California: What's next? Redistricting

San Jose Mercury News ^ | October 15, 2003 | Ann E. Marimow

[John Jorsett]

SACRAMENTO - Emboldened by the success of his recall initiative, anti-tax crusader Ted Costa said Tuesday he plans to go back to the voters with a ballot measure to break incumbents' grip on California's Legislature and congressional delegation.

Proponents of redrawing the state's political map have tried before to overhaul the redistricting process, which is controlled by the Legislature and in 2001 protected its Democratic majority and incumbent Republicans.

But Costa, a Republican, is hoping for a boost from Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger, who campaigned to remove reapportionment from the whim of the Legislature and put it into the hands of a panel of retired judges.

``If I were in this business, I would strike right now,'' said Tim Hodson, director of the Center for California Studies at California State University-Sacramento. ``This was a political earthquake and people are upset with the status quo.''

[BkBinder]

If they really want to shake things up, then along with redistricting reforms, change CA fro a winner-takes-all electoral state to a proportioned state, a la Maine.

Think Democrats are crying the blues now? Change the electoral math and they'll be ready to commit hari kari.

[July 4th]

Unfortunately, that usually lets a few total nutbags in at the bottom of the list. But it does have the potential to help out Republicans in this case as well.

[BkBinder]

If, for example, you structure it so that a candidate that wins a district gets the electoral vote represented by that district, then you would effectively keep the state in play every four years since the GOP could gather 20+ votes. In fact, you might give a majority to the GOP by trading an 80% Democratic seat (the Bay area) for several seats in the Inland Empire. Winner of the majority of districts would recieve 2 bonus electoral votes (representing Senators)

The extra attention of the National GOP probably would be beneficial to the State GOP as well.

[Amerigomag]

If this initiative is successful and the redistricting is based strictly on coordinate geometry with a small bias for geography it will be far more instrumental straightening out California's problems than the recall process.

Remember Davis took office and initially fought the cabal in the legislature. He soon gave up and simply became a political whore without core values.

[goldstategop]

Switch to a system of proportional representation. Republicans would be able to win seats even in the Bay Area. I would urge Ted Costa to abandon our winner past the post plurality system and have California adopt an electoral system that awards each party seats based on the share of the votes it has received. The splinter party problem could be addressed by requiring a party to win a minimum of 5% of the vote statewide before it can receive a seat. With one stroke, we can eliminate the biggest incentive for partisan gerrymandering. And while we're at it, let's adopt a unicameral legislature. There is no need for two houses based on the same principle of representation.

[Paleo Conservative]

Switch to a system of proportional representation. Republicans would be able to win seats even in the Bay Area.

Every system of proportional representation places very highly centralized control over party office holders in the hands of the party leaders. Proportional representation means representatives no longer are beholden to representing their district even when its voters disagree with the official party position on an issue. If a representative in a proportional system votes with his district rather than his party he will most likely be placed lower on the list of candidates. With single member districts, a representative can buck his party's leadership and be reelected, because nomination and election to office occur at the district level rather than at the state or national level.

I much prefer the system Illinois had prior to 1980 where each district had mulitiple members representing it. Only two were allowed to represent one political party. This meant that all districts had representation from both the major political parties.

[Paleo Conservative]

He soon gave up and simply became a political whore without core values.

He was always a "political whore without core values".

[DoctorZIn]

This post has been added to the… California In Transition- Must read Threads!

Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin

[ladyinred]

Whoo Hoo! Although the rats are whining all over the place about pubbies redistricting in Texas, they do it all of the time in Arnold country to keep their majority safe!

[goldstategop]

That could be remedied by adopting the German mixed system, where half the legislative seats are chosen by a first past the post single member district system and the rest are filled through a party list proportional representation formula. In effect, each voter would get two votes, one for their local representative and a second for their statewide party list choice. It would make for a more representative legislature and there would be more opportunities for party turnover instead of the current situation in which legislators hold office until they're termed out, die, or retire early.

[heleny]

a candidate that wins a district gets the electoral vote represented by that district, then you would effectively keep the state in play every four years since the GOP could gather 20+ votes. ... Winner of the majority of districts would recieve 2 bonus electoral votes (representing Senators)

Assemblyman Tony Strickland suggested this mini-state idea shortly after the 2000 elections. The proposal went nowhere in the Democrat-dominated committees, and there was no effort to make the proposal a ballot initiative.

It's a great idea, because it accommodates the vast differences between districts in the San Francisco Bay area and districts in inland CA or Southern CA (excluding LA).

There are good reasons for not changing the system, such as the fact that mini-states or proportionally assigning electors would be more like direct democracy (and less like what the Founders originally envisioned) or that Congressional redistricting would become even more politicized, but I don't like the way things are now. The county red/green map from last week's recall election demonstrate that difference: SF and its adjacent counties said "no" by 70-80%, but most counties said "yes" by 60-70%.

Imagine the extreme hypothetical case where CA's population balloons until it has 270 Congressmen; a candidate need only win 50% of CA to become President, thereby undermining the entire electoral system and making it direct democracy among CA voters. That probably won't happen in my lifetime, but add in a few other liberal states to achieve over half the electoral votes, and the rest of the country becomes irrelevant in the vote for President.

[heleny]

let's adopt a unicameral legislature. There is no need for two houses based on the same principle of representation.

States' rights! In the Senate, CA has about the same power as Wisconsin or Rhode Island.

[heleny]

Every system of proportional representation places very highly centralized control over party office holders in the hands of the party leaders. Proportional representation means representatives no longer are beholden to representing their district even when its voters disagree with the official party position on an issue. If a representative in a proportional system votes with his district rather than his party he will most likely be placed lower on the list of candidates. With single member districts, a representative can buck his party's leadership and be reelected, because nomination and election to office occur at the district level rather than at the state or national level.

I agree with this assessment of proportional representation of legislators. It makes party politics very important, while people may be unable to depend on their representatives to care about local issues. It also allows corrupt politicians to retain power while diminishing the importance of individual character.

But, proportional representation among Presidential electors is something different because electors don't really represent a particular district.