Arnold Schwarzenegger Wrong on Redistricting Proposition

newsmax.com ^ | October 10, 2005 | David Horowitz

[FJR]

David Horowitz has joined the fight against CA Proposition 77, the redistricting initiative, and calls on Republicans to vote NO on Prop 77. This op-ed piece explains the dangers Prop 77 poses to Republicans in CA and how its passage could start a trend that hands the House to the Dems.

[Dog Gone]

I guess I'd have to click through and get my mouse all dirty, so I'll just take your word for it.

[Mark]

I heard similar props worked good in other states.

[calcowgirl]

There are no similar props in other states.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/10/07/BAG7IF3FUA1.DTL

[AntiGuv]

If Proposition 77 passes, new lines will likely be created for the 2006 elections. And new lines in this very blue state at this time will likely spell disaster for the GOP!

I've said so before, but I was dismissed..

[Prost1]

Well, I read it and it makes a lot of sense. Horowitz normally makes a lot of sense and here again.....

Why allow judges to do what we fail to do at the ballot box?
Why trust "retired" judges who volunteer to be so helpful?
How is it that the process would not be tainted by selected and not elected judges commissioned to decide?
Is this the best solution or is enlisting the grass roots to vote a better solution?

"California's November 8 ballot that would strip the state Legislature of its constitutional responsibility for redistricting, void the current districts, and turn the job of an unprecedented mid-decade redistricting over to a three-member panel of retired judges – who volunteer for the job."

"Strip" is incorrect. It would amend the state constitution with this initiative.
I do not like phony word substitution on something so important.
I have not decided - it is not election day.

[PRND21]

start a trend that hands the House to the Dems.

It's been in the Dems hands forever...no?

[redgirlinabluestate]

Plus, where has our Republican Congress gotten us lately? It doesn't seem that we've been able to use the numbers to our advantage anyway. It would be nice to have a more balanced state legislature in California though.

[A CA Guy]

Why would any new lines spell disaster for the Republicans? Did you believe the Democrats were all this time drawing them while in power to best give us an advantage?

Don't drink the coolaid, vote yes on this proposition as well.

[Mark]

Thanks for the link. It was AZ that I heard mentioned and it was said that it favored Republicans.

[calcowgirl]

Everyone should read this whole article, IMO. (Emphasis in original)

Arnold says that the district lines look as if a "drunk using an Etch-a-Sketch" drew them. Some do. But most of the unseemly lines were drawn either to fulfill Federal Voting Rights Act mandates (which Proposition 77's judge panel must also obey) or to follow irregular city and county boundaries (which 77's judge panel must also follow) or to protect Republican voting power – and seats (which 77's judge panel is expressly forbidden to do). Neatness on a map will likely kill the Republican congressional delegation.

And that's why 45 (out of a then total of 45) Republican state legislators unanimously voted for the state Senate and congressional lines. That's right – a unanimous Republican vote for the district lines that Arnold's Prop 77 would discard! (An overwhelming majority of California's Republican congressmen endorsed the congressional plan).

(snip)

Republicans, no matter how much they embrace the other elements of Arnold's reform agenda, no matter how much they share Arnold's frustration with the super-liberal state Legislature, no matter how much gratitude and admiration they have for the phenomenon of the meteoric "Arnold" rise to power, must reject Proposition 77.

[AntiGuv]

Did you read the op-ed? Because it answers your questions quite clearly.

As for the Proposition, I don't think they will let North Carolina voters vote on it, but if they did, I would definitely vote yes. I support non-partisan redistricting and always have.

But, in California, the GOP will almost certainly lose seats because of it if this Proposition succeeds.

I'm talking about the Congress, of course. I have no idea what would happen with the legislature.

[tubebender]

Did you sign up today just to post this...

[A CA Guy]

This deal in CA puts it in the hands of retired judges to do unbiased redistricting.

The problem is that districts are more like spider webs now and far less like definable chunks of territory, so I'm voting yes on all three or four of those important ones before us.

[Czar]

As I said earlier, I'm leaning NO on #76, #77, #78, #79 and #80.

I don't trust Arnold on #76. I don't trust the appointed judges on #77. I see absolutely nothing in #78, #79 and #80 worthy of supporting.

[AntiGuv]

If it were up to me, it would be a nonpartisan commission (like Iowa has, by example) and there would be none of this nonsense where if the voters vote to reject them the lines still stand until the next election with a new map. In other words, if there's a referendum to approve or reject (from what I've gathered, that's part of CA law) then it would be before the districts go into effect.

But, compared to partisan redistricting, it's an improvement, so I would vote to approve Prop 77, and keep my fingers crossed on the election results..

[Torie]

Stick with me kid, and not this joker, who doesn't have a clue what he is talking about. Like a said before, a non partisan plan will likely cost the GOP one or two seats net, and maybe bring in some more moderate Dems. The state is that geographically palarized. The guy mentions Drier and Pombo (fair enough, although it depends with Pombo), but then goes on this Mr. Toad's ride mentioning seat after seat in some mental breakdown of angst. Of course he has no detail to support his case. Why should he? Details are boring and take work. If fe had bothered to look at the details, maybe he wouldn't have written his mental breakdown piece.

The Pubbies like the status quo with nice safe seats. Politicians don't like competitive seats. They drain too much money from the coffers, and are too much work to hold.

[Carry_Okie]

The tide begins to turn.

[bpjam]

You have a liberal state for the coming century. (Barring a massive flood/earthquake which eliminates the Bay area and LA) You have the lines drawn by the Dems to protect all of their seats. The GOP congressional delegation signed on because it only gave up two of our seats and the rest where not further eroded. This was not a vote to actually HELP the GOP, it was just a vote to save the jobs of those GOP congressmen.

With two bodies in the state being held by the Dems, they are NEVER going to let us have another Congressional seat. Its not like we are offering to give them seats in Texas either. Without a break up of the one party control (which will continue forever considering the illegal population booms), we are without any ideas of gaining more than 12 of the 54 congressional seats. At least Ahnold is trying to create a more level playing field. I don't see anybody else coming up with anything which moves us forward.

And if you just saw the news today that the California Teachers Association is asking for another $40M from their members and to take out another $35M in debt just to survive the fight with Ahnold to prevent dues money from going into campaigns - then I think the guy deserves at least guarded support.

[calcowgirl]

The tide begins to turn.

Yep. Some sanity, finally.

Although the RINOs for Redistricting campaign is just beginning.