Books

Common Cause Fronts California G.O.P. Power Play - Redistricting Reform, Isn’t…

towashington 089.gif By Bill Cavala
A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

“Gerrymandering in the State of California means that certain cities, counties, and groups bound by common interests end up with diluted or nonexistent voice in Sacramento”. – Common Cause Board Member

Sounds pretty horrible.

But is it true? Will the Governor’s proposed redistricting reform remedy this evil?

No. And No. The standards in the proposed ‘reform’ are identical to the standards that line drawers must adhere to under current law. City boundaries and County boundaries must be respected. Groups bounded by common interests – usually minority groups with a history of past political discrimination – are also protected by law.

Are ALL cities kept whole in this process? No. Some cities are too large for a single district and must be split (Los Angeles, Sacramento, San Francisco, San Jose, San Diego among others). Are all Counties kept intact in a single district? In those parts of California where that is feasible and desirable – in scantly populated Superior California, for example, the answer is Yes. In urban areas the City, not the County is usually the unit most important for purposes of representation, so County lines (in Los Angeles County, for example) are sacrificed to keep City Boundaries intact and/or to protect minority populations that have historically faced discrimination.

As the Federal Courts have held – repeatedly – a redistricting plan must be judged as a whole.

And as a whole, the plan drawn by the Legislature in 2001 meets the Constitutional criteria of protecting “cities, counties, and groups bound by common interests”.

It is an old campaign trick to pick out an occasional exception to the rule and attempt to persuade voters that the exception “is the rule”.

But when a Common Cause Board Member and long time League of Woman Voters activist lets her reputation be used in this fashion, it is shocking.

“It would eliminate back room deals”, the good government lady writes. Having been in that “back room”, I can guarantee you that every conversation I had for a year was potentially subject to deposition. None of those conversations were held without the presence of an Attorney whose job it was to keep myself and any one I spoke with in close adherence to the law and to the Constitution. Dozens of public hearings were held before and after the plans were proposed. I had to attend them. All of them were transcribed and I had to read every transcript – and to modify plans in the light of public testimony. The plans were available on line – as was the database used to draw them. All available to the public through the University of California at no cost. Software to manipulate the data was available for about $500.

This was hardly “back room” politics. Anyone could have submitted an alternative plan for the Legislature’s consideration. Only one group did, and it was NOT Common Cause.

The good government lady also claims the Governor’s proposed reform would “prevent minority communities from being underrepresented”. The truth is that it changes nothing in current law or the Constitution. The Federal Voting Rights Act must be adhered to by any group drawing lines – Commission, Legislature, even the League of Woman Voters.

Every decade the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, whose mission is to remove redistricting authority from the Legislature and into their hands, sues the final law passed by the Legislature (or enacted by the Courts). If intentional discrimination is found, they would indeed gain the remedy of being able to do the job themselves (as they did in the famous Garza case in Los Angeles).

But the Courts held that the Legislature “had prevented minority communities from being unrepresented”. A fact of which the good government lady must be aware.

Finally, the good government lady argues that there would be no political impact of her “reform”, that “neither party would be disadvantaged”. That’s being naïve, ignorant or something worse. Republicans now have 32 seats. They could reach 33 under the current configuration. When the Court drew district lines in the 1980’s, they reached 41.

That’s the real objective of redistricting “reform” – provide a justification for the Supreme Court to step in and again produce an undeserved Republican Majority. If you think that’s “good government”, then join with the “good government” front groups like Common Cause that seek to disguise this end in campaign rhetoric and fallacious criticism.

Bill Cavala was Deputy Director of the Assembly Speaker’s Office of Member Services where he worked for over 30 years.

He attended undergraduate and graduate school in the 1960’s and received a doctorate in political science at UC Berkeley. He taught political science at UC Berkeley during the 1970's while he worked part-time for the State Assembly.

Cavala left teaching at UC Berkeley and went to work for Assembly Speaker Willie Brown in 1981 until his tenure as Speaker ended in 1995, and he has worked for his five successors as Speaker up to and including Speaker Fabian Nunez.

Mr. Cavala manages election campaigns for Democratic candidates.

Posted on March 14, 2008

Comments

I think the interests of the people of CA.should come first especially the poor and most needy. I think it's time for a new governor that cares about the needs of the common folk instead of the rich special interests. The Republicans just can't seem to get it right, they care more about the rich than the majority poor.It's time for a Democratic governor to turn things around. It would be nice to have a recall and send Arnold back to doing movies that's where he belongs.

Posted by: alfonso armendariz at June 16, 2009 04:29 PM

I think the interests of the people of CA.should come first especially the poor and most needy. I think it's time for a new governor that cares about the needs of the common folk instead of the rich special interests. The Republicans just can't seem to get it right, they care more about the rich than the majority poor.It's time for a Democratic governor to turn things around. It would be nice to have a recall and send Arnold back to doing movies that's where he belongs.

Posted by: alfonso armendariz at June 16, 2009 04:30 PM

I think the interests of the people of CA.should come first especially the poor and most needy. I think it's time for a new governor that cares about the needs of the common folk instead of the rich special interests. The Republicans just can't seem to get it right, they care more about the rich than the majority poor.It's time for a Democratic governor to turn things around. It would be nice to have a recall and send Arnold back to doing movies that's where he belongs.

Posted by: alfonso armendariz at June 16, 2009 04:31 PM

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.

Advertise Here

Our latest headlines

About Us

Sponsors

Books

Common Cause Fronts California G.O.P. Power Play - Redistricting Reform, Isn’t…

Comments

Post a comment

Get Email Updates