I caught a glimpse of this dastardly deed earlier and meant to ring the loudest alarm bell I could find!!! If this is the same totally un-American gimick that the League of Women Vipers (Voters) was trying to get my county to adopt in our Charter, then by gum Doolittle is absolutely right to oppose this measure and I will work tirelessly to help him.
http://www.fairdistricts.com/Initiative_Text.asp
I noticed some stuff in here that I had not noticed before in the selection of the 3 "Special Masters." (That term gives me the shivers)
--The "Judicial Council" first "nominates" 24 judges.
--Perata(D), Nunez(D), McCarthy(R), and Ackerman(R) then get to select 3 of those 24 (each) as candidates for "Special Master", (reducing the pool to 12).
--BUT--they can only select candidates NOT in their own party! So, the only GOP possible nominees would have to be selected by Perata and Nunez! While the same is true on the other side of the aisle (McCarthy/Ackerman selecting Dems), I see the left as playing a much dirtier game.
And what about retired judges whose party is "Decline to State"?
Somehow I think we are going to end up with 1 Dem and 2 Decline-To-State "Special Masters".
I'm not familiar with the LWF gimmick.
In this measure, after all of the rigamorole of selecting "Special Masters" and ultimately coming up with new Proposed Districts, those Districts will be used in the same election in which the voters are being asked to approve the Districts.
If the Districts are NOT approved by voters, those elected using the Districts will serve out their term anyway (outlined in the law). This would supposedly be a one-time-only situation, but I think it is lousy precedent for lawmaking.
If the Districts warrant voter approval, as proposed in the law, then they should get voter approval BEFORE using them.
Just my not-so-humble opinion.
I'm getting very anxious and agitated about this "instant election" crappola!!!