This is a long diary, written mostly for the record. Approach it accordingly.
We are halfway between June 12, the day when California's Citizen's Redistricting Commission (CRC) was supposed to release its "Second Draft" maps and July 28, the day that the "Final Maps" are to be released. (They must be approved by August 15.) For those who follow the CRC closely, though, this last week has been anything but a slack period. We're down to the "short strokes." (That's a woodcutting term, by the way.)
I compare the last maps that I turned into the CRC with their work-in-progress as of Wednesday,July 20. I'll address Congress, Assembly and Senate Districts in that order, followed by a preliminary look at what may be an especially consequential map: that for the State Board of Equalization. One comment about my maps up front:
One is not to consider the partisan implications for maps nor the residences of incumbents or prospective candidates. Accordingly, I have not done so. Some things are obvious -- Santa Ana is more liberal and Democratic, Newport Beach is more conservative and Republican -- but I have not even looked at the partisan breakdown or electoral history of the districts that I've constructed. (I take as given that Latinos in Santa Ana have had different voting patterns than non-Latinos.) I have been guided only by the statutorily required criteria -- including trying to honor "communities of interests."
Even Districts Are Elected in Gubernatorial Elections, Odd Districts in Presidential Elections
by Brian Leubitz
From a tweet from the Press-Enterprise's Jim Miller:
The #CAredistricting commission is scheduled to act on numbering SD's Thursday. Odds vs. evens have big implications. (Twitter)
Here in San Francisco, this has been the talk of much of the City. As San Francisco has been consolidated into one Senate District, if the number assigned was even, the eastern half of the City would be represented by nobody that it had elected. Mark Leno's (SD-3) term expires in 2012. Leland Yee (SD-8) is termed out in 2014, but is running for Mayor. If he wins, there will be a special election in early 2012 to replace him. The replacement could either last a few months or for a couple of years.
In other parts of the state where senate districts are set to be dramatically changed, such as the North Coast and several areas in LA, they will represented by temporary assignments to Senators that they did not elect. This process is rather bizarre, but that's what you get when you elect legislators for districts longer than 2 years, there really is no other way around it.
Keep an eye out for those numbers this week, it could raise a whole other raft of questions.
When Prop 11, the first redistricting measure, was on the ballot, I was fond of saying that it would never end up drawing a map that was actually used by anybody. My suspicion at the time was that the 14 members would not be able to get the 9 member majority (3+3+3) to agree to a map. That is still a possibility, as we really have no certain indications as to how the commissioners are going to vote and how happy they are with the process. That being said, seeing how the public comment has gone, and how the webcast meetings are going, I would be surprised if they were unable to come to agreement.
But that doesn't mean that judges may not end up making the maps. Tom Del Beccaro, the CRP Chairman has been making noises about how the maps favor Democrats. Apparently he wants districts carved out for his legislators, and doesn't like the fact that the districts more closely represent the fact that Democrats have a rather sizable registration advantage in the state. I would be pretty shocked if the CRP or some closely related proxy group doesn't sue shortly after the August 15 due date. He's basically said as much:
Tom Del Beccaro, state GOP chairman, claims the panel has been "overtaken by partisanship and incompetence" in hiring legal and line-drawing advisers, and in drawing political districts, some of which he considers oddly shaped and unfair.
"It's either shenanigans or they're doing a terrible job," he said. "We can't afford either one."
Del Beccaro said he is concerned about draft proposals that analysts say would give Democrats a strong chance to gain a two-thirds majority in the Assembly and Senate.(SacBee)
And of course the noise isn't only from the Right, as former Senate President Don Perata says he has talked with several groups who are considering suing to block the maps as well. The Commission has the authority to protect its maps, and will do so. If I had to guess, I would say that a few districts here or there will get tweaked, but the majority will be implemented.
But, that's only a guess, and the courts will end up sorting much of this out.
This is the 2nd post out of three posts analyzing California's new congressional redistricting maps.This post covers districts 18-35. The 1st post is here
Update: I saw that the 1st post could not be accessed. The problem has been fixed and here is the post! http://racesandredistricting.b...
The newest member of Congress could be among the most adversely affected by new political maps currently being considered by the state's redistricting commission.
Democratic Congresswoman-elect Janice Hahn of San Pedro could find herself in a new district that runs along the coast from the South Bay to Malibu, and stretching inland to grab parts of West Los Angeles and Beverly Hills. Much of that district is currently represented by Rep. Henry Waxman. The other option for Hahn is a Long Beach district that has none of her South Bay political base and also includes two other Democratic incumbents -- Reps. Linda Sanchez and Laura Richardson.
Democratic consultant Paul Mitchell, who has been actively monitoring the redistricting process, says Hahn could be "in serious trouble."
"She's losing the seat that she just won," Mitchell said.
Mitchell says that under new working maps released by the commission this week, the number of Latino seats in Los Angeles is likely to increase, while one of the basin's three African American congressional seats could disappear.
Here's what happened: The California Citizen's Redistricting Commission just released a third version of their "visioning" maps for Congressional and State Assembly Districts. And as indicated above, these new maps are radically different from anything we've seen before.
There are three different proposed versions of CA-36. Depending on which option you chose, our newly-elected Congresswoman Janice Hahn could end up sharing her district with Henry Waxman, or she could even end up outside the district. All of the options include everything from Malibu to Rancho Palos Verdes, while cutting the Beach Cities - Redondo, Manhattan, Hermosa and Torrance - in half just west of the 405 freeway.
To see more detailed congressional maps, go to this link, type in your home address, then go to the "Select District" pull-down menu, and select "congress la opt1, opt2, or opt3"
The new Assembly districts in Southern California aren't much better. My Assembly district, AD53, is now partially divided into three separate districts, with Venice as the nexus. Which means that Venice - 1 square mile wide - could potentially be represented by THREE different Assembly members.
To see the new Assembly map, Go to this link, type in your home address, then go to the "Select District" pull-down menu, and select "assembly la opt1"
So now what? The final district maps are slated to be released July 28, according to a press release, and adopted by the commission on Aug. 15. So you still have time to make your voice heard.
The Commission needs to hear from you. Send an email to votersfirstact@crc.ca.gov and let them know what you think.
Be sure to put down where you live so they know you're a constituent.
The California Redistricting Commission has canceled release of its Second Draft maps.
No, I'm not joking.
Citizens Redistricting Commission Will Not Release Second Draft Maps in Order to Gather More Public Input Throughout Line Drawing Process and Produce Best Final Maps Possible
Sacramento, CA (July 9, 2011) --
The California Citizens Redistricting Commission decided at their meeting this afternoon, that in order to produce the best district maps possible, it will amend its schedule and not release a second round of draft maps. The Commission will be posting visualizations of proposed districts, and make equivalency files available for organizations and news outlets to provide greater detail to the public on the visualization proposals. The visualizations are proposed options for districts and are considered and discussed by the Commission at their meetings instructing the line drawers.
The final district maps are slated to be released July 28th and adopted by the Commission on August 15th.
The Commissioners are soliciting public comment on these visualizations and will be receiving, reading and considering those comments throughout their meetings directing the line drawers for the final maps.
The Commission will release more details early next week on how the public can easily obtain information, submit comment on the visualization proposals and follow each step of the process for drawing the lines.
The Commission will meet again with its technical line drawers on Wednesday, July 13th. The meeting will be streamed live at www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov.
Well, that was unexpected. So we'll go straight from visualizations to final versions. I wonder if this means that they've been having trouble meeting the 3+3+3 vote requirement.
On November 2nd, 2010, California voters passed Proposition 20 allowing a commission composed of 5 Democrats, 5 Republicans and 4 Independents to redraw my state's congressional districts. Previously, the state legislature drew the maps. In the House of Representatives, the representatives represent voters in districts the legislature draws. In recent years though, states such as Washington and California have chosen commissions to draw districts without political influence. In California, the commission traveled around the state to hear public comments from citizens like me and talk to groups such as MALDEF. On June 10th, 2011, the California Redistricting Commission released their first set of maps for California after hearing public comments from meetings such as this one on May 20th that I attended. The guidelines set for the commission were to draw districts that follow the VRA, stick to county boundaries as much as possible and preserve communities of interest. This analysis examines the first 17 congressional districts to examine whether they fit the communities of interest requirements and what happens to the districts' incumbents under the new lines. The commission has dismantled gerrymandered districts such as the 25th which connected Mono County in the High Desert with Santa Clarita in the Los Angeles suburbs. Still, I want to ensure that they have drawn all the districts so the districts respect communities of interest. Here is a link to the new maps of California:
http://www.latimes.com/news/lo...
The demographics and the voting percentages can be found here: http://redistrictingpartners.c... A few notes: I will give district numbers according to the incumbents who live in the districts and/or which incumbent is most likely to run in the district due to factors such as the partisan makeup and familiarity with the constituents.
District 1 Mike Thompson (D) Santa Rosa/Napa/Yuba
Brown 54%, Whitman 38%
Obama 62%, McCain 34%
Demographics: 5% Asian, 29% Hispanic
Status: Safe Democratic
I attended the meeting where the commission heard comments about Santa Rosa. A few meeting attendees said they wanted to combine the Napa area with the Central Valley but no one mentioned combining Santa Rosa with the Central Valley. Santa Rosa is more working class than the surrounding communities but it is not similar to Yuba County. Sonoma County does have agriculture but Santa Rosa is not very agricultural. Yuba County is very agricultural. Anyway, this district may be a "leftovers district" because these areas had no district for them so they were placed in the 1st district. I would suggest that the lst district should have similar lines to its current form. This would unite Yolo, Napa, Mendocino, Lake, Humboldt and Del Norte Counties. Although Yolo and a few of the North Coast Counties may be different, they are more similar than Santa Rosa and Yuba City because Yolo County has Davis with university liberals and Humboldt County has Humboldt State also with university liberals. It also keeps the theme of counties with small cities instead of one city with around 160,000 people (Santa Rosa) with more rural territory with a few small cities. Placing Santa Rosa with Marin County and the rest of Sonoma County keeps the theme of medium sized cities/suburbs with some rural areas mixed into the district. The lines help the Democrats though by placing Yuba County in this district because Yuba County could be used in another district to make it more Republican. Anyway, Santa Rosa and Napa County should keep this district in the Democratic column. Mike Thompson's home of St. Helena is located in this district so he may run here.
With the draft redistricting maps, all of the members of Congress are busy trying to figure out where they will run. The musical chairs as Reps. shift down the street or to another area entirely won't really be complete until we get a real map. At this point, it looks like the commissioners are working pretty well together, and may actually get a map. (Oh, and if that happens...well, I was wrong about them not being able to agree. But I'm still waiting to admit anything yet.)
But as the musical chairs progresses, a few folks who didn't have a seat before are looking for one now. And the Top-2 system might play in here. In an area mainly represented by Ken Calvert (R-Corruption and Riverside Cty.), who is looking towards shifting to a different district, a sitting Supervisor thinks it might be time to launch a campaign from the center:
Five-term Riverside County Supervisor John Tavaglione said Thursday he would run for Congress in a newly proposed district that overlaps much of his current territory. ... As currently drawn, that seat would contain slightly more Democrats than Republicans and Gov. Jerry Brown bested his Republican challenger, Meg Whitman, by 6 percentage points last year.
Tavaglione, who lives in Riverside, described himself as a moderate Republican with a record of working across party lines.
"I believe we need to see balance -- and strong balance -- within our legislative offices in order to get things done," he said. "That takes strong leadership and I've proven myself in that regard." (Riverside P-E)
Now, that district could, and really should, be a Democratic district. If the presidential election is a blowout for Obama in California, this seat will probably ride the coattails. Otherwise, who knows. However, it is no sure thing that a "moderate" like Tavaglione will be the GOP standard bearer, and Dems are likely to find somebody with a similarly "moderate" record. But there are so many variables here with Top 2. How many Dems run, how many Republicans run? The Dem bench is a little thin in this area, so it would be surprising to see more than a couple competitors. However, at least one other Republican, Asm. Jeff Miller, who is not a "moderate" announced he is in for the seat. Expect others.
Of course, this process is playing out in other districts across the state. The North Coast will likely be looking for a new Congress member, and the rumors of Noreen Evans running might not work as her Santa Rosa base is now in a seat that Mike Thompson will likely pursue. Norman Solomon and a Jared Huffman are also looking at that one.
With the Top-2 system, both June and November will carry much weight as these races sort themselves out. Now we just wait on the Commission...
UPDATE: More intrigue, with Asm. Isadore Hall saying he's running for one of the new seats, but only if Maxine Waters doesn't want it. You'll find his release over the flip.
Get your comment engines running! Officially the full maps were supposed to be released today at 9AM, however, it seems the drafts now available lack district numbers. For the Assembly, this really doesn't matter so much, but for the Senate, that is a big deal. You could end up with a bunch of Senators sitting out 2012-2014 and then hopping back. You see Senators will serve the full four years of their term, even if there district and the corresponding number varies wildly.
So, take a look, and let's see what we have here...
UPDATE: The Bee did a little counting for us, and they've posted the resulting maps showing which districts lean Dem or Republican. You can find those here. Going just by registration, there are 29 districts in the State Senate with a 20K advantage to Democrats. Of course, that demands that Dems win elections where they have previously lost, most noticeably in the area that is now Sam Blakeslee's district.
Update 2:The Washington Post has an interesting analysis of the Congresional map showing a 3 to 5 seat gain for Democrats. This is more a result of unwinding the weird districts from 2001 than population shifts, but if we can pick up a few seats to make up for Texas that's a good thing.
I haven't been able to really go through any of this, but you can take a look at what the redistricting commission has come out with today for their so-called working maps. You can download the plethora of maps at their website. Friday will yield us the first real set of "draft" maps.
Being that I'm in SF, the first thing that jumped out at me is the fact that we would have only one Senate seat. There are also some maps expected out on Friday, so stay tuned.
Jim Sanders and Kevin Yamamura of the Bee take on the theory that redistricting maps due out Friday could shake free a few votes:
To secure Republican votes for the state budget, Democrats have enlisted business leaders, police officers and teachers.
Now they're hoping for a boost from cartographers.
An independent mapping panel will release its first draft of new legislative boundaries Friday, shuffling incumbents into new districts and threatening some members' best-laid political plans.
Democrats hope the redistricting maps will help shake free the necessary Republican votes for a budget that relies on taxes to bridge the remaining $9.6 billion deficit. (SacBee)
This isn't an altogether unreasonable hypothesis. But, that's all it is right now, an untested guess. And as Tony Quinn points out, it is just too hard to game out right now.
However, all that being said, I think a critical point might have been missed here: Top 2 is going to change pretty much everything from the last time around. Beyond the citizens redistricting commission, which might be more likely to lump two (or even three) legislators into one new district, the element of this new voting system makes next year even more of a wild card.
Just from numbers, this is more likely to be of some import in a district with two Republican legislators, but it could make a difference in a race of two Democrats in the opposite fashion. So, say you have two somewhat strong legislators of one party as well as a no-name or two of the other party. While it is far from clear that you will have two Rs or Ds in that general election (see Bowen, D), a sizeable chunk of the smaller party could shift allegiance to a partisan of the other, more powerful party in the region. So, if a bunch of Democrats decide to back one of the Republicans over the other, that could make a difference in creating the Craig Huey situation. In other words, the weaker party will still get one of its nominees into the general election.
Basically, at this point this is all speculation, but come next June, we could have some very interesting contests on our hands. And over the next 8 days until the June 15 budget deadline, there will be some squirming legislators.
(The OC redistricting might end up as a big battleground. A map I've seen floating around has Loretta Sanchez's district split up into three. As Seneca Doane points out, there are a lot of Voting Rights Act issues at stake here. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
In Orange County, over the last few days, we've been talking a lot about the Latino vote, which has not been well-served by the Congressional maps recently proposed by the California's Citizen Redistricting Commission late last week. In this diary, I present an alternative proposal -- one that I presented to the Commission but intentionally did not present here or in any other partisan venue -- that I think does a better job of protecting the Latino vote.
Lest I be seen as slagging the Commission, I will say that the Assembly and Senate maps do a better job of ensuring a large Latino voice in a reasonable number of Orange County districts, and that in other respects their Congressional Map seems quite reasonable. If the "joining Santa Ana to Newport Beach" problem is resolved, I think that they will be better than what we've had -- although that opinion is certainly open to revision. They are certainly less ugly -- more compact and less obviously gerrymandered. I think that that's what supporters of the Commission wanted.
One preliminary point: neither I nor anyone to whom I've spoken about them was clear on who exactly authorized them and whether these maps have even preliminary support by the required 3 (of 5) Democrats, 3 (of 5) Republicans, and 3 (of 4) Others.
Redistricting is one of my biggest passions and California's redistricting situation is no exception. I have published three maps for California's Congressional redistricting and the most recent one is here: http://racesandredistricting.b... On May 20th, I decided to share my thoughts with them because the commission would be holding a public comment meeting in Santa Rosa. Although California is keeping all 53 of its congressional districts, slow population growth increases the likelihood that the Bay Area will lose a district. Some proposals say that Marin County should be combined with San Francisco and as a Marinite, I like San Francisco but we do not belong in the same district. We belong with Sonoma County instead.
As I drove north to Santa Rosa, I looked at the traffic on the highway. This further highlighted my argument that Marin County and Sonoma County were communities of interest in the way they shared commuting issues. San Francisco did not have these same issues. I was not surprised to hear three people mention the traffic in their public comments about how the similar traffic issues connect Marin County and Sonoma together.
When they said eternal vigilance is the price of liberty I'm not sure California's Citizens Redistricting Commission was what they had in mind.
A few days ago I wrote about how a bunch of Republican operatives were busy submitting maps to the Commission while doing everything they could to reveal their true backgrounds and intents. Yesterday they were back again with another set of maps that supposedly were about maintaining communities but really were about maintain Republican legislators.
Presenting maps on behalf of the Coalition of Suburban Communities for Fair Representation was Scott Wilk who introduced himself as a member of the Santa Clarita Community College District (SCCCD) Board of Trustees. Wilk left out some notable parts of his biography, like that he is a current elected member of the Los Angeles County Republican Central Committee, former District Director for Republican Congressman Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, former Chief of Staff for Republican Assemblywoman Paula Boland and former Republican candidate for Assembly District 38.
Sound like someone whose maps would ignore impacts on parties, candidates and incumbents as Propositions 11/20 mandates? I guess it was just a coincidence that the plans used some often convoluted shapes to make sure every Republican legislator found a district to land in.
By the way, I do not mind Republicans submitting maps to the Commission. They have the same rights to participate as anyone else. I do mind when they hide who they are in order to try and manipulate the process. And I really mind the hypocrisy of someone standing in front of the Commission and saying how important it was to take the redistricting process away from the Legislature when they are submitting maps designed to protect Republican legislators.
Earlier this week, the Citizens Redistricting Commission held a hearing in Oakland for organized groups to submit their maps for consideration. One of the last groups to present was the California Institute on Jobs, Economy and Education. Commissioners were rightfully curious who that really meant. They repeatedly asked for more information about the organization, who were their members and what was their policy interest was in redistricting. The presenters did everything they could to skirt, dodge and avoid answering the questions.
Well, since the Institute did not want to help, I can. The gentleman who began the group's presentation was Thomas Hiltacht. Hiltacht is a well-known Republican attorney. He's worked for everyone from Arnold Schwarzenegger to the nefarious initiative to divide the state's electoral college votes by Congressional District.
The man who drew the lines was Matt Rexroad. Rexroad admitted he is a County Supervisor in Yolo County. He left out the fact he is also a highly-partisan Republican political consultant who frequently posts on redistricting for the FlashReport describing lines that may advantage or disadvantage his party. Guess which ones made it into the Institute's plan?
The good news is that Commissioners quickly realized their plan was a hot mess. The Senate plan includes a district that runs from El Dorado to Tulare. That's more than 250 miles and a 4 and a half hour drive. The Assembly plan splits 85 cities. That's about 30 more than the Legislature did 10 years ago. The Congressional plan drops African-Americans from three districts to one in Los Angeles County. That understandably irritated the African-American Commissioner from Los Angeles.
The bad news is that we have to continue to be vigilant. Tomorrow the Commission is scheduled to hear more group presentations. The last group to present is Citizens for California Reform. Another independent organization that just wants fair redistricting right? Wrong. Citizens for California Reform is a front group for Gabriella Holt, failed Republican candidate for Assembly District 54 in 2008 and the main force behind the 2010 failed effort to use a part-time Legislature initiative to threaten Democrats into giving into Republican budget demands.
Hopefully we can count on Commissioners to see through their act just like they saw through the Institute's today.
Cross posted on my blog: http://racesandredistricting.b... which you should visit for more redistricting maps and election analysis.
Before November 2nd 2010, it appeared that Democrats would control the redistricting process because most polls suggested Jerry Brown (D) would become Governor. Brown did win and the Democrats retained their majorities in the state legislature. They, however, lost control of the redistricting process. The voters passed Proposition 20 which transferred the redistricting power from the state legislature to a 14 member commission compromised of 5 Democrats, 5 Republicans and 4 independents. The commission must draw districts according to communities of interest which are similar communities based on the residents' ethnicities, location and income. Drawing districts according to the VRA is more important though on the priority list. Also, at least three members of each party must approve the map before it takes effect. Even if Democrats do not control redistricting the way they used to, they will certainly propose some maps to the committee that will protect Democratic incumbents and eliminate a few Republicans who are in gerrymandered districts. Although the Democrats crafted the 2002 map as a bipartisan plan, the lines resemble a Republican gerrymander. For example, San Bernardino and Riverside County both cast narrow majorities for Obama and have about 5 districts between them. A Democrat only holds one of those districts. The Democrat is Joe Baca (D) but his district does not even touch Riverside County. So Riverside County which voted for Obama and has enough people for nearly three districts does not even have a Democratic representative. Also, Orange County voted for McCain by three points and has around 3 million people, enough population for almost five districts. How many Democratic districts cover at least part of Orange County? The answer is only one: the 47th district represented by Loretta Sanchez (D) which covers Santa Ana and Anaheim. Although Democrats worry that the independent commission will carve up districts leaving Democratic incumbents with no familiar territory, Democrats should not be too worried. The commission likely will weaken many Republicans too.
This leads to why I am drawing this map and it is because I am predicting what the Democrats will propose to the commission. Although the commission makes the final decision, both parties will draw up proposals suggesting what the commission should do. For the Democrats, their proposal needs to protect their incumbents, create more opportunities in the Inland Empire and Central Valley while not drawing convoluted lines. Also, my proposal respects the VRA which requires a certain number of minority majority districts in order to ensure minorities are not underrepresented in the House. For example, I made the 15th and 32nd districts with Asian representatives more Asian. I also created three new districts designed to elect Hispanics because California's Hispanic population is growing rapidly and will need representation. Also, California's Hispanic population is 36% and there are only 8 Hispanic representatives in 53 congressional districts. The problem is that Hispanic turnout rates are low so districts with a Hispanic percentage of 51% will not have enough Hispanic voters to elect a Hispanic representative. If the district is Democratic but has Republican white voters though, there can be enough Hispanics in the Democratic primary to elect a Hispanic candidate. Some of my districts have low Hispanic populations but the population numbers are from ten years ago so the Hispanic population should be larger. I also created 29 Safe Democratic seats, three Likely Democratic seats, five lean Democratic seats, three Toss Up seats, one Lean Republican seat, two Likely Republican seats (these could be competitive in a few years if demographic trends continue) and ten Safe Republican seats. I wanted to create more seats for the Democrats but I did not want convoluted lines because the commission will reject those. Anyway, here are some helpful links and the maps:
Take a look at the Redistricting commission's schedule. Specifically, look at the end of June, where you will find the final Sunday's meeting is in San Francisco. If you happen to know much about San Francisco, you'll also think to yourself, isn't there some big event in the Civic Center that weekend?
Well, you are a pretty sharp cookie. Because June 26 happens to the San Francisco Pride event which attracts hundreds of thousands of LGBT locals, visitors, and their friends, to the Civic Center. Note that the Civic Center also happens to be where meetings like the redistricting commission typically meet. So, it is even doubtful that people could get into the building. All in all, probably not the best time for a meeting.
The Alice B Toklas LGBT Democratic Club sent a letter to the commission noting the issue, and pointing out both the importance of SF Pride and of the openness of the redistricting commission's hearing. The latest update is that the Commission is now working to reschedule the meeting (likely to the following Monday, 6/27).
So, hooray for local Democratic clubs who pay attention to redistricting.
Have some time to talk with the 14 member redistricting panel? Well, they have some time for you! Over the next two months, the band will be hitting the road for a series of public input sessions across the state. You can get that schedule at their website.
But, the GOP isn't waiting, they're going on the offensive! See, they are still really peeved that their choice, the Rose institute, was dinged for not releasing their donors. But, you know, they had trust in the firm, as the main consultant in the form had previously worked for Republicans and was actually a registered Republican himself.
And they aren't being shy in the media:
"The commission was asked by myself and others not to pick that underqualified firm," said California GOP Chairman Tom Del Beccaro. "The decision to hire Q2 may very well undermine the trust of voters in this entire process." (MediaNews)
They even tried to compromise, you see. They wanted the nonpartisan Q2, whose main consultant on the project is a DTS voter, to work with the Republican Rose Institute. See, that's how they are used to balance, and that's how FoxNews tells them it works. 1 DTS + 1 Republican= World Harmony!
Except that it doesn't. Fortunately for now, the Redistricting made the right call and hired the nonpartisan Q2 firm. But, as for the actual lines, well, they'll be coming from the commissioner input. AND your input. So, make sure you get to those hearings across the state.
Wait, it's not that boring! Drawing lines really can be fun. What I can tell you is that the people at the top of both major parties in California have this once-a-decade process at the top of their priority lists and you should too. If you don't believe me, just check out all the partisan back and forth in the public comments to our new Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC). Until this year, the parties were drawing the lines for their own benefit behind closed doors and now they're frantic that an independent commission really will be independent.
The powerful people who run the state from Sacramento are sidelined and YOU are now front and center as we draw district lines for the State Assembly, State Senate, Board of Equalization and U.S. House of Representatives.
Please join us in the Bay Area to learn how to get involved and share information with fellow Californians.
Some of the organizations you lean on for expertise and wisdom when you don't know where to turn for political information you can trust make up the coalition hosting this conference.
Please consider telling others you know in the Bay Area about this half-day event. People power is YOU.
Members of the Redistricting California Alliance include the Advancement Project, African American Redistricting Collaborative, Asian Pacific American Legal Center, California Common Cause, California Forward, Center for Governmental Studies, Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy, League of Women Voters of California, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund, Rose Institute for Government Studies, the Greenlining Institute, San Diego Foundation for Change and The Redistricting Group at Berkeley Law.
(This is an interesting thought experiment. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
In the last part of my redistricting California series, here is a map of what a 120-district unicameral legislature, the Senate and Assembly merged, might look like. I did this map at the same time as the Assembly map.
In Orange County, over the last few days, we've been talking a lot about the Latino vote, which has not been well-served by the Congressional maps recently proposed by the California's Citizen Redistricting Commission late last week. In this diary, I present an alternative proposal -- one that I presented to the Commission but intentionally did not present here or in any other partisan venue -- that I think does a better job of protecting the Latino vote.
