Democrats say they support redistricting reform, but they are on record opposing it
For the past several years, legislative Democrats have said they support taking the map-drawing power from the Legislature and giving it to an independent redistricting commission. But every time they have a chance to back a measure that would actually do what they say, they oppose it. The latest example was the vote by party leaders to oppose the redistricting measure on the November ballot.
The executive board of the California Democratic Party voted 9-1 last week against the redistricting measure. The Dems claim it's a Republican power grab. That's their fallback position when the facts aren't on their side. This effort is being pushed by California Common Cause, AARP and the League of Women Voters. Those groups don't exactly conjure up thoughts of Dick Cheney and Karl Rove.
Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Democratic Controller Steve Westly are backing the redistricting measure. It's a bipartisan measure, excerpt for legislative Democrats who don't want to give up their power to create safe districts. Democrats and Republicans know that it's a conflict of interest to draw the boundaries of your own district.
Right now, legislative elections in California are essentially fixed. A seat won't change hands without some extraordinary event. Even when lawmakers are termed out, the seats won't change parties.
This is what California Voters First says about the issue: "State legislators are allowed to draw their own district boundaries to subvert the system and ensure their reelection. In fact, there is now a 99% re-election rate in California legislative races! Guaranteed re-election is not the best incentive for elected officials to be accountable and responsive to voter needs."
Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata has scheduled a meeting for Friday with his political allies to discuss ways to block the measure, as well as raise money for the November campaign against the redistricting initiative. It's clear the Dems are going all out to oppose this initiative.
The special-interest money that Perata is generating to oppose redistricting reform will come at a cost. How much more of state government will be given away as a payback for helping the Democrats kill the redistricting initiative?
Those opposing redistricting reform know their position is indefensible, so they resort to political spin. It's time to fix a system that doesn't make sense to anyone but politicians.
Comments
Why oppose this measure?
1. It turns over the redistricting process to an unelected bureaucrat, who, in turn, appoints a commission of citizens with zero experience that are not accountable to a single citizen. No other state has such a system.
2. Democrats oppose it because it gives Republicans the same number of seats on the commission -- despite the fact that Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in California (and our state is getting even more Democratic).
3. This measure was specifically designed to exempt Congress -- a callous political move that leaves the most gerrymandered seats (Congress) untouched.
4. More than 95 percent of the special interest money behind this measure comes from Republican interests -- including the New Majority, whose website notes that it's sole interest is to elect more Republicans to the legislature. So much for "bipartisan."
And that's just for starters.
Posted by: Steven Maviglio | June 23, 2008 6:11 PM
Why Support this measure?
1. California Voters FIRST creates an open and transparent selection process of the commissioners that is designed to ensure that those who are chosen who represent the geographic, racial, and gender diversity of California, and who possess relevant analytical skills and the ability to be impartial. Diversity considerations are required at three stages of the selection process: recruitment, creation of the initial pool, and selection of the final six Commissioners. We envision that demographers, city planners, lawyers, civil rights leaders, academics and people who are civically active would apply and be considered. California State Auditor Elaine Howell, the 3rd officeholder since the creation of the position in 1993, was appointed by Governor Davis.
2. The Commission is comprised of 5 Democrats, 5 Republicans and 4 Representatives affiliated with neither major party and requires 3 votes from each group for approval. The process is an open and transparent process- strikingly different from the closed door sessions where lawmakers protect their incumbent interests that are the status quo. The public and media have the opportunity to scrutinize and comment throughout the process.
3. California Voters FIRST addresses the most egregious conflict of interest in our current system- state Legislators drawing their own political districts. It is a process that serves the self interests of this politicians- not those of their constituents. It’s no surprise that political insiders whose jobs are protected by the system today would want to keep things the same.
4. California Voters FIRST is a bipartisan coalition of good government groups and democratic donors such as AARP, California Common Cause, The League of Women Voters, Angelo Tsakopoulos, Reed Hastings, Haim Saban and others that support fair redistricting reform.
And that’s just for starters.
Posted by: Jeannine English, President, California AARP | June 24, 2008 4:31 PM
Democrats' actions speak louder than words:
The argument for opposition to the measure speaks volumes for what democrats really want for this state and country, but you have to read between the lines. Mr. Maviglio states:
"...a commission of citizens with zero experience..." (interpretation: "Never mind of the people, by the people, for the people; citizens don't know squat about government and shouldn't be involved)
"...it gives Republicans the same number of seats..." (interpretation: "Now that we have a majority, heaven forbid any measure that gives anyone with another opinion any kind of say in any matters."
The Democratic party SAYS it represents the commoner, but its ACTIONS work to prevent citizens from running anything.
The Democratic party SAYS it stands for equality for all, but its ACTIONS are motivated by a desire to eliminate the opposition. The end result for citizens would be to "play our way or don't play at all."
The Democrats' poster child, Al Gore, SAYS that he is concerned for the climate, but his ACTIONS prove otherwise. He recommends that the masses drive cars that don't pollute while he gets carted around in a limo and a jet with who-knows-how-many empty seats. He says that it's imperative for the survival of the planet that we cut down on carbon emissions, but how much polluting happens every week when his acres of lawn and garden are manicured by the landscaping crew?
The socialist-elitist message: for the good of the country, you can't do these things but I deserve these luxuries because I'm in charge. We know what's best for you; you don't.
Posted by: Matt McIntyre | June 25, 2008 9:44 AM