Political fallout from being nonpolitical

Timm Herdt
Ventura County Star
April 2, 2011

In two votes over the last three years, Californians created and then expanded an independent redistricting commission, with the expressed intent of removing political considerations from the process of drawing legislative and congressional districts. 

After a painstaking process of selecting members, that commission has now been established and is about to start its work. 

And it didn't take long for some critics to assert that the commission ought to keep the politics in politics after all -- that is, that it really should factor in political considerations when making its decisions. 

The first salvo was fired by GOP political commentator Tony Quinn, who accused the panel of having a left-leaning bias, an opinion that was seconded by state Republican Party Chairman Tom Del Beccaro. 

Among Quinn's beefs is that the state auditor, in overseeing the selection process, succumbed to pressure from "racial and ethnic activist groups" to ensure that commission members were reflective of California's racial and ethnic diversity. He asserts that he was rebuked for suggesting that the objective of the commission was to create politically competitive districts. 

Although the commission has barely begun its work, Quinn believes he's already sniffed out a conspiracy. 

"The political end is to strip Republicans of their remaining clout in the Legislature by assuring that the final map will give Democrats two-thirds majorities in both houses," Quinn wrote last week. "That this will be attempted is beyond question, since racial politics were the motivating factors in forming the commission in the first place." 

Quinn is right about one thing: Ethnic diversity and an appreciation for California's polyglot demographics were vital considerations in selecting the panel. 

That's precisely what Proposition 11 required in stating that, in order to be considered for the commission, applicants must have demonstrated an "appreciation for California's diverse demographics and geography." 

It also created a process in which the first eight members were selected by lottery from among the finalists, and then given the responsibility to pick the final six members. Proposition 11 was explicit in explaining the reasoning for this two-step process: Those six "shall be chosen to ensure the commission reflects this state's diversity, including, but not limited to, racial, ethnic, geographic and gender diversity." 

That was the proposal that Californians voted into law. 

What they didn't vote for was a proposition that required the commission to try to create politically competitive districts. The commission's legal charge, in fact, was quite the contrary. 

The language of Proposition 11 was explicit that the commission be utterly agnostic to political considerations: "Districts shall not be drawn for the purpose of favoring or discrimination against an incumbent, political candidate or political party." 

Historically, of course, the process of redistricting has been all about political favoritism. In 2001, lawmakers produced a bipartisan gerrymander that locked-in safe Democratic and Republican seats that scarcely changed hands. 

Throughout most of the 20th century, the once-a-decade process was used not only to protect incumbent politicians but also to systematically prevent minorities from gaining political influence. 

Racial and ethnic populations were split among multiple districts to dilute their voting influence, or, when their numerical concentration was so great that some representation couldn't be avoided, packed into a single district to minimize their influence. 

Judging from the selection process and their comments since being seated, it's clear that these commissioners are determined not to let that happen in the 21st century. 

They are about to embark on a tour of the state that will take them to cities large and small to listen to Californians talk about what makes their communities unique and why political districts should not illogically split small towns with common interests, or divide their neighborhoods. 

The districts they create will have political consequences, some of which are predictable. Big-city Democrats in Los Angeles will get fewer fiefdoms as the result of districts that reflect population growth there that has been slower than in the rest of the state. Some suburban and rural Republicans in the Inland Empire and Central Valley will be forced out of their comfort zones by districts that reflect the huge growth among Latinos in those areas. 

As the commission proceeds with its work, it's likely that yapping from the political class will intensify, from both ends of the spectrum. 

The commissioners' job will be to stay focused on the mission that California voters gave them: 

Do a fair redistricting . Respect the common interests of neighborhoods. Make districts as compact as possible. If there are political implications, well, the idea behind Proposition 11 was to let the chips fall where they may. 

Timm Herdt is a columnist for the Ventura County Star.