REMAP PLANS: VOTES FOR PROP. 20, AGAINST PROP. 27 WILL MAKE ELECTIONS MORE COMPETITIVE

The Press Democrat
August 29, 2010

Some candidates will take issue with this statement, but it's true: Most of California's legislative and congressional races already are decided. And there's still a month before the first ballot is cast.

Don't misunderstand. This isn't an argument against voting. Nor is it a suggestion that voters should ignore the candidates, or that legislative and congressional candidates abandon their campaigns. We only lament the lack of competitive elections. To that end, we recommend that voters approve Proposition 20 and reject Proposition 27 on the Nov. 2 ballot to ensure that the redistricting process is independent.

It's no secret that there was a single purpose to the district lines drawn after the census in 2000: to maintain the status quo in California's congressional and legislative delegations. To that end, they've been remarkably successful.

When the 107th Congress convened in 2001, California sent 32 Democrats and 20 Republicans. One reapportionment and four elections later, there are 34 Democrats and 19 Republicans. In Sacramento, Democrats held 26 seats in the state Senate and 50 in the Assembly in 2001; the GOP had 14 and 30 respectively. At the beginning of the current session, the split was 25-15 in the Senate and 51-29 in the Assembly.

According to the state Fair Political Practices Commission, more than $1 billion -- billion with a "b" -- has been spent on legislative elections since 2000, for a net change of two seats.

Compare that to the period after the 1991 reapportionment, when districts were crafted by the state Supreme Court. Partisan control of the Assembly changed twice over 10 years.

There is a public price to pay for letting legislators draw their own districts, in effect choosing their voters. Incumbents whose only threats are term limits and primary challengers have little incentive to compromise. Breaking with the Republicans' anti-tax ideology or the Democrats' public-employee base can invite a primary challenge or undermine a future appointment.

Proposition 11, approved by voters in 2008, took the power of reapportionment away from the Legislature. An independent commission is being selected by the state auditor to draw new Senate and Assembly districts based on the 2010 census. Proposition 20 would extend the commission's authority to congressional districts.

This won't fix all the problems in Sacramento or Washington. But it's a step forward, along with the open primaries approved by voters in June, greater transparency on campaign expenditures and fewer super-majority rules.

Proposition 11 was passed over loud objections by legislators, and members of Congress are fighting Proposition 20. That brings us to Proposition 27, a cynical effort to undermine the process by eliminating the independent commission before it can draw any new lines. The backers of Proposition 27, primarily the state's congressional delegation, included an artificial spending cap so they could claim this is a cost-cutting measure. Don't be fooled. In addition to losing an independent process, there will be a ample special interest money, from groups that benefit from the status quo, to more than make up for a tiny cut in public spending on the once-a-decade redistricting process.

California voters have taken important steps toward more competitive elections. Don't let politicians reverse the tide: Vote yes on Proposition 20 and no on Proposition 27.