sides are people of good will.”]

The initiative creating a new tax on oil drilling in California to help fund alternative energy sources is shaping up to be an expensive political campaign.

Proposition 87, which public polls show is currently supported by a majority of those surveyed, is strongly opposed by the oil and gas industry. Today, Chevron wrote a check for $9 million to the No On 87 campaign. That brings the company’s contributions, to date, to more than $12.5 million. And Chevron is clearly the big dog in the campaign so far– the No on 87 committee has now raised a total of about $18.5 million this year, according to campaign finance records.

And again, the opponents seem to have their work cut out for them. Today’s Field Poll shows the initiative ahead 52% to 31%.