Redistricting fever is sweeping the Golden State faster than swine flu hysteria. California voters have taken redistricting from the legislature’s greasy palms, and put it in their own sweaty mitts. Now, you too can draw legislative districts (no previous experience required) by signing up for the Citizens Redistricting Commission. Special interests of every shape and size are scrambling to stake their claims at the State Auditor’s new website. Don’t get left out of this gold rush, sign up now!
Redistricting is not just for crooked lawmakers, anymore. Now, you can gerrymander your own districts with the Voters FIRST Act. California voters passed this law in November 2008. The law creates a Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw electoral boundaries for the California Assembly, Senate, and Board of Equalization. The Voters First Act empowers (faceless bureaucrat) state auditors to select a pool of 60 registered voters (political hacks, perhaps) from the applicant pool. (Legislative leaders are permitted to reduce the pool – oops, fine print.) Auditors then pick eight commissars by lottery. These eight pick six more – voila, the Citizens Redistricting Commission!
With ultimate power on the line, special interests are signing up from every conceivable (and inconceivable) political, religious, ideological, and biological persuasion. Pro-LGBT activists want lines drawn to reflect their interests. And, so should you! There is no ideology too extreme, no belief too ignorant, no idea too kooky, no fetish too kinky, no desire too trivial! The Citizens Redistricting Commission must reflect California!
Don’t let this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity pass you by! Sign up, now! Faceless bureaucrats are standing by!
If you love the initiative process then you’ll LOVE this. Perhaps the only thing worse than ill-informed voters acting on poorly conceived initiatives is ill-informed citizens drawing legislative boundaries.
Given the application and interview process I wonder how much of an “outsider” these appointees will, in fact, be. And I wonder what sort of political bent this group will have. I also wonder whether the bureaucrats will be driving this bus and having the commission rubber stamp a staff porposal. If that occurs, I’d rather have the hooligan legislators drawing their own maps.
Thanks Rogue, I like this too, having backed Prop 11 last year (against the entrenched interests in both Parties.) No more Safe Districts! Let democracy rule!
No Longer FTP, how many hours/days of training do you think members of the Citizens Redistricting Commission will require to get up to speed on all the relevant issues? Or are they just doomed to be gullible morons, because they haven’t spent as much of their lives in the political game as you have? I think I’ll sign up now.
Vern – funny. You don’t know me (nor would you if I ever introduced myself to you). Frankly, I don’t know you either. Yet you think for some reason that I have spent many yers in the “political game.” I am not sure I know what you mean by that, but I can assure you I make no money off of the “game” as you call it. Nor do I profit personally. I just happen to know what is going on. But that is beside the point.
So, here is the answer to your question: There are 80 Assembly seats and 40 Senate seats. There are hundreds of cities, school districts, water districts, vector control districts, et cetera et cetera. There are cities with vastly disparate and distinct neighborhoods. All of these have different interests, different issues, different demographic makeups and different economies. The courts require all of these to be balanced but permit politically motivated districting. How a handful of TRULY independent citizens will come up to speed on all the disparate interests throughout the state is beyond me. And in simple terms, they won’t be able to. They will have to do something else, and I bet it starts with bureaucrats and dry erase boards.
Interestingly the federal courts have time and again indicated that POLITICAL gerrymandering (what you appear to disdain) is a defense to many of the contiguity/similarity of interest challenges that occur. However, I suggest that only legislators can use political gerrymandering as a defense. This “independent” citizens’ commission (again, I question whether they truly will be independent) won’t be able to use that defense (since by definition, they aren’t elected to anything). The door will be open for all sorts of challenges to the redistricting on a variety of bases, including racial discrimination. And these challenges will come. At huge cost.
I guess in the end, I’d rather have legislators who are supposed to be political making the redistricting decision (which is political) rather than a bunch of unqualified citizens who will either likley be unable to comprehend the many layers of interests at issue or will be controled by state workers with their own ideas of democracy.
I can’t believe I voted for this turkey.
Instead of the “Voters FIRST Act”, it should have been titled “READ first,then Vote!” act.
Oh my God, what have we done?!
Wow, we lost the Rogue, and that quick? I hope it’s not just because I agreed with him.
No Longer (I wish you had a catchier handle): I read all your comments with interest and find them very informative, even though I usually disagree with you philosophically. I can tell you’ve been working in local politics for a long time, at least it sounds that way. I would like a little time to thoughtfully respond to your comment #3.
Vern,
I’m with you on the “no safe districts” philosophy because I believe that safe districts encourage extremism. I believe that California’s moderate center cares about fiscal responsibility.
But, I think we may have jumped from the frying pan into the fire.