I don't live in California and I haven't read up on this proposition, but I'm strongly in favor of anything that makes the districting process as non-partisan and logical as possible. California is particularly infamous for having virtually every district be a bizarrely shaped region that makes little geographical sense and exists only because it is "incumbent-friendly".
"The Big Sort" thesis is that even without gerrymandering, people tend to move into neighborhoods which match them--- thus leading to uncompetitive districts even if they follow 'natural' boundaries.
So while I support redistricting reform (witness Texas for what can go wrong with a legislature-driven process) I'm not convinced it will lead to more competitive races.
Term limits have done their intended job: Willie Brown is no longer Speaker of the State Assembly. Now that he's gone, can we get rid of term limits? State politics is Amateur Hour as a result.
This is an issue where I'm in complete agreement with jpmassar. California has a completely dysfunctional legislature. And if you consider it, it's probably correct for the legislators to act in the manner in which they have. The districts are almost all gerrymandered so that only a highly partisan individual can win; there are almost no competitive districts.
This isn't a perfect proposal. Yet if this proposition passes we're likely to get something far, far better than what we currently have. Competitive races will likely lead to a legislature that can compromise and some fiscal sense in Sacramento.
For the benefit of schmengie, California already has term limits.
The same thing that would happen if the Legislature / Governor couldn't enact a redistricting plan currently?
I have no idea what would happen in that case; one might guess a California judge would draw up new districts, since the State Constitution presumably mandates that districts be redrawn (or even go to Federal court -- one man, one vote)
Much as Oregon is (in my mind) the model for how voting should be done in this country, Iowa is the model for how apportionment and redistricting should be done.
And yet Iowa's 5 CDs are all tagged "safe Republican" or "safe Democratic" on DC Political Report. Although it looks like the 1st CD may be competitive this year.
(My brother is moving to Iowa. But to a pretty Republican part of Iowa, alas.)
Comments 13
Reply
term limits
Reply
Gerrymandering in CA has resulted in their being essentially
no competitive Congressional or Legislative districts.
And since relatively few people vote in the primaries which
decide the elections, the party
machines really control things to a much higher degree.
Reply
So while I support redistricting reform (witness Texas for what can go wrong with a legislature-driven process) I'm not convinced it will lead to more competitive races.
Reply
Reply
This isn't a perfect proposal. Yet if this proposition passes we're likely to get something far, far better than what we currently have. Competitive races will likely lead to a legislature that can compromise and some fiscal sense in Sacramento.
For the benefit of schmengie, California already has term limits.
Reply
Reply
couldn't enact a redistricting plan currently?
I have no idea what would happen in that case; one might guess
a California judge would draw up new districts, since the
State Constitution presumably mandates that districts be redrawn
(or even go to Federal court -- one man, one vote)
Reply
From this, it's not obvious that the Governor has any say
in the matter
Reply
http://www.legis.state.ia.us/Redist/Redist.html
Reply
(My brother is moving to Iowa. But to a pretty Republican part of Iowa, alas.)
Reply
Leave a comment