The Onion recently ran a story under the headline: "Democrats Hoping to Take Control of Congress From Minority Republicans in 2010."

If there were a California version of the Onion, you could run a similar story here, simply by replacing "Congress" with "The Legislature."

To repeat briefly what we all know: Under California's constitutional rules requiring a 2/3 vote for spending bills and revenue increases, the legislative minority, if it can stay together, is in charge. And California's legislative Republicans have been skilled at taking hostages each year, threatening to send the state into fiscal chaos unless its demands are met. Democrats have been unable to figure out how to win these battles, so they have the worst of both worlds - they're responsible for the legislature's failings but don't really have the power to do anything about it.

What's worse, voters seem unwilling to change the rules to end minority rule and put the majority in control of the legislature.

Last week, the veteran Democratic strategist Darry Sragow, acknowledging these realities, advised Democrats to lay low and say little about the budget or the state's structural problems so they can keep the legislature and retake the governorship this fall.

Sragow, in a narrow sort of way, is right. If Democrats want hollow political victories that don't change the reality of the state, then they should follow his advice.

If they want to make California a better place, and make its budget and governing systems work again, they need to try something completely different.

What to do? Here's a modest proposal for the Democrats.

Surrender the legislature.

That's right. Give the Republicans control.

Lose now, in order to win later.

Now the only way to do that, given the fact that nearly any Democrat with a pulse can win in a majority of districts, is to refuse to run any candidates in a huge number of safe Democrat seats. The goal: make the Republicans the majority party.

This would be a punishment disguised as a victory for the GOP. There's nothing worse for a party than to be in the majority in a minority rule system.

The Democrats, once they had the full leverage of the minority status in a 2/3 environment, could start making demands and taking hostages. Insist upon a tax increase as the price of any vote for the budget. If the state gets run into the ground, fine-blame the majority, just as the Republicans do. Gum up the works.

Two things could happen in such a scenario. First, Democrats might finally convince some Republicans of the madness of the 2/3 supermajority fiscal issues. Certainly, Democrats would have a better chance of convincing voters to end 2/3 rule when the Democrats are in the minority.

And second, even if minority Democrats couldn't convince voters to change the supermajority rules, Californians, after living under a Republican majority with an irresponsible Democratic minority, would likely restore Democrats to a majority in the next election. Heck, they might give them a 2/3 majority in both houses.

The only danger is that Democrats might find minority rule - and the privilege of being in charge without being responsible - so much fun that they don't want to go back.