PDA

View Full Version : Redistricting - Shift The Balance


sholling
11-12-2009, 8:18 PM
Moderators - if this is out of place please feel free to move it. I'm posting this here because it is our very best shot at shifting the political balance of power in our favor. Of unseating gun grabbers in hitherto safe districts.

Traditionally every ten years the legislature was empowered to draw it's own district maps. And while gerrymandering has been a problem since the 60s with the last census the legislature took it to extremes. Using scientific computer modeling they drew districts that were engineered to guaranty that no district could ever change party hands. They ensured that the current Donkey/Elephant balance of power would go unchanged and unchallenged and that no one could be voted out of office. Well we finally have a shot at changing that. Prop 11 was passed by the voters to let a committee of citizens redraw the districts after the 2010 census.

The reason that I'm posting this is that the state is finally ready to start taking applications to sit on that committee and we need to try to get a few of our own in there to see to it that everyone has a voice. If we don't it's going to wind up populated with a bunch of political hacks that just extend the status quo another 10 years. Here is your chance to draw districts that make every race for every seat in the legislature competitive. This is a once every 10 years chance so let's not ignore it.

http://www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov/

"Before the Voters FIRST Act, California lawmakers were charged with drawing their own legislative and Board of Equalization districts. But California voters changed all that when they authorized the creation of the Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commission) in the November 2008 General Election. Now YOU can apply to serve on an independent Commission that will draw district boundaries for the state Senate, Assembly, and Board of Equalization."

bulgron
11-12-2009, 8:43 PM
I wonder what makes someone a 'qualified applicant.'

My guess is, this is going to turn into another corrupt system that's dominated by the usual suspects.

7x57
11-12-2009, 9:00 PM
I wonder what makes someone a 'qualified applicant.'

My guess is, this is going to turn into another corrupt system that's dominated by the usual suspects.

On the other hand, it may turn into another corrupt system dominated by an unusual set of suspects. :TFH:

7x57

bulgron
11-12-2009, 9:10 PM
On the other hand, it may turn into another corrupt system dominated by an unusual set of suspects. :TFH:

7x57

No, there's too much riding on the line for the Dems and other corrupt politicians to let just any old suspect onto that panel. The thing is going to be rigged so that the balance of power in CA does not shift, I'm willing to bet on it.

What that proposition should have done is mandated district lines drawn up by an open sourced computer algorithm based on census data. I know that this is a hard computing problem that is likely to lead to unsatisfactory results. But then again, at least they won't be results deliberately designed to skew elections one way or another.

7x57
11-12-2009, 9:19 PM
The thing is going to be rigged so that the balance of power in CA does not shift, I'm willing to bet on it.


Joking aside, it's very possible. The guy running the Nevada Republican campaign was dubious that it would help, and that's likely the reason.


What that proposition should have done is mandated district lines drawn up by an open sourced computer algorithm based on census data.

Naturally, that's the only reasonable solution, but I don't expect to ever see such a rational solution in a California proposition.

The biggest flaw with the existing one is that it was unusually complex, and therefore difficult to predict effectwise.

If you wish to suggest that it was that way to disguise some built-in flaw that allows continued corruption, I cannot disprove it.

7x57

sholling
11-12-2009, 9:41 PM
There are 2 ways to approach this opportunity:

Decide that it's hopelessly rigged and sit on your butt grousing for the next 10 years.

or
.
Get involved, see what it would take to get on the committee, and apply. The worst that can happen is you waste an hour or two and don't get picked.


It's taken 40 years of trying to get the voters to approve some form of redistricting. Every previous proposal failed at the polls. This is our shot.

kf6tac
11-12-2009, 9:59 PM
Get involved, see what it would take to get on the committee, and apply. The worst that can happen is you waste an hour or two and don't get picked.
[/LIST]

It's taken 40 years of trying to get the voters to approve some form of redistricting. Every previous proposal failed at the polls. This is our shot.

Yep. Even if it is a hopelessly rigged system, I'm going to apply anyway and see what happens. Maybe if we get as many Calgunners as possible to apply, they'll pick at least one of us :P

Librarian
11-12-2009, 10:18 PM
So, look at the 'application (http://www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov/application.html)' page at the link sholling included.

Clearly there's some current-power influence in the process.

The general info page says The Applicant Review Panel will be randomly selected at 10:00 a.m. on Monday, November 16, 2009, at 555 Capitol Mall, Sacramento, CA. The names of the certified public accountants that are eligible to serve on the Applicant Review Panel can be accessed here.

The application period to apply to be on the Commission begins on December 15, 2009 and continues through February 12, 2010, and interested persons must apply on this Web site.

Also says 3. Who can serve on the Commission?

The Act requires the State Auditor to initiate an application process for selecting the members of the Commission. The application process is open to every registered California voter who:

Will have been continuously registered in California with the same political party, or with no political party, for the five years immediately prior to being appointed to the Commission; and
Has voted in at least two of the last three statewide general elections.

However, an applicant is ineligible to serve on the Commission if the applicant has a “conflict of interest” as defined by the Act.

An applicant is ineligible if, during the 10 years prior to submitting an application, the applicant, or a member of his or her immediate family has:

Been appointed to, elected to, or a candidate for a California congressional or state office;
Served as an officer, employee, or paid consultant of a California political party or of the campaign committee of a candidate for California congressional or elective state office;
Served as an elected or appointed member of a political party central committee in California;
Been a registered federal lobbyist;
Been a lobbyist registered with the State of California or a California local government;
Served as paid California congressional, legislative, or State Board of Equalization staff; or
Contributed $2,000 or more to any California congressional, state, or local candidate for elective public office in any year.

Applicants are also ineligible if they are serving as staff or a consultant to, are under contract with, or have an immediate family relationship with the Governor, a member of the Legislature, a California member of Congress, or a member of the State Board of Equalization.

Not that it's definitive, of course, but ordinarily one does not think "Oh, a CPA - no doubt a political activist". Perhaps the apps will be stored in a Mason jar on Funk & Wagnall's front porch before being evaluated.

Read the rest of the FAQ (http://www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov/faq.html) - might not be to your individual taste; looks like a fair amount of travel and public hearings, concentrated in about 8 months in 2011.

kf6tac
11-12-2009, 11:45 PM
4. How many Commission members will there be?
The commission will have 14 members: five members who are Democrats, five members who are Republicans, and four members who are neither a Democrat or a Republican.

Any Democrats here on Calguns? :)

joelberg
11-12-2009, 11:47 PM
Redistricting has been on almost every single ballot for the last 5 years. And its always failed.

kf6tac
11-12-2009, 11:48 PM
Redistricting has been on almost every single ballot for the last 5 years. And its always failed.

This one already passed last November.

cbn620
11-13-2009, 12:26 AM
I didn't vote for it and I don't support it... not this way. I was drawn into it because I would support anything that would make politics more fair. I was sorely disappointed when I researched it myself. They select 14 people to draw the districts, each of them is guaranteed 300 bucks a day last I heard, with no taxpayer accountability. There is also no limitations placed on their spending. Worse, the legislative leaders get to weed the selectees out as they see fit.

It basically creates a giant bureaucracy to sift through if we ever want to truly beat the current district policies, while putting it into the hands of a 14 member group that itself must go through a bureaucratic process before ever being allowed into it. The whole thing stinks on wheels, it is more prone to corruption than what we have now.

bigstick61
11-13-2009, 1:25 AM
Even if the whole process may turn out to be a sham and even if I don't have much of a shot at getting picked (in my 20s with only an AA degree and without formal specialized experience), I may stil apply for this. I just don't know exactly what day I registered to vote on in 2005; the requirement, if I remember correctly, is on or before 20 November 2005. I'm sure there's a way somehow to find out when you registered. Otherwise I meet the basic requirements.

joelberg
11-13-2009, 2:06 AM
This one already passed last November.

Uh, forget what I said then :D :wub: </embarrassment>

Librarian
11-13-2009, 7:14 AM
and four members who are neither a Democrat or a Republican. Oh, good - Arnold is eligible for another public service job ...

7x57
11-13-2009, 8:28 AM
Oh, good - Arnold is eligible for another public service job ...

:smilielol5:

7x57

jdberger
01-25-2010, 3:48 PM
There are still opportunities for this commission....

trautert
01-25-2010, 4:14 PM
I saw this when it first came up, and meant to apply then. Then promptly forgot about it. Glad you brought it (the thread) back to life. I just applied for it, and received an email right back saying the next phase emails will come out about February 14, so there clearly is time to apply.
Tom

cbn620
01-25-2010, 6:54 PM
I wonder what makes someone a 'qualified applicant.'

My guess is, this is going to turn into another corrupt system that's dominated by the usual suspects.

Ding ding ding... It's highly bureaucratic and places the decision making into an even smaller group of hands. S'why I didn't vote for it, folks.