This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
I added a source to back up how much longer a legislature could serve, settling on the wording "some current members would serve longer." In basic formulation, a member could serve 8 years in the Senate and then, after just being elected to the Assembly (with Prop 93 passed) serve 12 years in the Assembly for a total of 20 years. The new 12 year limit applied to the house the member was currently in. The maximum possible wasn't 8+6+12 because either the 8 or the 6 is 12. So, the limit would be 20 years under term limit law. But, to burst my bubble a little, some members, like Tom McClintock, served before term limits law passed previously, meaning he could serve up to 26 years. This last fact from the Chronicle article I cited. In short, it makes the most since just to say "some current members would serve longer."User:calbear22 (talk) 09:27, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
