Thanks for the ping SW. I somehow missed the lasses last response in my inbox.
Irishlass--you obviously have first hand knowledge, but the way you make it sound is that Doolittle was only looking out for himself and didn't care if the Dems ended up taking over R seats. That is certainly not the way it is described in the news of the day.
I also find your backstories interesting, nonetheless.
Sorry I didn't reply sooner. I've had a few evening engagements this past week.
In my experience, the party regulars are highly united on redistricting. They believe that incumbent politicians will put easy re-election way above the people's best interest. It is not a conservative vs. moderate issue. In 1991, Congressman Doolittle and Assemblyman Bill Baker were widely believed to be negotiating with Willie Brown for a redistricting map that would be favorable to them personally. I cannot provide links to support this, nothing was online then. The CAGOP passed an amendment to the party bylaws that stated if you oppose the party's interest in redistricting, the party can support your primary opponent. The team that led the floor fight included the moderates you dislike, but also the leadership of CRA, YAF and the like. It passed nearly unanimously.
I believe that it is human nature for people to have selfish impulses. And I think human nature also drives most people to come up with justifications for why their selfish behavior isn't really so bad. Congressman Doolittle is trying to spin this as a noble quest he's on, but if he really was doing something good for Republicans and Conservatives, why did he advocate the same action that Nancy Pelosi, Howard Berman and Zoe Lofgren?