Early summer is deadline season at the state Capitol. Legislation must move out of policy committees, the state budget is supposed to be enacted, and… in an election year… legislators and the governor must act to place proposals on the fall statewide ballot.

As of today, scratch that last deadline off the list.

Using the state’s election laws… and counting backward from election day… today is the deadline for measures to be in place for the November 4 ballot.

11 proposals are already on the weighty November ballot, 10 of them placed there by voter circulated initiatives and one — the previously delayed high-speed rail bond — placed there by the Legislature.

Governor Schwarzenegger has been pushing for three more ballot measures: a budget reform plan, a proposal to modify the California Lottery and borrow money against its future revenues, and a bond measure to solve the state’s water woes.

The budget reform issue and the lottery borrowing plan are both mired down in the seemingly going nowhere negotiations over a new state budget. And while some sort of lottery proposal has support in both parties, Democrats have pretty resoundingly shot down all budget reform ideas placed on the table.

The water bond’s fate is especially murky, even in the midst of drought like conditions across the state, and no new signs of compromise have appeared.

Having said all this, missing today’s deadline doesn’t mean any — or all — of these measures have missed the November ballot. Lawmakers have stretched their time limits on ballot proposals several times in recent years. And the reality is that once they blow past today’s official deadline, it becomes a question of how long do local elections officials need to design and print their ballots… and how much are lawmakers in Sacramento willing to spend to send out an extra ballot pamphlet to millions of voters?

“I love deadlines,” British author Douglas Adams is quoted as once saying. “I especially like the whooshing sound they make as they go flying by.”

With all of the talk this week, and this budget season, about a new constitutionally mandated cap on state spending, we decided to take a wider view of the issue.

On this morning’s edition of The California Report, I reported not just on the spending cap proposals being talked about by both legislative Republicans and Governor Schwarzenegger, but also a look back at why some say the state’s exisiting spending cap (yes, there’s already one on the books) was modified in 1990.

The story is about 2:40 into this morning’s program, which you can hear below.

A long November ballot for California voters just got longer, as Secretary of State Debra Bowen has certified a proposal to strip legislators of the power to draw their own political districts.

The redistricting proposal was penned by representatives of California Common Cause, AARP, and the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce; but it was undoubtedly carried across the goal line by the fundraising prowess of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s campaign operation.

If voters approve the measure, a bipartisan citizens commission would draw legislative districts after the 2010 census, while the Legislature would retain the power to draw congressional districts.

Redistricting reform is a cause celebre among government reform advocates, but has been summarily rejected by California voters several times — most recently in 2005 as Schwarzenegger’s doomed Proposition 77.

As noted here before, this may not be the end of the November 4 ballot. Although it’s doubtful any more initiatives will be certified in time, the governor and legislators are toying with the idea of two budget-related measures (budget reform and lottery revenue borrowing) and a measure to sell bonds to help stabilize California’s ailing water supply.

The main story out of today’s news conference from Governor Schwarzenegger is, of course, important news: the governor has officially proclaimed a drought in California but has stopped short of imposing water restrictions, opting instead to first try and get the word out for more water conservation.

Schwarzenegger is using the proclamation to renew his push for borrowing $11.9 billion to create long-term solutions to California’s water woes. Water bond negotiations broke down here in Sacramento months ago and have been in limbo ever since.

And so now to our minor but noteworthy point: the governor hopes to add the water bond to the ever-growing ballot that voters will be handed at the polling place on November 4.

“Put it on the ballot this November [and] pass it,” he said at today’s Capitol news conference, “so that we can start building, and so that we can secure the water for the future.”

For those not keeping score at home: the November ballot already consists of eight measures– seven voter-circulated initiatives, one measure placed on the ballot by the Legislature. That includes the proposition that’s likely to crowd out all others for attention, an attempt to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriages.

Add #9 if Schwarzenegger’s political team successfully gathered enough voter signatures to qualify a redistricting reform measure. And most politicos think that they did.

Add #10 if you think the victim’s rights intiative known as “Marsy’s Law” will qualify. And that, too, seems likely.

Add #11 for a $5 billion bond encouraging fuel-efficient vehicles and energy research.

Add #12, #13, and #14 if the governor gets his trifecta of budget reform, authorization to sell $15 billion in bonds against future California Lottery revenues, and now… water bonds.

14 ballot measures is a heck of a hefty ballot. Not that there haven’t been hefty ballots in years past in California. But it certainly would seem that this particular myriad of complicated subjects, layered on top of an historic presidential campaign, could saddle the voters with quite a challenge.

Needless to say, Schwarzenegger thinks they’re up to the task. “I think that the people enjoy participating in the political process,” he said.

His complete answer, which focuses more on the policy issue at hand, can be heard here.

Having lined all of these proposals up, perhaps it’s time for a reality check. The budget reform and lottery ballot measure plans are the stickiest of wickets, so much so that the odds of both of these making the November ballot currently seem a little long.

Reality check #2: the Legislature and governor are technically supposed to submit any ballot measures for November by June 26. Ummm… okay. That formal deadline has been stretched to the point of breaking in the past, and would apparently have to be stretched again this time.

Reality check #3: negotiating multiple complicated things at the same time is a tough act to pull off at the Capitol, even though Schwarzenegger today (as you can hear below) urged legislators to give it a shot.

But were it all to come true… 14 ballot measures, four of which would be near and dear to Schwarzenegger’s heart… then consider this: which one(s) would he campaign for? Which would he raise money for?

In other words, how many ways can you slice the time… and spread the influence… of the state’s most recognizable politician?

The year was 1940, a year when war was on the horizon and the big political chatter centered on whether Franklin D. Roosevelt would run for an unprecedented third term in the White House.

That was the last time California held two separate primary elections in the same year.

Wait a minute. There’s an election tomorrow?

Tuesday’s primary still seems overshadowed by the presidential contest; on February 5, it was how California and the rest of the Super Tuesday states would vote. Tomorrow, the national media will be oblivious to the state’s issues… likely focused only on whether the Democratic presidential race will come to a close.

Meantime, dozens of local, legislative, and congressional races will lock in candidates from all political parties. And while some think voter turnout will be dismally small, that might not be the case everywhere considering the intensity of some of these intra-party races.

“There are some hot contests,” says Secretary of State Debra Bowen. “I think we’ll see some pretty big variations from region to region.”

Bowen dismisses any notion that moving the presidential primary from June to February was a bad idea, saying that it may be the reason behind a recent surge in voter registration — particularly among young voters.

Unlike her predecessors, Bowen has not made an official prediction of statewide voter turnout. And if she’s right about differences in voter participation by community, then one wonders whether some of these heated races for elective office could impact the only statewide contest — the battle over changes to the government power of eminent domain.

Dueling initiatives Proposition 98 and Proposition 99 both aim to change eminent domain rules, albeit in different ways. Prop 98 is a far broader attempt to rein in the possibility of seizing property for redevelopment purposes; Prop 99 chooses instead to focus on limiting the taking of someone’s home. If both initiatives should pass, only the one with the highest vote total will take effect.

The folks at the non-partisan California Voter Foundation have an online guide on what you need to know before you head to the polls.

We’ll be doing live updates of The California Report through the night on public radio stations across the state. And we’ve got election resources on our site at KQED.

“I respect the Court’s decision and as Governor, I will uphold its ruling. Also, as I have said in the past, I will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling.”

That’s the official statement from Governor Schwarzenegger after this morning’s announcement by the California Supreme Court that same sex couples have the same rights to marriage as do heterosexual couples.

The 4-3 decision is sure to dominate the state’s airwaves and newspapers for the next few days; the ruling takes effect in 30 days and it’s reasonable to assume that thousands of gay couples will be applying for marriage licenses at that time.

Setting aside the decision and the details of the issue for a moment, let’s consider the politics.

Public opinion polls have found some changes in the attitudes of Californians about the issue of same sex marriage in recent years… with what appears to be more support than existed when Proposition 22 passed in 2000.

Prop 22 was focused on state statute and not the California Constitution — hence, it’s a little tangential to the high court’s ruling today. It’s also a tangent to the initiative that voters may be asked to weigh in on this November: an actual amendment to the state constitution to ban same sex marriage… in other words, a cancellation of today’s legal victory for gay couples.

But it’s not tangential to the politics, with many seeing all of this as a cultural battle. The new initiative appears to be a lock to qualify for the ballot. And that raises the likelihood that it will dominate what’s going to be an already crowded ballot. As his above statement makes clear, Schwarzenegger has firmly stated his opposition to the anti-gay marriage initiative. That puts him, once again, at odds with his conservative GOP brethren.

But will he campaign against the measure? Or better yet, how broad a coalition will arise to challenge conservative supporters? How will the political campaign influence the race for the White House (California is, after all, the big enchilada when it comes to electoral votes)? How might the debate shape the political future of possible gubernatorial candidates… in particular, the gentleman from San Francisco?

There are many, many layers of political intrigue here. And the ink is barely dry on the historic ruling.

For complete coverage of today’s ruling, tune in to KQED Public Radio this afternoon for a half hour special news report, and more coverage tomorrow on The California Report.

It’s still more than six months away, but there’s a good chance the November statewide ballot could feature some of the most interesting ballot measure battles in recent memory — perhaps not because of the deep pockets behind the campaigns, but because of the actual issues themselves.

At this point, only two proposals have nailed down a spot on the fall ballot. One is a long suffering bond offering to jump start California’s long discussion over high-speed rail. I say “long suffering,” because the bond measure has been moved from ballot to ballot in recent years by the Legislature… usually because they didn’t want to risk voters feeling overwhelmed by all the new borrowing, and thus reject other bond proposals (most notably, the Governor Schwarzenegger-led infrastructure bonds of 2006).

The second currently qualified measure, as reported last week, is one to ban certain kinds of animal confinement on California farms. The ag industry is likely to fight this one with a big campaign warning of the economic costs, while animal rights advocates will no doubt make an impassioned ethics and morality argument.

Another argument of morality and ethics could be in store with a new chapter in the debate over same sex marriage. There’s a reasonably good chance that an initiative to amend the state constitution banning same sex marriages could qualify. It’s a much tougher stance on the issue than the still debated Proposition 22 from 2000. And its chances at being on the November ballot are real enough that Governor Schwarzenegger waded in to the issue last week, telling a gathering of gay Republicans that he’s strongly opposed to the proposal. That, as you might imagine, didn’t sit well with many of the conservative groups pushing the proposal. The timing of the ballot fight could be particularly combustible, as the California Supreme Court’s ruling on the issue is expected by the summer.

What else? Well, a coalition described as environmentalists, labor leaders, and others have submitted what they say is enough signatures for an initiative requiring 50% of all California energy be from renewable sources by 2025. And elections officials are checking signatures on two health care initiatives: one that affirms that health care is a “fundamental human right,” and one to sell bonds to pay for new hospitals for children.

And if that isn’t enough, there seems to be a very good chance that the Schwarzenegger-endorsed initiative to change the process of political redistricting. The proposal was written by a handful of government reform groups, but is being bankrolled largely by the governor’s political operation… a sign that its chances for getting on the November ballot are very good.

That’s seven ballot measures right there… and many more are in circulation. Yes, we’ve had this many… and more… on the ballot before. But remember, voter turnout is likely to be huge on November 4 — the most closely watched presidential campaign in a generation — and it’ll be fascinating to see who shows up at the polls for that race, and subsequently weighs in on these big issues, too.

The November statewide ballot has its first initiative: a proposal to ban procedures currently used to confine some farm animals.

Secretary of State Debra Bowen certified today that the initiative will appear on the fall ballot, after concluding proponents had gathered more than enough voter signatures.

The initiative, if passed, would require that a calf raised for veal, pregnant pig, or egg-laying hen (chicken, duck, turkey, goose) must be allowed to lie down, stand up, and turn around. The simple and direct proposal would effectively outlaw any kind of cage or tethering device that failed to let the animal have such a range of activity.

There are some exemptions listed in the initiative, but it’s likely to stir an impassioned debate between animal rights groups and the state’s farming community. The proponents, known as Californians for Humane Farms, have a website that claims the initiative could impact some 20 million farm animals in the state.

This is the first initiative to qualify and the second ballot measure slated for November (the first measure, a bond measure for a high-speed rail system, was placed on the ballot by the Legislature).