Common Cause Blog :: Designer Districts in CA

Designer Districts in CA

By Mike Surrusco
Posted on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 11:41:44 AM EST

Common Cause is working on several fronts at once. You are probably aware of our work on Congressional ethics and Tom DeLay. But we are also engaged in a number of fights across the country at the state-level. The process of redistricting, for example, is hotly contested in a number of states, especially after the highly partisan Texas redistricting.

Today at a noon time press conference in Sacamento we are releasing a new report on California redistricting: "Designer Districts: Safe Seats Tailor Made for Incumbents." The report compares the last three redistrictings in California and how each one affected the competitiveness of elections in the state. Every ten years, after the national census, states are required to redraw their legislative districts. In California, as in many other states, the redistricting process is most often dominated by incumbent officeholders who make deals to preserve their own political turf and ensure years of non-competitive elections.

Our analysis of elections since 1982 - covering three redistricting cycles - shows that competition was suppressed when redistricting was in the hands of incumbents in the 1980s and 2000s. But after a court-imposed redistricting in 1991, with lines drawn by three retired judges appointed by the California Supreme Court, competition rose in both U.S. House and state legislative races.

This is part of our effort to pass legislation in California that would reform the redistricting process in that state. The objective is to make elections more competitive and, as a result, make legislators more responsive to their constituents because their reelection would not be assured. Go to our website to see more about redistricting in general and specifically what is happening in Sacramento.

Please read our report, and pass it on to everyone you know. Tell us what you think by posting your feedback right here.

Tags: (all tags)

Designer Districts in CA :: 12 Comments

Redistricting reform in every state

We need redistricting reform in every state to get nonpartisan, sensible lines drawn. Competitive elections are the essence of democracy. This is not North Korea.

California does need it. Californians unwittingly continue to send the same people back to Washington and back to Sacramento by huge margins because of the incumbent protection racket that was 2001 redistricting in the Golden State.

But there are several states that need it more than California - Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, for example. Texas, Illinois, and New York too. What do these states have in common? They are the most populous states in the union. And every one of them is heavily gerrymandered.

California, Illinois, and New York enacted incumbent protection rackets in 2001, thereby suppressing competition. Texas, as we all know, recently redrew its congressional map in a GOP power-grab. Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, meanwhile, all experienced outrageous GOP gerrymanders in 2001.

The results are as silly as you'd expect. In New York, a state as blue as they come, Republicans control the state senate. California's legislature is 2/3 Democratic but the state itself is about 55% Democratic. Michigan and Pennsylvania have over 60% Republican congressional delegations though they both voted for Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry. Ohio, the major battleground in 2004's presidential election, has a 2/3 Republican congressional delegation. Florida, the major battleground in 2000, has almost a 3/4 Republican delegation!!!!

That's why, while I do support reform in California, I think it is important not to forget other big states that have it even worse. For example, Florida, a state whose congressional and state legislative makeup is Utah-esque. For a state with more registered Democrats than Republicans, and a state that not only hosted the most competitive Senate race in the country last year, but made the difference in the 2000 presidential election, those numbers are pretty awful. And take a quick peek at some of those congressional lines - the 3rd slithers from Jacksonville to Gainesville to Orlando and looks like a snake digesting an egg (its top and bottom are paper-thin, while its middle, around Gainesville, is quite wide). And the 11th, based in Tampa, jumps across Tampa Bay to snatch heavily Democratic south St. Petersburg and therefore make neighboring Republican Bill Young's district less Democratic.

I support the Committee for Fair Elections' effort to get an initiative for nonpartisan redistricting on the Florida ballot next year. I also support Common Cause's efforts in California, though I'm not crazy about conservative activist Ted Costa's plan. The point is, we need nonpartisan redistricting everywhere. California and Florida, as two of the most innovative states, might as well lead the way towards a real democracy and away from this Soviet-style incumbent immunization.

by Nathaniel on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 04:56:47 PM EST

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

This is nonsense. Every attempt at creating a nonpartisan commission eventually leads to someone finding a way to game the system and turn it into a partisan commission. This has happened in several states that have panels of retired judges doing reapportionment (check Montana as an example). The only people willing to serve on a commission like this are those that are very active politically and want to advance a cause. The reason this idea is a disaster for Progressives (I am a liberal Democrat) is that California is one of the few states where we have the upper hand. A commission system will give both parties a chance to pick up some seats which is good, but it will limit the fundraising ability of Democratic Congressional people and also tie up money from California specific industries with liberal tendencies like entertainment that will now have to worry about their congressman having a stiff challenge from a Republican. If this happens it will be a huge victory for George W. Bush.

by doughnut on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:17:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

I am a liberal Democrat too (and therefore I'm a little uneasy with the idea of reforming California, but am much more focused on fixing Florida). I hate the idea of losing seats in one of the few Dem-dominated states. In fact, I will go as far as to say that I oppose nonpartisan redistricting in California until Florida does it.

But, it's for the best. As far as the retired judges part, we'll see. Iowa's system seems to work pretty well. So does Washington's. As far as Hollywood though, I don't see much difference it would make. After all, Hollywood's $ couldn't win the last election for Kerry anyway.

There is one thing I oppose about Arnold's plan though. Since California more than any other state is regionally polarized, with the coast overwhelmingly Democratic and the inland overwhelmingly Republican, drawing competitive districts could mean the sacrifice of compactness. After all, try to imagine what a competitive Bay Area district would have to look like! ARGH!

I'm with you, doughnut. I opposed the Texas power grab, I oppose the Georgia power grab, and I am uneasy about the California reform plan. But, if it means reform in GOP-controlled states like Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, I'm fine with losing a few seats in California.

Oh, and BTW, I'm a former Californian, so it's not like I don't feel the California Dems' pain.

by Nathaniel on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:35:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

Oh, and one other thing - nonpartisan redistricting has worked in Europe for centuries.

by Nathaniel on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:39:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

Actually one of the reasons for the rise of right wing crazies in different parts of Europe has been decisions by what might be considered reapportionment commissions.

by doughnut on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:09:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

If it was applied nationally it might (emphasis on might) be a great thing. But that is not what Republicans are doing. They are pushing reapportionment reform in one of the states that consistently favors Democrats (and which also allows referendum ballot measures which could change the system) while killing it behind closed doors in other states. This reform only has a chance of passing in a few states and most of those are solidly blue.

As for the comment about entertainment dollars, I think we all know money is important in politics. Progressives like Nancy Pelosi and Henry Waxman have been able to make America a better place precisely because they have safe districts. Reformers are right that these people should have to compete for their seats, but so should everyone else. What Texas showed was not just how corrupt the system could be, but how far Republicans are willing to go to game it. To unilaterally disarm in the hope of reform elsewhere (which is what we are talking about here) is ridiculous. We are the only ones that will lose anything.

by doughnut on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:05:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

Read my entire post. I thought I made it very clear that I WILL NOT SUPPORT REFORM IN CALIFORNIA UNTIL FLORIDA REFORMS. I'm sick of GOP power grabs in states like Texas, Colorado, and Georgia, and it's time they lose something. I agree, doughnut. I too am a partisan Democrat. But California does need reform. It's just that Florida needs it more.

I urge you to tell every Floridian you know about what Common Cause and the Committee for Fair Elections are doing in the Sunshine State.

by Nathaniel on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 09:04:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

While I believe, overall, that this might be a good endeavor, I am suspicious of the Schwarzenegger plan that you support in California. If a Republican is for it, then there cannot be anything good about it (take this from someone who has been re-districted out of representation in Texas!).

by Anonymous Citizen on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 07:02:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform in every state

I am suspicious too. Especially with the competitiveness idea. After all, imagine what they'd do to get a competitive district in the Bay Area!

But California does need reform. I wish people would actually read my entire post, though. I have said more than once on this thread that I will not support redistricting reform in California until Florida does it.

by Nathaniel on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 11:28:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Redistricting reform

California redistricting is a red herring and generally redistricting is equivalent to moving the deck chairs on the Titanic.

In a perfect world democracy would always provide us with myriad choices. Unfortunately, we live in the US of A where money votes as often, and today more often, than people. (I'm an experienced entrepreneur, so don't give me the communist lecture, I've been in the boardrooms.) How much money was spent on the last election cycle - $2-4 billion? How much of that was disinformation?

I see no need to redistrict California at this time. What's the hurry? There is no assurance that redistricting will make any district more "competitive." More importantly, there is a reason the framers of the US constitution proposed 10 year census periods and adjustments to representation so as to avoid this incessant battle, it forced the legislators to get down to business and govern through compromise.

As to California, I will state that redistricting is a red herring intended to distract the voters from Schwarzenegger's incompetence at understanding basic finance and inability to turn off his ideologue supporters and seek compromise - what we traditionally have called GOVERNING.

Ted Costa, for all his high-minded idealism, is clueless about political reality. He's like a theoretical physicist who keeps falling down because he can't deal with gravity. His support for the recall was one of the worst excuses for avoiding the problem I've experienced in my half century.

The problem isn't merely the voters, it's the money. With our current financing schemes, especially the pay-to-play schemes of the Tom DeLays, you can literally buy congress for less than $6 million over 5-10 years- Bill Gates paid that to get Microsoft off the hook. The bankruptcy bill cost big banks (I have personal experience as an entrepreneur within the credit industry) $160 million over 10 years. Medical liability limitations cost about the same.

I'll say it again, "Find a way to govern with the ones who brung you." Common Cause is sullying your (formerly) good reputation in California on this issue. Turn off the ideologues and politicking and redistictring - GOVERN!

by Anonymous Citizen on Fri Apr 08, 2005 at 11:35:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tea Party 2000

I believe that we could all save a lot of time and energy fighting for fair elections with something like this...

http://www.bicycle-power.com/tp2k.htm

Please feel free to make comments or crticism.

Keith Shockley Riverrock Enterprises P.O. Box 75432 Honolulu, HI 96836 (808) 223-2137 www.bicycle-power.com

by kshock on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 06:08:25 PM EST

Redistricting Reform

While redistricting at the Federal and state levels MUST be done in response to the 2010 census without the partisan gerrymandering that has characterized the present round, it must be borne in mind that single member districts are inherently unfair. We must push for single transferable vote or some other form of proportional representation.

by jnobrien on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 08:34:41 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account just by filling out the form below. It's quick and free.

Designer Districts in CA

By Mike SurruscoPosted on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 11:41:44 AM EST

By Mike Surrusco
Posted on Thu Apr 07, 2005 at 11:41:44 AM EST