California Redistricting Reform: Arguments Against Prop 11 Don't Hold Water to This Progressive Democrat

By Roy Ulrich

August 20, 2008

If Linda Sutton's op-ed which appeared in the California Progress Report last week were simply a hit piece against Proposition 11, that would be at least tolerable. But it was a verbal attack based wholly on false assertions, which, in my view, makes it much worse. Let me count the ways:

* Ms. Sutton mentions a "convoluted maze" in Prop. 11 to choose the 14 independent commissioners who would draw district lines for the California legislature beginning in 2011. Fortunately, this "maze" is light years ahead of the Dark Age secrecy that shrouds how districts are drawn using today's rules. In 2001, Legislators held their perfunctory public hearings, and then withdrew behind closed doors, where the actual maps were drawn, out of the public eye, by special consultants, who were paid huge sums of money by the legislators to make their districts ultra safe. Requests for information as to how those maps were drawn were summarily denied. To this day, that information remains hidden from public view.

Under Prop. 11, the entire process is open to the public. No secret meetings are allowed! No closed doors!

* If there is deadlock on the Commission, Ms. Sutton correctly states that the California Supreme Court - one of the most respected state courts in the country - would then appoint special masters to draw the lines, much as they did in 1991. And what happened in that year? The Special Masters did a much better job than our legislature did in 2001. For example, the Assembly had more Democrats under the 1991 Supreme Court plan (50) than they do now under the gerrymandered plan (48). As for the charge this is a Republican Court, it should be noted this is the same Court that recently declared unconstitutional the state law limiting marriage to people of the opposite sex.

* Ms. Sutton attacks the State Auditor, Elaine Howell, as a political appointee. She conveniently fails to mention that this position does not term out when the governor leaves office or that it was former Governor Davis who originally appointed Ms. Howell.

* Ms. Sutton seems concerned about possible gridlock on the commission because it will take nine votes to approve the maps: three Democrats, three Republicans and three others. To believe that a commission would adopt a plan that would end Democratic majorities necessarily demands that you also believe that three out of the five Democratic members of the commission would be GOP moles or such morons that they wouldn't understand what were happening.

And, of course, she neglects to mention that it is the legislature that is currently gridlocked, in part, because Republicans have enough safe seats to block a budget that might actually include a tax increase.

* Ms. Sutton next goes on to tell us this is a Republican power grab and presents us with an edited list of supporters and contributors. She fails to mention that among Proposition 11 supporters are Gray Davis, Steve Westley, former Speakers Bob Hertzberg and Fred Keeley, and the Democratic mayors of Berkeley, San Leandro and Hayward. As John Wildermuth of the San Francisco Chronicle recently reported on August 13th:

"Some of the Democrats' go-to money people also are breaking ranks over the redistricting measure. John Doerr, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, and his wife, Ann, gave $500,000 to the Democratic State Central Committee in 2006, but have given $20,000 to Prop. 11.

Eli Broad, a Los Angeles investor, gave $300,000 to block Davis' recall in 2003, $50,000 to support the Democrats' unsuccessful term limits revision measure this year, $100,000 to the state central committee in 2001 and thousands to other Democratic candidates. He put $25,000 into the Prop. 11 kitty.

Sacramento developer Angelo Tsakopoulos has been a regular Democratic donor, putting millions into his close friend Phil Angelides' 2006 campaign for governor, giving $3.6 million to the state Democratic Party in 2006 and writing checks to other Democrats, including $100,000 to Perata's legal defense fund. But he's on the other side when it comes to redistricting, giving $25,000 to the Prop. 11 effort.

Even Haim Saban, a big-time party donor who gave $100,000 to the Democrat's successful effort to defeat Schwarzenegger's 2005 redistricting measure, has given $100,000 to back Prop. 11."

* Ms. Sutton complains that the commissioners will be paid. I'm afraid that's true. The Independent Commissioners will be paid $300 per day while working on the new mapping. But that is a far cry from the $1.3 million paid by members of the California legislature in 2001 to one Michael Berman so that he could draw ultra safe districts for everyone, Republicans included.

* Finally, Ms. Sutton says that with Prop 11 all accountability ends. Actually, she has it completely backward. As it now stands, redistricting is the process by which incumbent legislators select their own voters. When politicians draw their own district lines, it's akin to putting the fox in charge of the hen house. Example: Since 2001, over 99% of incumbents have been reelected, and most of them by margins of victory greater than 20%. Due to declining registration, Republicans might well have lost seats in this past decade had it not been for incumbent-protection gerrymandering engineered in 2001. Instead, Republicans have been able to maintain 40% of the Assembly and 37% of the Senate seats despite the fact that Republican registration has decreased from 35% to a little over 32%.

If we don't change the system with Prop. 11, 2011 is going to be another year in which Democrat and Republican incumbents agree amongst themselves to protect each other with sweetheart districts that cut out challengers and dissident voices. That would include such voices as Marcy Winograd, who challenged incumbent Democrat Jane Harman in 2006 in the 36th Congressional District and garnered a surprising 38% of the vote. When the lines are redrawn in 2011, Mr. Berman or his successor may simply draw Ms. Winograd's residence out of the district or make the district more moderate, thereby increasing Ms. Harman's chances of winning the primary. That's something for people who call themselves progressive democrats to ponder.

Roy Ulrich is a member of Progressive Democrats of Los Angeles. The views expressed are his own.