LOS ANGELES — The Democratic Party has controlled the California Legislature for a nearly unbroken stretch of 42 years. Yet control goes only so far: it takes two-thirds of the Legislature to enact a host of important legislation in this state, meaning that even the diminished Republican Party has been able to easily frustrate Democratic ambitions.

But with a swell of electoral victories in November, the Democratic Party has now crossed that boundary and controls two-thirds of both the Senate and the Assembly, giving it the kind of unfettered power that no party has had here for 80 years.

This does not appear to be a passing advantage. Even Republicans say that changes in electoral demographics mean that, with the exception of a few brief lapses caused by vacancies, Democrats could hold a supermajority at least through the end of the decade.

Yet in the “be careful what you wish for” department, Democrats are beginning to confront the struggles and complications that come with being in charge of the store. This authority came at least two years earlier than most Democrats had projected. And it is unleashing years of pent-up Democratic desires — to roll back spending cuts, approve a bond issue to rebuild the state’s water system, amend the state’s tax code, revamp California’s governance system — that had been largely checked by the Republican minority.

At the same time, it is stirring concerns from Democrats, among them Gov. Jerry Brown, that the situation may inspire an overreach that could make the party’s reign brief. By contrast, some Democrats argue that handled correctly, the next two years could provide an opportunity to lock in long-term control.

“The center of gravity of the Democratic Party will be restraint, but some people can’t help themselves,” Mr. Brown said in an interview. “The supermajority is not a permanent condition. It’s something that can be lost far more easily than it can be gained.

”The demand became apparent even before the new Legislature was sworn in this month. State Senator Ted W. Lieu, a Democrat, proposed reinstating an automobile registration fee that was repealed under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. That fee was a rallying point of what many saw as excessive taxation here; its elimination created a $4 billion revenue shortfall. Mr. Lieu pulled back at the urging of Democratic leaders.

“Democrats have unrestricted, unchecked power in the executive and the legislative branch today — and they have not had that for decades,” said James L. Brulte, a former state lawmaker running for state Republican leader. “If you are a Democrat, the good news is that your party is 100 percent in charge of state government. If you’re a Democrat, the bad news is that you don’t get to blame anybody else if things go wrong. So Democrats own it.”

Darrell Steinberg, the president pro tem of the Senate, said that he appreciated the risks and that Democrats would not overstep. Still, he said, this was a chance to address years of deep spending cuts and to put before voters measures to change a government and tax structure that analysts from both parties blame for much of California’s paralysis.

“We get the overreach warning: we have heard it, and we acknowledge it,” Mr. Steinberg told lawmakers at their swearing-in ceremony. “But frankly, I think you can focus too much on overreach because there is an equally compelling danger. It is the danger of being so cautious, so worried about creating controversy, that we fail to take advantage of unprecedented opportunities.”

In a later interview, Mr. Steinberg added: “There are a whole host of things that the two-thirds majority gives an opportunity to talk about. I believe in the two-party system. But are we prepared to use our supermajority if the Republicans choose not to participate? Yes.

”The Democratic ascension has arrived as California emerges — if tentatively — from a prolonged recession and government retrenchment. And it has come as lawmakers and outside analysts have increasingly come to view California’s problems as a result of flaws with its governance.

This new authority comes with a markedly different Legislature, filled with dozens of first-time lawmakers, empowered by a change in term-limit laws that allow them to stay longer and develop areas of expertise, and elected under a nonpartisan election system intended to produce moderation and compromise.

It is hard to think of another state as solidly Democratic, after an election that left Republicans relegated to the sidelines.

“A supermajority is problematic for California,” said Connie Conway, the Assembly Republican leader. “I hope voters understand what they’ve done. I expect a full-out assault on the taxpayers of California.”

Under California law, a two-thirds vote is required to put initiatives before voters to change the State Constitution or raise taxes. That requirement is an outgrowth of Proposition 13, the property tax reduction initiative passed in 1978.

Many Democrats said a top priority was figuring out a way to remove deep spending cuts made to education and other state services, which could mean finding new revenue.

“We do need to take stock,” said Ellen M. Corbett, the Senate Democratic leader. “We do need to take a look at things we have cut that may impact our ability to grow the economy.”

Senator Mark Leno, a Democrat, proposed putting on the ballot an initiative that would allow school districts and cities to pass a parcel tax increase with 55 percent of voters, down from the two-thirds requirement in Proposition 13. Lawmakers said they were also reviewing business tax exemptions they agreed to in order to win Republican votes.

Another Democrat, Assemblywoman Nancy Skinner, said, “What we want is to look carefully to see what kind of tax do we have like that, that are costing our schools, costing our taxpayers and not benefiting our economy.”

Proposition 13 has long been blamed for California’s financial turmoil and inequitable tax system, but its political popularity has made lawmakers wary of touching it.

Now that the Democrats have a supermajority, there has been a growing call for lawmakers to put an initiative before voters to revise Proposition 13, either by eliminating the two-thirds requirement or creating a split tax roll, which would protect residential property owners but remove protection from commercial and industrial properties.

“It’s Time to Adjust Prop 13,” said the headline over a column by George Skelton in The Los Angeles Times on Thursday.

Mr. Brown recoiled at the suggestion.“There’s a lot of talk about that,” Mr. Brown said. “With water, energy, school funding formulas, higher education, the whole implementing of Obama health care, we have lots on our plate. With these kind of hot-button issues, I’d be very surprised if there were any serious attempt to deal with them in the near term.”

This new Democratic dominance is also not necessarily good news for the state’s Democratic governor. He no longer has the foil of the Republican minority. And Mr. Brown, whose fiscally moderate views have at times clashed with those of his Democratic colleagues, now faces something he has not faced before: a Legislature with enough votes to override him.

Reprinted from The New York Times (Dec. 17, 2012)

Following a catastrophic election for the California Republican Party, influential members of the party have recruited a prominent former legislator, Jim Brulte, to lead a comeback.

The former Senate Republican leader has been discussing his interest in the party chairmanship with members of the party since the election a month ago. Brulte is a giant in GOP circles, having helped Republicans in the 1990s win a majority in the state Assembly for the first time in nearly 25 years.

The situation for the California GOP appears far more critical now. They hold no statewide offices, suffered a net loss of four House seats (they hold 15 of 53 in California) and allowed Democrats to achieve a two-thirds majority in the state Legislature for the first time since the 1880s.

Republican voter registration has fallen below 30 percent statewide, and the party is essentially broke.

Brulte, 56, has not discussed the chairmanship publicly. Activists and party leaders with whom he has spoken expect him to be a candidate during the organization’s spring elections. He is widely expected to win.

“His political judgment is superb,” Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Elk Grove, said Wednesday. “I found out about his interest from (House Majority Whip) Kevin McCarthy and told him to sign me up immediately.”

Mike Spence, president of the Conservative Republicans of California, said Brulte told him he talked with fellow partners at his public affairs company, California Strategies LLC, about becoming party chairman.

“I think having someone like Jim Brulte as chair shows we’re not dead in California,” Spence said. “He has a lot of credibility with donors and grass-roots activists and other people. I think it would be a morale boost for the party.”

Jason Kinney, a spokesman for California Strategies, said in an email, “The Republicans here support it and the Democrats oppose it – because the one thing we all agree on is that, if Jim decides to do it, he’ll be extremely effective.”

If he is elected, Brulte will be expected to resurrect the party’s sunken fundraising apparatus and make voter registration gains, if only incrementally.

Jeff Randle, a Republican strategist, said a Brulte chairmanship “would be a huge win for our party.”

Brulte has for years been warning about the Republican Party’s shortcomings, including its failure to adapt to California’s growth in Latino voters. After the GOP was battered in California in the 1998 elections, Brulte said the political action committee he controlled would use its contributions to broaden the traditional Republican candidate base, trying to recruit “good Hispanic, black, Asian, female (and) Jewish Republican candidates.”

More than a decade later, Brulte predicted last year that the 2012 election would be even worse for Republicans than in 2010, when Democrats swept the statewide elections. By almost any measure, he was right.

Garry South, a Democratic strategist and partner at California Strategies, described Brulte as a “solidly conservative guy … but he’s not a nut about it.”

“I think that if he decides to do it, there couldn’t be any better choice,” South said. “He is a great strategic political thinker, he’s got a winning manner about him … and has enough force of personality to deal with various factions, like he did both in the Assembly and the Senate as minority leader.”

However, South said rebuilding the Republican Party in California may be out of reach for anyone.

“A political party is always just the sum of its parts,” South said. “The parts at this point don’t add up to much, and they certainly don’t add up to winning elections.”

Brulte, whose political base is in San Bernardino County, started as a young aide to U.S. Sen. S.I. Hayakawa in 1980 and had stints with the Republican National Committee, the defense and housing agencies in the Reagan administration and as an advance man for President George H. W. Bush before returning to California to work as a legislative aide.

He won an Assembly seat from Rancho Cucamonga in 1990 and served the full 14 years in the Assembly and Senate allowed under term limits, serving as GOP leader in each house.

Perhaps his most memorable political success came in 1994, when Republicans picked up eight Assembly seats under his stewardship and eventually briefly controlled the lower house.

Though Brulte is likely to easily win over Republican lawmakers and donors in his bid for the party chairmanship, he may have more difficulty courting the party’s volunteer class.

“Jim has an impossible task in my opinion, and I’m not opposed, by the way, to the idea of him running for chairman at all,” said Aaron Park, a Republican activist from Rocklin and conservative blogger. “But the problem is he’s got to try to sell activists on the fact that he really does care about us, as opposed to the interest of the legislators. They’re oftentimes at odds.”

The current chairman of the state Republican Party, Tom Del Beccaro, announced shortly before the election that he would not run again next year.

Del Beccaro was elected chairman in March 2010. The party was hampered by fundraising difficulties and internal disputes, and in the last election cycle many Republican donors bypassed the party infrastructure in their efforts to recruit and fund GOP candidates.

Del Beccaro said the party “cannot become more Sacramento-centric.” Asked if he was referring to Brulte, Del Beccaro said whoever succeeds him must “have a more than healthy plan for involving volunteers, not just Sacramento-area donors.”

Steven Baric, the party vice chairman, was initially expected to run to succeed Del Beccaro as the party’s leader. He said Wednesday that he has not decided if he will.

Reprinted from the Sacramento Bee (Dec. 6, 2012)

A California lawmaker wants to change Proposition 13 to boost funding for public education and other programs.

Assemblyman Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco) said Thursday that he plans to introduce legislation that would remove business property owners from some provisions of the groundbreaking 1978 law, which placed limits on residential and commercial property taxes.

A “split roll” would allow commercial properties to be taxed based on their current market value. Currently, corporations can avoid reassessments when property changes hands, Ammiano said.

“Prop. 13 is not the untouchable third-rail anymore,” Ammiano said in a statement. “It’s more like the bad guy with the mustache who has tied California to the rails with the fiscal train wreck coming.”

The lawmaker said revenue was needed to help government programs that have been slashed in recent years.

While Proposition 13 remains popular with California voters, a new poll found 58% of them favor the “split roll” idea. According to the survey, released Wednesday by the Public Policy Institute of California, most Democrats and independents supported the proposal while Republicans were divided.

The change would have to be approved by voters, and with new supermajorities in both legislative houses, Democrats now have the power to place measures on the ballot without GOP backing.

State Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) has also proposed changing Proposition 13. He introduced a constitutional amendment that would allow local parcel taxes for schools to pass with 55% of the vote, instead of the two-thirds currently required.

Reprinted from The Los Angeles Times (Dec. 6, 2012)

Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Updated Estimates of Distance to Supermarkets Using 2010 Data

Efforts to encourage Americans to improve their diets and to eat more nutritious foods presume that a wide variety of these foods are accessible to everyone. But for some Americans and in some communities, access to healthy foods may be limited.

That’s the findings of a report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service entitled, “Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Updated Estimates of Distance to Supermarkets Using 2010 Data.”

Using population data from the 2010 Census, income and vehicle availability data from the 2006-2010 American Community Survey, and a 2010 directory of supermarkets, this report estimates that 9.7 percent of the U.S. population, or 29.7 million people, live in low-income areas more than 1 mile from a supermarket.

However, only 1.8 percent of all households live more than 1 mile from a supermarket and do not have a vehicle. Estimated distance to the nearest three supermarkets is an indicator of the choices available to consumers and the level of competition among stores. Estimates show that half of the U.S. population lives within 2 miles of 3 supermarkets.

How to access the report:

• Report Summary
• Entire Report