With Election Day two weeks from Tuesday, I wanted to take the national pulse from California, where I just spent a few days. I know what you're thinking: California doesn't have a U.S. Senate election this year at the top of the ticket; Jerry Brown seems a shoo-in for re-election against Neel Kashkari, and California couldn't be more geographically removed from Washington. All true.

But there is often something afoot out west that merits the attention of the rest of the nation. Right now, there are several matters of interest.

Consider that Brown recently signed into law the nation's first state prohibition of plastic bags. In another first, family members cannot only seek a gun-violence restraining order, but they can also, after convincing a judge of an imminent threat, have the firearms of a relative seized, pending a hearing within 21 days. It also set a standard for campus sex, saying there must be an "affirmative, unambiguous, and conscious decision" by both parties before they can engage in sexual activity. And California just became the first state to ban public schools from suspending or expelling K-3 students for "willful defiance."

Each of these is the sort of initiative that causes many across the country to scratch their heads in wonderment, but often things that emanate from California don't stay contained there.

For example: No-fault divorce began in California. So, too, the decriminalization of pot. And one can only hope that there will soon be imitators of California's top-two, or "jungle," primary system, which forces candidates to moderate rather than just appeal to ideologues in hyperpartisan districts. California is also on the vanguard of professionalizing the drawing of legislative boundaries.

"I think one of the things that's interesting about California and makes it stand out is just simply the scale of the state," explained Franklin D. Gilliam Jr., the dean of the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs and a professor of public policy and political science, with whom I spoke last week. "So when these kinds of changes happen in South Dakota or Oregon, it's not quite as significant, but when it happens in the most populous state, and happens at scale, then I think we stand up and take notice."

Gilliam put California's role in national politics in historical context:

"If you go back to the turn of the 20th century, you'll see that the progressive tradition starts there with Hiram Johnson and his attempt to break up the monopoly of the Southern Pacific Railroad. So, for example, then Leland Stanford — who we know started Stanford University and who had been a co-founder of Southern Pacific — had been governor, he appointed the co-founder's brother-in-law to the Supreme Court and it just so happens that the brother-in-law was the chief counsel for Southern Pacific. So it was in response to this kind of robber-baron corruption that the progressive movement starts in California, and really at the turn of the 20th century, when direct democracy started."

Which is not to say that all that has its political roots in California is liberal. Consider the Howard Jarvis-inspired Proposition 13, which froze property taxes, or the Proposition 209 ban on affirmative action, or more recently, the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage, which the Supreme Court struck down last year.

Gilliam also draws significance from the lack of a traditional political and social hierarchy, which you see in Eastern states like New York, Massachusetts or Pennsylvania.

"There is a rich tradition of the nouveau wealthy being able to quickly ascend to the top of the social and political and economic hierarchies," Gilliam says, "and so this more open system also gives rise to more transformative change, and then, by the 1970s, wide-scale immigration changes the demographic profile of the state."

So what might Election Day now portend for the rest of the nation?

Maybe prison reform. In two weeks, Californians will vote on what some regard as an initiative that replaces "tough on crime" with "smart on crime." Proposition 47, or the "Reduced Penalties for Some Crimes Initiative," would lessen penalties for many crimes in California, including drug possession, petty theft, possession of stolen goods, shoplifting, forgery and writing bad checks. Each of these potential felonies would now be treated as a misdemeanor.

If passed, this initiative would have several important effects. In the first instance, it would reduce district attorney caseloads, because felonies involve more work than misdemeanors. Second, it should have an effect on racial disparities in the criminal-justice system, given that men of color disproportionately make up the petty-crime population. Third, it would redirect funds used for incarceration to public schools and social services (although the amount, $250 million, is relatively paltry). While many in law enforcement oppose the move, it has drawn support from such strange bedfellows as Newt Gingrich and Jay Z.

"Sure, California can be a bit wacky," opines Gilliam. "Celebrity culture, self-indulgence and year-round tans often distract us from an important political reality. When it comes to politics, California has found a way to make profound changes acceptable and even workable."

Michael Smerconish writes for the Philadelphia Inquirer and is host of "Smerconish" on CNN. Readers may contact him at www.smerconish.com.