Redistricting

Redistricting Initiative "Is A Power Grab," Says Supporter of Redistricting Reform

Joe Mathews — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 12:52:00 -0400

Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Weintraub writes today that politicians will lie to beat the redistricting reform initiative on the November ballot. But if Ted Costa's views are heard, they may not need to do much.

Ted Costa was the original proponent of both the recall of Gov. Gray Davis and of Prop 77, the failed redistricting initiative in 2005. In an email, he blasts the new initiative, Prop 11, as a "power grab," matching the rhetoric -- if not meaning -- of the measure's opponents.

Democrats and legislators have constituted most of the opposition to this point. But Costa is a Republican, and his argument, if it gets heard over the din of the presidential election and the gay marriage ban, could peel Republicans off the measure. Costa also betrays his own personal frustration with Common Cause and other backers of the measure; he's spent years trying to work with them on redistricting, and doesn't like their approach, from how the lines are drawn to the fact that Congressional districts aren't included. The measure only covers state legislative districts, and the districts for California's Board of Equalization.

Here's Ted's email:

"In a funny way the initiative opponents are right. The redistricting initiative IS a power grab! But not a power grab by Republicans.

This initiative is a power grab by the left wing interest groups who drafted it like Common Cause, and AARP, and those who've endorsed it (ACLU) to seize control of the redistricting process from the incumbents like Perata. The interest groups want a more liberal legislature that will be more likely to give then a 2/3 vote to raise taxes..

Fairness and accountability have little to do with this initiative.

It's all about shifting power from incumbents to special interests!

If it were truly reform, there would have been real instead of misleadingly phony criteria to keep cities and counties from being divided, and there would have been actual language to promote competitive districts. But there is none. The left vetoed such language.

There would have been strong conflict of interest provisions, to keep employers of lobbyists (not just lobbyists) and former legislative consultants (not just former legislative employees) off the Commission.

There would have been some minimal safeguards like better disclosure of who recruited applicants, or a jury-like random invitation process to prevent special interests from recruiting hidden ringers for the Commission. But there are no safeguards.

In fact, this measure is precisely tailored to put public interest group liberals like Common Cause, AARP, and ACLU allies, and perhaps even their Board members on the Commission with no restraints on their ability to gerrymander the state.

And a liberal gerrymander by this Commission would APPEAR biparstisan, because no one may ever know who or if hidden ringers are really working for some incumbent or special interest, instead of the interets of the Party in which they happen to be registered.

If the Mafia could recruit potential jury panelists to pack a jury pool, how would we ever be sure the prosecutor found them all and that the trial was honest? If the Mafia could write rules to allow them to pack the jury pool, would we adopt them?

And if a jury, once selected, could write its own rules of evidence (its "criteria"), instead of following the law, would we have any confidence in the result? Why would we give any jury such unlimited power?

This initiative is a mockery of reform!

Unless the "reform" you want is a tax increase and a MORE liberal legislature.

Under today's Rules at least Republicans can:

1. Elect a Republican Governor to force a fair plan OR

2. Referend a partisan gerrymander OR.

3. Use the threat of a referendum to force at least an incumbent protection gerrymander that blocks the 2/3 majority the left needs for a tax increase.

4. Count on the greed of Democrat incumbents to create a safe district Democratic majority instead of the incumbent-threatening gerrymander it would take to get a 2/3 liberal tax-raising majority.

5. Perhaps even propose and pass real redistricting reform that would protect cities and counties, and guard against special interests planting phony Republicans on the Commission

The left has, under the current system, so far failed to get a 2/3 vote for a tax increase....

Shameless Anti-Redistricting Web Site Goes Up

Joe Mathews — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:17:00 -0400

I've been critical of the political strategy behind advancing redistricting reform by ballot initiative in this November's California elections. But looking at the web site put up by opponents of the initiative makes me think that perhaps it's worth fighting for reapportionment reform, regardless of the long odds.

In a display of chutzpah, the opponents -- state senate Democratic leader Don Perata and others -- have put together a web site called "Citizens for Accountability." The argument is Clintonian--it accuses redistricting reform supporters of doing precisely the thing (trying to protect politicians) that the opponents themselves are doing. Totally shameless.

Dems Intimidate Dems Who Support Reapportionment

Joe Mathews — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:05:00 -0400

Surprise, surprise. Democratic supporters of the redistricting initiative backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (a Republican) and former state controller Steve Wesly (a Democrat), are accusing Democratic regulars of trying to intimidate them. The party has come out against the redistricting measure.

Redistricting, and Unintended Consequences

Joe Mathews — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:03:00 -0400

Ted Costa, the Sacramento anti-tax activist best known as the original proponent of the 2003 recall of California Gov. Gray Davis, once told me that the recall was his second choice. He wanted to pass an initiative to strip California's state legislators of the power to draw their own districts. But the courts knocked a measure he drafted off the ballot. With the money he had raised for redistricting, he decided to launch the recall effort.

In 2006, looking back at all the political change his recall had produced, Costa looked back and said, "I would trade it all for a fair redistricting." Well, another redistricting initiative is headed to the ballot in California this November. And Costa doesn't like it at all.

Redistricting Makes the California Ballot

Joe Mathews — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 00:12:00 -0400

The ballot initiative, sponsored by Gov. Schwarzenegger and others, would take the power to draw state legislative districts -- but not Congressional districts -- away from state legislators and instead give the drafting role to a citizens' commission. Such measures have a perfect record in California--they always lose. But opponents have been a little slow to organize, and perhaps the initiative can escape attack and attention, what with the presidential election and the gay marriage initiative on the same ballot. Don't bet on it, however.

Donor Fatigue for Arnold?

Joe Mathews — Mon, 12 May 2008 17:14:00 -0400

This piece in the Contra Costa Times asks whether there's "donor fatigue" as Gov. Schwarzenegger raises money for his redistricting initiative and perhaps, some sort of budget reform ballot measure (or measures) in November. It's a fair question. The problem may not be fatigue but donors' clear-eyed assessment of the political chances of redistricting and budget reform. Redistricting has a perfect record at the ballot over the last 15 years -- it's lost every time -- and budget reform proposals of all stripes (notably Prop. 56 in 2004--backed by Democrats and unions -- and Prop. 76 -- backed by Schwarzenegger and Republicans -- in 2005) have gone down to defeat. What is the point of spending good money on reform proposals that will go down to defeat, no matter their merits?

Redistricting as a Test

Joe Mathews — Thu, 08 May 2008 16:25:00 -0400

Capitol Weekly has a good piece on the Schwarzenegger redistricting initiative as a test of a new non-profit reform group, California Forward, led by former Congressman and Clinton Chief of Staff Leon Panetta. Panetta is one of the best strategic thinkers in the state, but fighting dysfunction in the Clinton White House is nothing compared to fighting dysfunction in California state government.

California Political Reform Round Up

Joe Mathews — Wed, 07 May 2008 19:29:00 -0400

BASS EXPANDS ON TAX REVIEW: The incoming California Assembly Speaker Karen Bass explains her plans for a tax reform commission in an interview with the Associated Press. Aaron McLear, a spokesman for the governor, is quoted as saying that the governor is interested in tax reform but it's "not a substitute for reforming our broken budget system." Yes, and no. Clearly, the state budget process needs procedural changes, and there are strong arguments for establishing a real reserve and an ability to respond more effectively to changes in revenue. But the main failed attempts at spending-side budget reform suggests that budget reform may not be possible without tax reform.

NUNEZ PROPOSES COUNTER-MEASURES: Speaker Fabian Nunez, at his final news conference in that job, rolled out his three part plan of ballot measures. But there's considerable cynicism about the measures, particularly a redistricting one that looks like it has little purpose than as a weapon against Gov. Schwarzenegger's initiative, which appears headed for the November ballot. Nunez's reapportionment reform would create a 17-member commission to handle redistricting; 8 of the members would be appointed by legislators. Schwarzenegger's plan calls for a 14 member panel of citizens, chosen at random. Nunez's other proposals include a ban on fundraising at certain points in the legislative calendar and a measure nearly identical to the term limits initiative he unsuccessfully backed in February.

ANGELIDES BACKER GIVES TO ARNOLD REDISTRICTING: The Sacramento developer Angelo Tsakopoulos, a major donor to the 2006 gubernatorial campaign of Democrat Phil Angelides, has given $25,000 to the redistricting reform initiative backed by Gov. Schwarzenegger. Opponents of the measure have been harping on the long list of Republicans backing it. So the backing of a prominent Democrat is worth more than the amount of cash. In other redistricting news, signatures were submitted on Tuesday.

More Evidence That Arnold's Proposed Education Cuts Are Undermining His Reforms

Joe Mathews — Fri, 02 May 2008 15:09:00 -0400

Last month, I wrote in the Los Angeles Times about how Gov. Schwarzenegger's pursuit of education cuts as part of his budget proposal was undermining his efforts to achieve redistricting and budget reforms. A new poll from the Public Policy Institute of California offers more evidence. His stance on education is so unpopular -- only a quarter of Californians approve of his handling of education -- that it's dragging down his overall popularity (to 41 percent in the poll). Schwarzenegger is leading the way in offering reforms, but if he doesn't drop the education cuts -- and he has the opportunity to do just that with his revised budget proposal later this month, his low popularity will poison those reform ideas and end his last chance to make major changes in how the state governs itself.

California Redistricting Count: Nearly 1.2 Million Signatures

Joe Mathews — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 00:50:00 -0400

Rick Claussen, consultant to the redistricting initiative in California, reports that the final count of sigs, after last night's turn-in, is just under 1.2 million. With those numbers -- nearly twice as many as the number of required valid signatures -- the initiative should have no trouble qualifying for the November ballot.