In the Nov 8, 2005 election California voters rejected Prop 77, an attempt to approve a redistricting reform by a vote of 59.8 percent opposed and 40.2 percent in favor.
What exactly is redistricting anyway? Valid question.
Redistricting is the redrawing of boundaries for legislative districts to reflect changes in population. The California Constitution entrusts the state legislature with adjusting Senatorial, Assembly, Congressional, and Board of Equalization districts every 10 years following the national census (California Constitution, Article XXI). The governor has the authority to approve or veto proposed districts.
I Just received an email from the “Join Arnold” Team Prop 11 Redistricting
“The Governor has been fighting for redistricting reform since he took office in 2003 because the people of California want to bring competition and centrist leadership back to our state. He believes strongly that we need a system where voters choose the politicians not where politicians choose the voters. The Governor has endorsed the California Voters FIRST Act, which if passed by voters in November 2008, will return power to the people.
The California Voters FIRST Act will create a 14-person independent citizens commission comprised of five Democrats, five Republicans and four individuals not registered as a member of either major party to draw district boundaries for the Senate, Assembly and Board of Equalization. The measure creates a more open and transparent redistricting process, takes the power to draw district lines out of the hands of lawmakers and puts into place a non-partisan process that requires respecting existing city boundaries, county boundaries and communities. ”
From the Contra Costa Times let me provide an opposing statement:
“‘Voters First’ puts minority voters last,” said Arturo Vargas, executive director of tge National Association Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund. “The (initiative) is a flawed strategy for achieving open and accountable redistricting in California. It fails to guarantee diversity, expertise or accountability within the commission it creates, and represents a step backwards for the political progress of California’s minorities.”
Gilbert comments. It is true that currently we have “elected officials selecting us” instead of us picking them simply by the way the current boundaries are crafted. And “crafted” is the appropriate word to use. Campaign strategist Michael Berman, brother of U.S. Rep. Howard Berman (D-Calif.) is a key power broker in the current system.
And from Politico you can read the following. It’s not difficult to see why many incumbents are concerned about setting any objective standards that would apply to drawing legislative and congressional districts. Members would prefer to keep redistricting an inside game among professional politicians. During the post-2000 redistricting, California Democrats and Republicans agreed to a map that locked incumbents into friendly turf.
From Salon.com I found the following remarks that are right on point.
The redistricting process, for example, is a national disgrace. Thanks to computer-aided demographic research, politicians can now draw politically homogeneous districts that guarantee reelection for incumbents year after year.
While there are many voters in this state that are upset with Arnold, what odds are you giving that his latest effort will have a better outcome than Prop 77?
Larry,
I would love to see it happen. The current system is so bad, even cowpie bingo would be better.
Now that I think about it, the current method has many similarities.
I’m a huge supporter of redistricting. Otherwise, we just get party hacks, its a contest can be the most extreme to either side of the political spectrum. Let’s get districts that go along natural populations & geographic boundaries, and politicians who are actually supported by all voters, not just primary voters.
Here I go again putting my 2 cents worth, I would like to see the lines drawn on the City Lines. Because little islands like Santa Nita get screwed out of equality for our kids. Our Kids go to school
6 miles away they attend school in Westminister and we live in the City of Santa Ana. When there are after school programs in Westminister it is too far away for these kids to attend. They cannot access the Spurgeon School because that is the Santa Ana School District does not fund our kids using their facilities. Neither Cities of Santa Ana or Garden Grove want to take responsibility for these Cracked (Gerrimandered) Neighborhoods. The only thing good is that we are a blue ribbon School District, and that what Corporate Families are looking for when raising their kids, property prices go up and development hence Willowick Greens Homes. I kinda wanted a school built where willowick was for these kids to have a place close to home. I hope this time the lines are drawn right.
Yeah, why doesn’t anybody use the term gerrymander anymore? It sounds a lot more sinister than ‘redistrict.’ I mean, how does one ‘district’ anyway? I’m pretty sure it’s a noun. 😛
And Lisann, I am so grateful for your contributions to our blog. You should seriously consider joining our team. It’s boring being the only woman here! HELP! lol
I’ve noticed since I’ve joined the site, there has been a dramatic increase in female commenters and I think it’s AWESOME! You could help us further this trend even more.
There are so many women in politics in OC, but the blogosphere here is still primarily a boys’ club. Ladies, SPEAK UP! And if any guys give you a problem, well… you just let me take care of that! 🙂
SMS
Carl, Todd, Lisann and Sarah. The need for redistricting is beyond question. The challenge is how to implement it. We need to peel the onion back to see who will make the call. While I addressed Prop 77 when it was on the front burner I need to spend some time on this new initiative and add my two cents as to its merits.
If you wish to see one of the most blatant illustrations of abuse simply check out the 23rd Congressional District which is a sliver of land that covers 200 miles from Oxnard north to the Monterey County line. And guess what. It is only a few hundred yards wide.
I thought “term limits” solved all of those problems.
If making the districts “compact and competitive”, where voters can vote out an incumbent with ease, then the current term limits laws would not be needed.
Rob,
The term limit law was to get certain specific individuals out of the legislature, i.e. Willy Brown among others, but he was the primary target. Even the city of San Francisco went after him as well, initiating “district specific” rather than “at large” elections and term limits later on because he was too controlling.
Gerrymandering has been a chess game for forever.
The CA-23 is a real winner in that regard and shows just how bad it can be.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9b/Ca23_109.gif
Wikipedia actually has a very good description of what is involved and how they do it and why.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
Carl.
Another example that I have referenced previously is in San Diego County where each party has it’s own protected turf. The city of La Jolla where former Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham had a lifetime opportunity in his 50th CD seat. His political neighbor, Congresswoman Susan A Davis (D-53), was also protected.
Check out the map. In the wealthy enclave of La Jolla, shaped like an elephant, is a section that is part of the Republican controlled 50th while it is surounded by the 53rd that runs along the coastline from the Mexican border north to Torrey Pines where a man named “tiger” recently won a golf tournament.
Yes Term Limits is one way to address part of the problem but, as I have researched, you rarely see party turnouver unless you have fallout such as happended to “Duke” who was replaced by another Republican.
Like Larry, I’d like to learn more details, but from what I’ve heard of this so far, it’s exactly what we need for more democracy and more debate. There should be NO SAFE DISTRICTS, for Dems or Republicans. Make these politicians fight for our votes! And let the chips fall where they may, party-wise. That’s the Orange Juice way!
From Tony Quinn
Tony Quinn Co-Editor of the California Target Book and Author
Fri, June 27th, 2008
Joe Mathews (LA Times) dismisses my analysis that the redistricting initiative might pass with all the usual arguments as to why past measures lost: support by good government reformers and the media is irrelevant; the public doesn’t care, it’s biggest booster, Gov. Schwarzenegger, is unpopular, etc. etc.
Joe is pretty much like the stopped clock that’s right twice a day, and this may be his hour. If the politics of the past is prologue, he is right — it will lose.
So what’s different? Joe points to “good government” and media support for Schwarzenegger’s Proposition 77 in the 2005 special election. But Prop 77 got caught in the maelstrom that sunk it along with the three other initiatives on the ballot. It did call for an immediate election in the new lines that was interpreted (by me among others), as an attempted Republican power grab. These problems will not plague the 2008 initiative.
Joe also overlooks a key difference — that this measure has real bipartisan support, which the 2005 measure, and those before it, did not.
But the most important difference is the times. The electorate is angry, dissatisfied and open to doing very odd things. As I sit waiting for the Clinton-Giuliani presidential debate that will never be, I am reminded how wrong the conventional political wisdom has been. I fully agree with Joe that redistricting reform will not pass because media and reform elites love it, or the public suddenly wants a handful of marginal seats.
It will only pass if the public sees it as an assault on a selfish, arrogant, out of touch political class that cares only about perpetuating itself in power. Maybe they will never see it that way, but this year the public is certainly more engaged. If they have figured out that oil speculators in Riyadh are making them pay $5 a gallon for gas, maybe they can also figure out that an arcane ballot measure like this one really does strike a blow against the very people they rightly blame for so many of their ills.
Tony’s report can be found at the following link:
http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/tony-quinn/the-redistricting-discourse-carries-on
Vern,
Glad to see we have found something we can agree upon. I knew we could 🙂
Let’s try to build on our agreement and attempt to gain a broader base of support to help us move this forward.
Carl.
Having met Vern I can say that he is really not a bad guy once you educate him to our way of thinking. Just joking Vern!
We all agree that “gerrymandering” needs to end.
The one man who would oppose it is a guy named Michael Berman who has been very effective in this area of control.
I might consider it, if I knew what I had to do. I feel that some people think that I am telling a fantastic story, or a conspiracy theory. I love to play the game of Chess, and my Dad always said try to be 2-3 steps ahead of the other person. I also had a supervisor once that said always C.Y.A. and have the documentation to back up what you say. I also had someone tell me once, that at a city council meeting they asked him what he thought of me and he said “I thought you were crazy”, and they said see that bag that she has? “She is not so crazy because she can back up what she says in that black bag”. I feel that it is only right that the stock holders of Santa Ana, should get their just investments in this City, even if it is just a minimum wage job. I am tired of going to hiring agencies that never call, submitting resumes. I want my share of the work investment board dividends, or a home that I can afford.
I honestly believe I can contribute to The Orange Juice Blog.
Lisann.
I did see your Newsline article “Hillary wins Straw Poll” but I will not go there today.
As to drinking juice with the team simply contact Art Pedroza.
Thanks for your comments.
Larry –
I’ve extended an invitation to her.
SMS