Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Long Beach Press Telegram: Analyzing redistricting

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Places » California Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-30-05 02:01 AM
Original message
Long Beach Press Telegram: Analyzing redistricting
Article Last Updated: 9/28/2005 10:06 PM

Analyzing redistricting

Prop. 77 wouldn't greatly benefit either party.

Long Beach Press Telegram

One of the most succinct, accurate descriptions we've heard of California's gerrymandering problem is that elected officials are now choosing their voters, instead of voters choosing their elected officials.

That assessment is repeated, and confirmed, by a new study examining the probable outcome of Proposition 77, the redistricting reform measure on the Nov. 8 ballot. The study is useful because it is the first academic analysis of the proposition, and comes at a time when the measure is being framed by opponents as a Republican power grab.

The Rose Institute for State and Local Government study dismisses that notion as pure propaganda, and corrects it with solid estimates. Though no one can predict absolutely how a panel of judges would reshape political districts under Proposition 77, it's safe to make certain assumptions based on 77's core requirements: that districts must be drawn along logical geographic boundaries of counties and cities, and be as compact as possible.

(snip)

Importantly, the study found that Proposition 77 wouldn't hand any more power to one party or another. It reports that the number of safe Democratic and Republican seats are likely to be reduced by about the same number (five each for Congress and state Assembly; four Democratic and three Republican seats in the state Senate). Most California districts have a natural partisan leaning, with more Democrats in coastal areas and more Republicans inland.

(snip)

But the partisan calculations are beside the point. No political seat should be "safe" for one party or another.

And who would defend a system in which voters can be ignored? Only one group: the politicians who benefit from it.

http://www2.presstelegram.com/opinions/ci_3069776
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Places » California Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC