Don't turn back on redistricting

San Francisco Chronicle
September 7, 2010

The League of Women Voters rejects the false choice presented by Daniel Lowenstein in Sunday Insight ("Prevent 'Jim Crow' redistricting by returning control to the legislature"). We strongly oppose Proposition 27 as a politician-funded attempt to kill real redistricting reform.

The two redistricting measures on the November ballot are trying to change the historic redistricting reform approved just two years ago. Prop. 27 would eliminate the independent Citizens Redistricting Commission. It would return us to the days of backroom deals, safe seats and no accountability to voters.

Prop. 20 would extend the commission's authority to draw district lines for congressional seats. The league supports the concept, but opposes Prop. 20 as premature. The new process should be fully implemented before the commission's responsibilities are expanded so dramatically. Prop. 20 also shortens the time the commission has to do its work by a month, and it narrows the way communities of interest are defined, which could make it harder for the commission to respect California's diverse neighborhoods.

Let's give the redistricting reform approved by the voters two years ago a chance to work. We urge Californians to vote no on Prop. 27 and no on Prop. 20.

Janis Hirohama, President California League of Women Voters, Sacramento

Bizarre argumentsDaniel Lowenstein's bizarre defense of legislative and congressional redistricting by the legislature as the only alternative to Jim Crow is astounding and preposterous.

As Lowenstein is neither uninformed nor stupid, that leaves "liar" as the only reasonable explanation. I wonder who's paying him ...

David Graber, Three Rivers (Tulare County)

Try scienceI have an easy solution to the redistricting question. Is it not possible, with computers, geometry and mathematics to simply create each congressional district from a logical epicenter (say Chico for the Second Congressional District), and program each district to "grow" out of each epicenter to as nearly circular borders as possible, taking into account the relevant factors of geography and population?

The result would eliminate the "apartheid like" gerrymandered shapes and would yield completely objective and democratic districts. I do not know if this would help or hurt incumbents, and I don't care. It would be the most fair, logical and partisan-free way of determining the composition of our districts.