California Redistricting Battle--More Action Expected This Week

At the end of the last session, spurred on by the support of good government groups including the California League of Women Voters, California Common Cause, and the California Public Interest Research Group, Senator Lowenthal secured the necessary two-thirds vote in the Senate for SCA 3 This had the support of Governor Schwarzenegger and the timing of the receipt of the bill by the Assembly did not allow sufficient time for committee hearings and a vote, so it died.

SCA 3 would have required a panel of 10 retired superior or appellate court judges to nominate 55 candidates to an independent redistricting commission. The majority and minority legislative leaders of each house would be able to strike two candidates from the list (a total of 8) leaving at least 47 candidates. Then 4 Democratic, 4 Republican, and 3 voters not affiliated with a party would be chosen randomly to form the 11 member commission itself.

The makeup of the commissions and how they get chosen is the most difficult aspect to be worked out. What's at play here in all of these proposals is a balance between the independence of the commission and the competence of the commission.

Most observers believe the process so far is like that of boxers in the ring, warily feeling their way towards a position, with politics playing a heavy role, and the final policies a way off. Speaker of the Assembly Nunez stated his desire to see his house pass a measure within a short time frame and send it over to the Senate. However, one observer I talked to who is not in the legislature, felt pretty strongly that nothing final at least would be done until after the budget is behind the legislators. This is supposed to be completed by mid June, but sometimes lingers until the month of July.

There are deadlines approaching if initiative proponents of redistricting changes want to see this issue make the February 5, 2008 ballot. Built into the process is up to 45 days for the Attorney General to issue a title and summary after language is submitted, then circulation, and enough signatures to qualify 131 days before the election, which puts that date near the end of September, shortly after the legislature is scheduled to adjourn on September 14, 2007 for the year.

The fact that a fourth ballot initiative is being talked about indicates some level of disarray, in my judgment, of the forces that are working together or separately on trying to qualify by the signature route. More signatures are required for a constitutional amendment and the less time available, the more expensive it is to get each signature with vendors who supply the petition circulators.

With the qualification of two property rights initiatives, a workers' compensation initiative, and others for circulation, it may become quite expensive to qualify measures.

Senator Ashburn's proposal, SCA 9, clearly has problems with the "single subject" provisions of the state constitution because it contains so many different provisions in different areas. However, it and the other legislative proposed amendments can be amended, and all provide available "vehicles" for any proposal put forward by the legislature. But it's going to take a two-thirds vote of both houses, which means bipartisan cooperation and co-optation.

What's curious in all of this is another sticky issue: Whether or not to include Congressional District lines in any proposal. As we pointed out in our article on Nunez's proposal, he is acutely aware that if Congress is included, there is the potential for multimillions of dollars being raised by our state's congressional delegation to oppose this item on the ballot, which would almost assuredly lead to its defeat.

Here you have the Republican measure, Ashburn's, leaving the Congress out of any independent line drawing panel and Nunez, and presumably Lowenthal's keeping it in the purview of such a body. Nunez so far has drawn harsh criticism from Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others. But apparently Republicans fear the potential defeat of corruption placed members of Congress including John Doolittle, Gary Miller, and others, numbering about 5.

Jonathan Singer of the highly respected political website, My DD published a very interesting article yesterday, " House Dems Amp Up Recruitment in Marginal Republican Districts." His analysis of Congressional Districts (in which the incumbent took 55 percent or less of the vote and/or voters in the district tend to vote 5 or less points more Republican than the nation as a whole in presidential elections, according to the Cook Partisan Voting Index) shows the following California races potentially in play:

• CA-04 (R+11): John Doolittle (under federal investigation)
• CA-24 (R+5): Elton Gallegly (who might retire)
• CA-26 (R+4): David Dreier
• CA-45 (R+3): Mary Bono
• CA-51 (R+5): Brian Bilbray

Additionally, there are at least two other California Republicans who are reported to be under federal investigation, Jerry Lewis in CA-41 (R+9) and Gary Miller in CA-42 (R+10). There are a few other districts that are R+6 or R+7 (CA-03, CA-25, CA-46, CA-48), but those are getting to be fairly large margins for the GOP--perhaps enough to make it very difficult to win in a non-open race in the absence of a scandal.

Given what is at stake here, control of Congress, and the potential for this issue to sink any measure with the voters (whether by signature or initiative or legislative placement on the ballot), this will be very interesting to watch. There is an argument that, given what the massive gerrymandering in Texas instigated by Tom Delay and comparable situations in other states, that California should not "unilaterally disarm" unless and until other states pass redistricting changes for their Congressional delegations. There is a also a defensible policy argument for excluding Congressional lines from any commission, because in them, the state legislature is not drawing its own lines. Of course, there is the argument that the Congressional delegation exerts tremendous influence on legislators in the drawing of these lines when this comes up every ten years.

Through the fog, this is what we can see. It will be interesting to see how it all turns out.