Fmr CA Gov Arnold Schwarzenegger vs. Gerrymandering

[lpetrich]

Schwarzenegger’s bipartisan next political act: Terminating gerrymandering

Challenges to existing redistricting systems are moving through courts in several states, with a pivotal case scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court next month. Former President Barack Obama said overhauling redistricting will be one of his post-presidency priorities. This month, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, fronted by former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder and others, will ramp up its operations, focusing on changing redistricting procedures in several states, either through the ballot box or court challenges.

But Schwarzenegger could be the movement’s most influential voice.

In 2008, he led the passage of Proposition 11 for setting up a nonpartisan commission for redistricting the California legislature, and two years later, that was followed by another one for redistricting the California House delegation.

The key to talking about redistricting and gerrymandering, Schwarzenegger said, is to keep it simple.

“The mistake that a lot of people make is to talk about the details,” Schwarzenegger said during a recent phone interview. “Don’t start with the details, because then people see the pine needles but not the forest.”

The Republicans have been very successful with their gerrymandering efforts, something that has likely had spillover into non-gerrymandered seats.

Since 2008, Democrats have lost more than 1,000 legislative seats across the country. Democrats hold 39 fewer seats in the House, three fewer in the Senate, and can claim 13 fewer Democratic governors than they did in 2007. The GOP controls 34 governor’s seats and dominates all branches of government in 26 states. Democrats control all three branches in only 15 states.

I'll close with this cartoon that I've created from the original gerrymander cartoon:

 

[zorq]

Gerrymandering is a huge problem, and one of the biggest offenders is California.

I am happy to vote for more fair and non-partisan district drawing strategies no matter where I live, BUT I feel quite reluctant to start the process in blue states. Because while almost every state draws district lines that deliberately favor one party or the other, the Republican states are the ones which are quantitatively more abusive in this regard. I simply think that there isn't a shot in hell's chance that that if the Blue States tackled gerrymandering, that the Red states would follow suit. I know this is true because of the blatant voter suppression activity Republicans are still pushing everywhere they have power. If Republicans ACTUALY cared about representing the will of the people, they wouldn't be trying to make voting more difficult everywhere. But, no, Republicans have made it clear that their first priority is to win elections and their second priority is to push their agenda of helping the 1%, and trailing in a distant third is their priority of paying lipsevrvice to their base on social issues, but actually delivering on some of them when the base gets restless.

Anyway, The Dems would be doing the right thing by reducing gerrymandering in the states they dominate, but that would hand the Reps dozens of free seats in the US House. Is it worth the risk for Dems to lead the way if there is no reciprocation from the Reps? I don't know.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Is it worth the risk for Dems to lead the way if there is no reciprocation from the Reps? I don't know.

I don't think anyone expects the Reps to reciprocate.
However, the blue states are probably the only places likely to give a new system a chance. And once it's road-tested, maybe the COURTS will say, 'Okay, yeah, that works. You guys, do it the way they did it."

 

[Tigers!]

Why not have an independent commission to determine the boundaries with no pollies on it?

 

[bilby]

Why not have an independent commission to determine the boundaries with no pollies on it?

Too sensible.

The seppos feel the need to have partzan voting for everything; They can't just appoint independent people to be judges, chiefs of police, school inspectors or dog catchers based on their qualifications and experience with the law, policing, teaching or canine control; They have to have an election, so that someone popular but incompetent can get the job. They think that competence is anti-democratic.

 

[LordKiran]

Why not have an independent commission to determine the boundaries with no pollies on it?

Too sensible.

The seppos feel the need to have partzan voting for everything; They can't just appoint independent people to be judges, chiefs of police, school inspectors or dog catchers based on their qualifications and experience with the law, policing, teaching or canine control; They have to have an election, so that someone popular but incompetent can get the job. They think that competence is anti-democratic.

Bilby are you my soulmate and we just don't know it?