Assemblymember Pedro Nava invited his dad to sit in on a committee field hearing he was chairing in 2006 at the historic Santa Fe Railroad Depot in San Bernardino. Before the hearing began, the two strolled around the renovated, Mission Revival-style depot, designed for the railroad by W.A. Mohr in 1916, to serve as “the gateway to Southern California.” Then his father, a Mexican immigrant, told Nava a bit of family lore he had not heard before:
“Here is where I jumped off the train” after riding the rails to California, Nava recalled him saying.
The assemblymember’s pride in his father’s story—hopped a train from Monterrey, raised his family doing manual labor in the baking heat of the Central Valley, became a U.S. citizen years later—offers a glimpse into the way he goes about his own business. A former prosecutor with a fireplug build, balding buzz cut, and soft-spoken bluntness, Nava takes a blue-collar approach to politics, focusing on incremental, pragmatic fixes of government programs more than big ideas or sweeping reforms.
“I’m a practical problem solver,” he told me over penne marinara and Pellegrino last week. “No one’s going to write any books about that.”
At 60, Democrat Nava is gearing up to run for his third—and, if successful, final—two-year term to represent the 35th Assembly District, which includes the Santa Ynez Valley, the South Coast, Oxnard, and the City of Ventura. Since Nava last ran in 2004, Democrats have padded their gerrymandered advantage, and now lead the GOP in registration, 46 percent to 30 percent, with the rest independents or third-party voters, according to the secretary of state.
His long-shot Republican opponent is a former member of the Carpinteria City Council, Greg Gandrud. The incumbent seems quite content to run for reelection without ever acknowledging his rival: “If he wants exposure, let him raise some money for TV and mail,” Nava growled of Gandrud. “I expect voters to make their decision based on what I’ve done.”
A good example of the unintended consequences wrought by legislative term limits, Nava will be forced from office in 2010, just as he is gaining influence in the Capitol. He’s chairman of the Banking and Finance Committee, which referees high-stakes fights between and among consumers and powerful special interests; he sits on the Appropriations Committee, which oversees all spending; he leads a special panel on emergency preparedness and homeland security, where he’s won a fight to get legislative oversight of $350 million in federal anti-terrorism grants to the state; and he maintains other assignments on transportation and environment committees.
Asked for a shorthand assessment of Nava, a well-scarred veteran of several decades of Capitol politics told me, “He’s a good guy, and he’s not stupid, which puts him above two-thirds of the rest of them up here. But there’s not one or two things that he’s done that you instantly think of and say, ‘Wow.’”
As a lawmaker, Nava closely minds the interests of his district, as with recent legislation to crack down on Greka and other “serial spiller” oil companies, to help ease recovery from the Gap Fire, and to require hunters to use lead-free ammunition in areas where the California Condor thrives (short digression: how about a lead-free requirement for ammunition used to shoot people?).
With the red ink state budget still mired in stalemate, one issue on which Gandrud might gain some traction is in contrasting his opposition to tax increases to Nava’s embrace of the Democrats’ consensus budget plan, which includes $8 billion in new taxes. “We don’t have any more tricks or accounting gimmicks to paper over the deficit,” Nava explained.
The assemblymember demurs when asked about his political future. He considered running for mayor of Santa Barbara before seeking his assembly seat several years ago and there’s talk in Sacramento that he’s eyeing a run for attorney general, at a time when termed-out, relatively unknown lawmakers routinely seek, and sometimes win, statewide office.
A true product of California’s higher education system—community college, state university, and UC Davis law school—Nava sometimes still sounds surprised at the success he has already achieved, just one generation after his father jumped off a train from Mexico.
“You can’t forget where you come from,” he said.
Jerry Roberts covers the state of the Golden State on the Capitol Letters Blog, which is updated regularly at independent.com/capitol-letters. The views expressed in this article are solely that of the author and not of his employer, UCSB.

Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
How do you spell relief?
R E P U B L I C A N
It's coming...
BeachLivin (anonymous profile)
July 18, 2008 at 12:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm not really sure how it's spelled, and I don't see any in either of the two major parties.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 18, 2008 at 2:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I want to avoid paying sales tax on the yacht I buy, so I am definitely voting Republican to continue this tax loophole!!
The State does not need the money anyway....
David_Pritchett (anonymous profile)
July 19, 2008 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Perhaps if our tax dollars went to actually solving problems, there would not be the anti-tax sentiment that exists.
I have no problem paying taxes--and extra ones at that--(possible bad grammar on my part) if the money goes to some tangible end. But we keep getting hit with taxes, fees, users permits, and on and on and on and what do those who advocate this tell us?...."This will go a long way in helping..." (fill in the blank)
From what I see, Scandinavian countries have high taxes, but they also have a better health care and education system. From what I see here, the money gets taken from us, but doesn't get to come close to solving the health care and education crisis. Even before World War Three began (a little sarcastic reference to the war that we are in which "Hope" and "Change" icon Obama wants to spread to Afghanistan--thus continuing the warmonger policies of Bush/McCain) America couldn't seem to deal effectively with these problems.
We need taxes, but we need to have a way to make sure the money actually goes to what is needed.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 22, 2008 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Both parties are useless, in my opinion.
Nava is an arrogant, career politician; witness his dismissive treatment of his opponent, Greg Gandrud. That's just childish and nothing to be proud of.
Yet people keep voting for this bozo...then whining because "the unintended consequences of term limits" are forcing him out. Those consequences are most definitely NOT unintended; they are doing exactly as they should: pushing out career politicians before they gain too much influence in too many areas, as Nava has.
Daddy was an illegal alien, he's proud of that too. It's OK for them to break the laws, but not anyone else. Interesting double-standard.
For all his talk about that old chestnut, terrorism, he allies himself with radical animal rights militants and pushes laws punishing pet owners who dare to not spay and neuter their little puppies and kittens per the animal rights agenda. He's right in there with Lightbulb Levine and all the rest of the PC crowd who are not happy unless they are right in your business, happily crowing that the end justifies the means.
You name the stupid law, and he's in on it somewhere.
Democrats, Republicans..they're all the same old mouthpieces spewing the same old garbage and I am sick of it.
And so are a lot of us.
And we vote.
Holly (anonymous profile)
July 22, 2008 at 6:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ah yes, term limits. I could be wrong, but someone of of great prominance in the American political scene said long, long ago that everyone has an obligation to become a part-time politician. Whether or not that was actually said--or is the stuff of Urban Legends--it makes sense.
Even if they only work in theory, term limits are a good idea. It prevents entrenched Pols from getting too much power and allows more people to become involved in the political process.
Hunters using lead-free bullets seems like a good idea, but I'm not clear what was meant by shooting people with lead-free bullets. To put it another way: Outlaws tend to ignore such niceties.
All the while the California voters keep voting for people who dig us ever further into debt...but hey...isn't this happening all over America?
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 22, 2008 at 7:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment