One thing leaped out at me when reading Frank Russo’s roundup of the bills that passed through the state legislature yesterday. That is that AB1430, a plan that will completely gut local campaign-finance reform laws, passed through the State Sente after a unanimous vote in the Assembly earlier this year.  All 15 Republican Senators joined 12 Democratic Senators to support the bill, giving it the bare minimum of 27 votes it needed to pass.  Bill Cavala tried to mount a defense of the bill in July by saying it’s an attempt to break municipal monopolies and foster competition locally.  Right, because it’s always the case that challengers can outraise incumbents, ay?  Sadly, both state parties backed this measure because they both want to MAINTAIN their fiefdoms in their respective regions without allowing localities to manage their elections their own way.  Anytime you hear a politician argue for less restrictions on campaign money, ask yourself if they’re doing this to aid their opponents.  The answer is usually no.  From the Chronicle editorial:

Let’s be clear: This bill deals with one very specific type of “communication” — an expenditure on behalf of a candidate, in collaboration with the campaign itself. These are direct political contributions. If local governments want to limit them — as the Legislature has done for state races — they should have a right to do so.

Now, if the governor signs the bill, they won’t.  And that will probably help Democrats more than Republicans, particularly with regard to labor.  Doesn’t make it right, however.