With the 2012 election mostly put to bed, this blog is retiring — temporarily. This post features thoughts on elections in general from KQED Election Editor Tyche Hendricks, Election Blog editor Jon Brooks and contributor Lisa Aliferis.

Tyche Hendricks, KQED Election Editor

As the dust settles on this election — with its nail-biter races that ranged from the presidential contest to board of supervisors races and local parcel taxes — it’s a good time to note that our individual votes really can make a decisive difference. It’s true, given our electoral college system, that nobody campaigns too hard for California’s votes in the presidential race. But we did have some state and local races that were decided by razor thin margins.

In two California congressional races, long-time incumbents lost their seats by just a few thousand votes out of more than a quarter of a million votes cast. San Diego Rep. Brian Bilbray and Sacramento area Rep. Dan Lungren both lost by exceedingly narrow margins. And in Alameda County, a sales tax hike for transportation projects fell just about 700 votes short of the two-thirds majority needed for passage. With more than half a million votes cast, that was a defeat by a margin of .14 percent.

So you can see that if a few hundred or a few thousand people had stayed home, or a few hundred or a few thousand more had turned out to vote, the outcome of those contests could have flipped.

That’s not to say that this political system of ours is perfect. KQED’s reporting examined the profusion of outside money that is playing an increasingly influential role in state races. We also took note of the millions of Californians who could vote but don’t, and explored some of the reasons people feel they don’t have a place in the political process.

Most Californians did turn out. By my preliminary assessment, it looks like 13.4 million people cast votes in this election. That’s roughly 73 percent of the 18.2 million registered voters in the state (and about 56 percent of the 23.8 million Californians eligible to vote). If those numbers are accurate, our turnout rate this year is down a bit from 2008 and 2004, but higher than in 2000 or 1996. Meanwhile the state’s electorate is beginning to better reflect the state’s tremendous ethnic and racial diversity, with Latinos, African Americans and Asian Americans together making up about 40 percent of voters in this election.

Through this election year we’ve been out across the state talking to voters young and old, and listening to Californians from the Inland Empire to Siskiyou County. We wanted to understand what makes a Republican become a Democrat or vice versa. And more than anything, we wanted to tap into the conversation that’s been taking place across the state and the country about what folks really want – and don’t want — from those we elect to govern us.

That dialogue will continue. And we’ll keep tracking it through our ongoing governance and politics coverage. We hope you’ll remain a part of the conversation.

Lisa Aliferis, Election Blog Contributor

Normally, I blog about health, not politics, but when there’s an election — especially a presidential election — it’s an “all hands on deck” time in a newsroom. Frankly, I was happy to get paid to learn about all those 11 propositions on the state ballot, such as this one, this one, oh and this very, very complicated one.

But then something happened. I discovered my inner political geek. I watched a one hour press conference, streamed live, between Gov. Brown and the editorial board of the San Jose Mercury News — and was riveted. I learned more than I ever wanted to about the history of the death penalty in California. And then, after the election, I became obsessed with the accuracy of the exit poll.

So thanks for reading. I’m shifting back to my health blog now and, among other things, following a major health story which is also a big political story: the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act.

Jon Brooks, Election Blog Editor

The people have spoken.

For now, at least.

The judgment of the body politic has tended to be maddeningly temporary over the last decade. In 2004, Democrats were shocked that the nation would return George W. Bush, perhaps the greatest liberal bête noire since Richard Nixon, to the presidency. Then in 2006, the Democrats swept back to power in the House and Senate. That was followed by the Obama landslide in 2008, resulting in one-party rule in the executive and legislative branches.

But in 2010, the electorate pulled the plug on that arrangement. The dissatisfaction was widespread, with GOP victories as far as the eye could see, from Congress to governorships and state houses around the country. The stage seemed set for the completion of a Republican revival in 2012…

Nope. The reasons for that failure are now being parsed, floated, squealed, critiqued, debunked, shouted, whispered, and trumpeted, as Democratic voters are besotted with schadenfreude, and Republican fans are moving to Canada. For real, this time!

In California, now long past its canary-in-the-coalmine status for the GOP, the estrangement from the Republican party was completed when voters granted Democrats not only a two-thirds, Proposition 13-proof supermajority in the Legislature, but also decided to actually increase taxes on themselves.

So…are we in the early days of a Democratic Wonderland, one ruled by a new and more progressive mindset? Or have the American people yet again only granted a short-term loan of the reins of power to one of the two major political blocs?

We’ll let you know in 2014.

As far as our coverage goes, I can only tell you what our stats indicate: many, many people had a genuine desire to go as deep as they could in understanding the candidates and issues they were being asked to vote on. This was especially true concerning California’s initiatives. Our proposition guide got “slammed,” to use online parlance, meaning more people accessed it than I, for one, honestly thought cared. Especially surprising was how many people found their way to this post on the highly complex governance initiative, Proposition 31, proving that many segments of the California electorate could not be dissuaded from meeting their direct-democracy responsibilities, even when it comes to decoding the most daunting of proffers.

And that was heartening.

We’ll keep on keeping on in covering all the local and regional political goings-on at our News Fix blog… see ya there.

Physician Ami Bera (D) won a hotly contested House seat over incumbent Dan Lungren (R). (Randy Payne/Flickr)

The election blog is coming to an end soon <sniff!> so this is the last update I’ll be posting on those stubbornly close races. Most of them were decided yesterday. There are still 1.7 million votes [PDF] to count statewide.

Jump for joy or read ‘em and weep. Counties have until December 7 to send final counts to the state. The secretary of state must certify the election by December 14.

Many of the close races we have kept an eye on are in Alameda County which finished counting votes yesterday. Here is an update on all the races we’ve been following:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): Physician Ami Bera (D) defeated incumbent Dan Lungren (R). This was Bera’s second attempt to defeat Lungren; he received 51.5 percent of the vote. This race was considered one of the most critical across the country, and SuperPAC money flowed in.

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): In this San Diego race, Democrat Scott Peters (D) flipped another Republican seat to the Democrat House tally. Peters beat incumbent Brian Bilbray with 50.7 percent of the vote.

Assembly Races

• Ong v. Quirk (District 20): In this Alameda County Dem-on-Dem race, Bill Quirk squeaked out victory over Filipina-American Jennifer Ong with 50.3 percent of the vote. That’s a 93 vote margin of victory out of more than 133,000 cast.
• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In another Dem-on-Dem race where LA Weekly says all the rich, white, liberal people in Los Angeles live, Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom leads incumbent Betsy Butler with 50.1 percent of the votes. Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters is still counting ballots.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (newly drawn District 65): Republican Chris Norby conceded yesterday. Sharon Quirk-Silva (D) won with 51.6 percent of the vote in this Orange County race.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1: This race may have been the tightest of all. The transportation tax needed a two-thirds majority to win — that’s 66.67 percent. “Yes on B1″ earned 66.53 percent of the vote. That’s right — the “yes” vote lost by .14 percent of the vote. There you have it — every vote counts. If you’re wondering about recounts — the Alameda County Registrar of Voters says a party must wait until the vote is certified, request the recount within five days…  and pay for it themselves.

• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” was known as “sit/lie,” and “T” changed zoning in West Berkeley. Measure S was defeated by 52.3 to 47.7 percent. Measure T was turned back by 50.51 percent of the voters.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Norman Yee defeated F.X. Crowley by 131 votes.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Steve Danon conceded the race to Dave Roberts on Thursday.

Voters from the Sacramento suburbs ousted the veteran lawmaker in the race for the state’s newly redrawn 7th Congressional District. This was the second attempt for Bera, a 45-year-old physician who failed to unseat Lungren two years ago.

The Associated Press called the race for Bera on Thursday. He defeated Lungren 51.1 percent to 48.9 percent.

Bera’s win adds to Democratic gains in California’s congressional races. The state’s majority party benefited from an independent redistricting process that was in full effect for the first time this year.

Before the Nov. 6 election, California’s congressional delegation had 33 Democrats, 19 Republicans and one vacancy in a Democratic district.

• 
• Source: Calbuzz

There’s a popular myth now in circulation – a logical conclusion from the exit polls – that says young voters were the key to Jerry Brown’s Prop. 30 victory. Surely, Gov. Gandalf’s outreach to college students and parents with young children were important factors in Prop. 30′s success.

Read more at: www.calbuzz.com

Ami Bera (D) is holding onto a tight, but growing, lead against Dan Lungren (R) in this Congressional race. (Photos: Republican Conference and Randy Bayne via Flickr)

The vote counting continues on. Latest from the secretary of state’s office is there are still a whopping 1.9 million votes [PDF] left to count. Counties have until December 7 to report their final results. The secretary of state will certify the election by December 14.

In particular, we’re tracking the likely Democratic supermajority in the state legislature.

In the current Congress, the 112th, Democrats hold 34 of 53 House seats. In the new Congress, the 113th, Democrats have definitively picked up two seats, a sure total of 36 seats. There are two other races too-close-to-call, but it’s looking like Democrats will win. That would bring California’s Democratic Congressional delegation to 38 seats out of 53.

Here is an update on the races we’re following:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): Bera’s (D) lead over Lungren (R) continues to grow. He is now up by 3,824 votes, from 1,779 earlier in the week. (119,726 to 115,902). 

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): In this San Diego race, Peters (D) also continues to extend his lead over Bilbray (R). On Friday, Peters led by 814 votes, early this week, it was 1,899. Now he leads by 2,660 votes.

Assembly Races

• Ong v. Quirk (District 20): In this Alameda County Dem-on-Dem race, Filipina American Ong trails Quirk by 1,215 votes.
• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In this Dem-on-Dem race where all the rich, white, liberal people in Los Angeles live, Bloom’s lead has been see-sawing. Last Friday, he led by 218 votes, then it was down to 103 votes, and now it is back up to — remarkably — 218 votes.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (newly drawn District 65): Democrat Quirk-Silva is leading Republican Norby by 2,222 votes in this Orange County race.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1: This race is perhaps the tightest of all. The transportation tax needs 2/3 majority to win — that’s 66.67 percent. Right now, “yes on B1″ has 66.34 of the vote. That’s right — the “yes” vote trails by one-third of one percentage point. The counting continues. The Contra Costa Times is reporting that about 8,000 provisional ballots remain to be counted, and it will likely take through Friday to finish.
• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” is “sit/lie” and “T” changes zoning in West Berkeley. “Yes on T” has been up and then down. It currently trails by 467 votes. “Yes on S” is trailing by 2.113 votes.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. Yee has extended his lead to 1,387 votes.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Roberts also extended his lead over Danon to 2,688 votes.

Via Kyle Akin on Tiny Post.

More than 13 million Californians voted on Nov. 6, according to the secretary of state’s office (when factoring in the uncounted ballots). For Amelia True, her vote reflected her sense of responsibility to those who fought for women’s voting rights.

“I feel connected to my nation when I cast my vote,” she wrote in a comment on KQED’s Facebook page. “I vote because my ancestors fought tirelessly so that I could have just as much of a deciding voice about the future of my country as a man. I vote for my great grandmothers, grandmothers, mothers, daughters and granddaughters.”

Robert Ashton of San Rafael also commented that his family inspired him to vote.

“My WW II father (told me) me when I was eight, as he took me to the polls with him, that this — exerting our right to vote — is what we owe to those who were sacrificed in battle to preserve that right,” he wrote.

During the past few months — over a variety of projects — KQED has interviewed dozens of Californians about voting. We also asked users of the Palo Alto-based mobile app Tiny Post to share their inspiration for voting in a photograph. On Election Day we heard from more than 100 Californians about their voting experiences.

Most of the comments about Bay Area polling places were positive.

“Overall the experience was very easy, smooth, and fast,” wrote Jennifer Koth of Livermore. ”There was no wait and I felt the volunteers were personable but not pushy. I also felt good because I brought a piece of paper in listing how I wanted to vote on the issues happening in my area.”

Click on the polling locations in the map below to read what other area residents had to say about voting.

We did hear from some in the Bay Area who had complaints about their voting experience. You can hear their comments in the SoundCloud set below.

Today, a week after the election, we again asked Californians what inspired them to head to the polls. Here are the comments we received on Facebook, as well as a look at the voting-related photos that were shared on Tiny Post.

Dan Lungren and Ami Bera are locked in a tighter than tight race. (Photos: Republican Conference and Randy Bayne via Flickr)

The number of too-close-to-call races is shrinking. Many counties continued to count votes over the holiday weekend. They have until December 7 to report their final results.The secretary of state will certify the election by December 14.

Of special note in these races is the make up of the California Congressional delegation. You’ve heard all about the Democratic supermajority in the state legislature.

At the national level, California Democrats have also gained ground. In the current Congress, the 112th, Democrats hold 34 of 53 House seats. In the new Congress, the 113th, Democrats have definitively picked up two seats, a sure total of 36 seats. There are two other races too-close-to-call, but it’s looking like Democrats will win. That would bring California’s Democratic Congressional delegation to 38 seats out of 53.

Here is an update on the races we’ve been following:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): This race was not updated over the weekend. Bera (D) leads Lungren (R) by 1,779 votes. (105,245 to 103,466)

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): Peters (D) has extended his lead over Bilbray (R) in this San Diego race. On Friday, Peters led by 814 votes; now he’s up by 1,899.
• Ruiz v. Bono Mack (36th Congressional District): ICYMI: Bono Mack conceded this race last Friday.

Assembly Races

• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In this Dem-on-Dem race in Los Angeles County, Bloom has seen his narrow lead over Butler shrink from 218 votes on Friday to 103 votes early this morning.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (District 65): Democrat Quirk-Silva was leading Republican Norby by 607 votes on Friday. Official reports early this morning show Quirk-Silva now up by 2,222 votes.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1: The transportation tax is trailing by more than 4,000 votes. The Oakland Tribune reports the county counted 93,000 ballots — nearly all precinct and mail ballots — over the weekend. B1 has gained 65.79 percent of the vote; it needs two-thirds to pass. Thousands of provisional ballots have yet to be counted, but 4,200 votes is a lot of ground to make up.
• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” is “sit/lie” and “T” changes zoning in West Berkeley. “Yes on T” had been picking up votes until Friday. But official reports last night show it behind by 472 votes. “Yes on S” is trailing by 1,417 votes.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. Yee has extended his lead from 1,156 to 1,315 votes, as reported late yesterday afternoon.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Roberts also extended his lead over Danon from 1,898 votes to 2,641 votes.

San Francisco State University history lecturer Steve Leikin, left, talks with a student at a university election rally in October. Leikin was working with the campaign against Proposition 32. Photo by Ian Hill/KQED.

Leading California pollsters are raising questions about the accuracy of the Edison Research exit poll (viewable on the CNN website) in terms of how big a share young voters — and non-white voters — comprised of all those casting ballots in California in last Tuesday’s election.

What’s not in dispute: Young voters and “ethnic voters” (which is to say Latinos, Asian-Americans and African-Americans) played an influential role in California’s big Democratic turnout… helping to pass Proposition 30, Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax hike measure, and giving President Obama a 21 percentage point edge in the already-blue state.

As we reported last week, Field Poll director Mark DiCamillo cast doubt on the share of last Tuesday’s voters who were under 30. The Edison exit poll put 18-29 year olds at 27 percent of Californians who voted in this election. But 18-29 year olds make up just 16 percent of all registered voters in the state, said DiCamillo. And in 2008 exit polling showed this age group was 20 percent of California voters.

“I certainly believe that the story line of this elections the power of ethnic voters, and that younger voters turned out in high numbers,” DiCamillo said. “It has to do with the governor [specifically Gov. Brown's campaign for Prop. 30] and online registration [which went into effect in September and has so far been used mostly by young Californians]…. But I can’t believe the 27 percent. That’s a huge number. To move the needle one full percentage point is a big thing, to move it seven or eight points is beyond credibility.”

And the incredulity extends to the Edison exit poll’s reported share of voters who are not white.

• DiCamillo and others note that of all the registered voters in California, 5.5 percent are black, and they typically turn out roughly in their population proportion. But according to the exit poll, they are 8 percent of Tuesday’s voters.
• Asian Americans make up an estimated 10 percent of the state’s registered voters. The exit poll put their share of the turnout at 11 percent.
• And Latinos are 23 percent of registered voters in California. are Latino. The exit poll showed them making up 22 percent of Californians who voted this election. But Latinos are younger and are less likely to have gone to college, on average, than the overall population, while older, better educated people historically vote at higher rates. “So even with good turnout, I would expect they would be a couple of points below their total registration,” observed Di Camillo.

Other political observers concur that the exit poll may not have gotten a perfectly accurate picture of who voted in California. “Because of early voting, exit polls no longer quantify the electorate accurately,” said Democratic pollster Ben Tulchin. “I would use exit polling for how people voted, not quantifying what the electorate looks like.”

Sacramento blogger Scott Lay has come up with his own “blending” of pre-election Field Poll turnout predictions and Edison exit polling to estimate actual turnout as somewhere in between the two.

Over the next couple of months, pollsters, scholars and political analysts will be digging in deeper: looking at turnout information from the Census Bureau’s November Current Population Survey, as well as the number crunching of private campaign consulting firms such as Political Data Inc. — to get a more accurate sense of the shape of the electorate: who turned out and in what proportion.

In the absence of precise figures, plain old political common sense prevailed.

“It was a very good night for Democrats,” said Mark Baldassare, president and chief pollster at the Public Policy Institute of California. “It just suggests to me that you must have had this high turnout of Latinos and younger voters, and a very poor showing among Republicans.”

“How did California Democrats win a supermajority in the legislature?” Tulchin asked. “The Obama coalition of young voters, Latinos, Asian Americans, African Americans, and throw in some white liberals: It gave Obama a big margin. His win exceeded what polling showed would happen. It’s the same with Prop. 30…. And in California, a young voter is overwhelmingly Latino or Asian.”

UC Irvine Political Science Professor Louis DeSipio wondered why the turnout of young people in the state did appear to get a substantial boost, while in the country as a whole it did not.

“Was there something unique in California?” asked De Sipio. “There’s no particular reason that the presidential race would mobilize more young people in a noncompetitive state like California. Maybe people turned out for some tight Congressional races, but the unique issue in California was the mobilization around Prop. 30. One big effect [if the measure failed] was to diminish funding for community colleges, the UCs and the CSUs. There was a message coming from college administrations and unions organizing, and young people felt it.”

DiCamillo was startled to see that white voters in California dropped to just 55 percent of all who voted, according to the Edison exit poll. “I’ve never seen an election in California below 60 percent white,” he said. “It jumps out at me. Wow. I don’t think we’re that far down the road yet. I think it’s coming, but I don’t think we’re there yet.”

Whether young people and non-white voters exceeded turnout expectations in California this year, the Golden State is pointing the direction for where the rest of the country is headed, observers say.

And Di Camillo gets the last word: “The main message of this election is that the ethnic vote really powered the Obama victory in California, it really powered the Prop 30 vote on the yes side. And the same thing goes with the youth vote. It was the youth vote that turned out in force that probably made the difference on Prop. 30.”

Dan Lungren and Ami Bera are locked in a tighter than tight race. (Photos: Republican Conference and Randy Bayne via Flickr)

Sit down and take a deep breath. The updated Secretary of State’s numbers show more than three million votes left to count.

If you’ve been following the handful of too-close-to-call races across the state, you’ll likely be waiting for a few days.

Counties have until December 7 to report their final results.The secretary of state will certify the election by December 14.

Here are the races still too close to call:

Congressional Races

• Bera v. Lungren (7th Congressional District): Bera’s (D) lead is slim, but keeps edging up. Yesterday, he led Lungren (R) by 182 votes. Today, with an additional 40,000 votes counted, he’s up by 1,779. (105,245 to 103,466)

• Bilbray v. Peters (52nd Congressional District): Peters (D) leads Bilbray (R) by 814 votes in this San Diego race.
• Ruiz v. Bono Mack (36th Congressional District): Ruiz (D) leads by 4,679, and local media in the Inland Empire have called the race for him. But Bono Mack (R) has yet to concede. UPDATE: Bono Mack conceded the race on Friday.

Assembly Races

• Bloom v. Butler (District 50): In this Dem-on-Dem race in Los Angeles County, Bloom leads Butler by 218 votes.
• Norby v. Quirk-Silva (District 65): Democrat Quirk-Silva is leading Republican Norby by 607 votes.

Ballot Measures

• Alameda County Measure B1 (Transportation): About one percentage point shy of the two-thirds needed for passage, with roughly 100,000 mail/provisional ballots still to count. Could be “several days” before we know the results, the Alameda County Registrar of Voters told the Chronicle.
• Berkeley Measures S and T: “S” is “sit/lie” and “T” changes zoning in West Berkeley. “Yes on T” has slowly been gaining ground since election night and now leads by five votes (four more votes since yesterday). “Yes on S” is trailing by two percentage points, but has also been gaining since election night. The counting continues.

Supervisors

• Crowley v. Yee: San Francisco County Supervisors District 7. Counting votes could take until next week. Yee leads Crowley 1,156.
• Roberts v. Danon: San Diego County Supervisors. Roberts leads Danon by 1,898 votes.

Other too-close-to-call races or measures we should know about? Tell us in the comments section!

Willie Brown served in the California Legislature for more than 30 years. (Steve Rhodes/Flickr)

This week’s buzzword in California politics: supermajority.

Democrats in California have a supermajority in the State Senate and are simply waiting for confirmation from two yet-to-be-fully-counted-but-leaning Democrat races in southern California to achieve a supermajority in the Assembly.

In case you missed it, in California politics a “supermajority” is a two-thirds majority. Most people know that any local measures to raise property taxes in California must be approved by a two-thirds vote of the people. That’s thanks to 1978′s Proposition 13. But Prop. 13 also requires a two-thirds vote of the legislature to raise taxes. While Republicans have long been the minority party in Sacramento, they wielded influence by blocking votes needed to pass a tax increase.

To find out what lies ahead in the state legislature, beyond one less road block to tax increases, KQED Forum guest host Scott Shafer spoke with Willie Brown, who served over 30 years in the state Legislature, to describe how a supermajority can change Sacramento.

Here is an edited transcript of Shafer’s interview with Brown on Friday morning’s show:

Scott Shafer: The Democrats have had majorities up in Sacramento for a long time. Other than the ability to raise revenue without any Republican votes, what else changes in terms of the dynamics at the State Capitol?

Willie Brown: Anytime you are at the point where you in one party have total dominance, you are in a position where — if you are smart — you’ll move programs, both those that require appropriations and those that do not. You don’t get this opportunity too often and you have to be just smart enough to do it.

Shafer: Give us some examples. When you say programs that require revenue…

Brown: I said, “may or may not” require revenue.

Shafer: But what about the ones that may?

Brown: Right out of the box, if you knew that Governor Schwarzenegger some years ago unilaterally wiped out the car tax, and that’s what created the problem in the state of California for the disappearing of revenues, maybe you should go back and re-do the car tax immediately. Take the heat for it, but do it.

Shafer: And can you do that without a vote of the people?

Brown: You can do that without a vote of the people. Jerry Brown would have to acquiesce but you could do it.

Shafer: But isn’t that one of the things that got Gray Davis in trouble?

Brown: No, it is not. Because at that time, Mr. Davis did not let the people know what the downsides would be if that source of revenue disappeared. You can’t have sources of revenue disappearing without adverse impacts on the programs. The people are now more sophisticated. The bankruptcies in the local governments that have occurred, the burden that’s being placed upon local government by the return of prisoners from the state system to local governments. There are so many more things now that are clearly evidence [that there is a] need for revenue. No, I don’t think you would have a problem.

Shafer: What about the idea of reaching out to Republicans? Would you advise the governor to do that to reach across the aisle? Or [is it ] just, “They’ve got the power now. Just do what they want to do?”

Brown: I think that most of them up there who read anything about my tenure would find my advice not as easily accepted as would be the case if I was advocating some change in my own attitude.

Shafer: They called you the Ayatollah of Sacramento, didn’t they?

Brown: All of my career, I have been about serving 79 other members, Republicans and Democrats alike. All the rules that I put in for equal access to resources, or proportional representation on committees, or for all kinds of things that would lead to a sharing of responsibilities beyond the campaign activities is what made the House strong and what kept me in charge for half of the time that I spent in the Legislature. The supermajority should not be used to just roll over all the persons there, including the Republicans. The supermajority ought to be about building the strengths of the system to a consensus process that includes the Republicans and the governor should lead that.

Shafer: And where would he lead them? What are some of the things that he can build consensus on — or just decide to do with Democratic votes if that’s the way it turns out? What should the priorities be?

Brown: First, I’d urge him not do anything with just Democratic votes, just because it is a Democratic strength. I would urge him to do the things that need to be done for the state, whatever they are, without reference to whether it’s Democrats or Republicans.

For example, what happens with the university system, the state university system, the community college system? Those are things that do not have Democrat or Republican stamped on them. I would urge them to address issues of the realignment process and go back to considering how do you get that economic development going in local communities, similar to what we did with redevelopment.

Mission Bay, for example, comes right out of the heart of the redevelopment operations. Base closures that occurred where land previously devoted to military purposes has now been given back to local governments in Orange County, Alameda County, San Francisco County and other places. [This] is a golden opportunity without reference to Republicans or Democrats or the governor.

Shafer: One of the things the supermajority could do is put things before the voters. Is there any sort of reform of the initiative system — or anything else — that some feel have made California difficult to govern over the past several decades?

Brown: My attitude about the whole initiative process is that it’s warped; it shouldn’t even be there. If the public wishes to do something about what the legislature has done, then we ought to liberalize the referendum process. But the initiative process ought to be severely restricted so that these political consultants who are now the driving force behind initiating such items won’t be able to do so for their own economic gain.