|
Home
>
Track the Issues >
Redistricting
 January
20, 2008
Long
Beach Chamber Supports Redistricting
Reform Proposal
 The Long Beach Chamber voted to
support the “California Voters FIRST
Act”, an initiative that would take
redistricting out of the hands of
career politicians in Sacramento.
Common Cause, a non-partisan
non-profit organization, is the
author of this proposal. The
initiative will appear on the
November 2008 general election
ballot pending the required number
of signatures that need to be
collected.
Click here to
visit the California Voters FIRST Web site.
“Redistricting reform is the single
most important component of true
political reform in California,”
stated Lori Lofstrom, Chair of the
Long Beach Chamber Government
Affairs Council. “Without
redistricting reform, our
politicians will continue to lead
this state into even higher deficits
and deeper trouble,” continued
Lofstrom.
The initiative would take the
redistricting process out of the
hands of Sacramento politicians and
instead would be placed with a
14-member “citizen’s commission”.
The commission would be made up of 5
Democrats, 5 Republicans and 4
others. The process would be open
and public. The commission would
hold hearings to receive public
input. This would effectively end
the closed-door political deals by
legislators to draw districts that
protect themselves.
The Long Beach Chamber, in voting to
support this measure, became one of
the first chambers to lead the fight
for state redistricting reform
California Voters FIRST Act
1.
Every 10 years, after the census,
new boundary lines for the United
States Congress and California
Senate, Assembly and Board of
Equalization districts are drawn.
Currently, the California State
Legislature draws those lines. This
is viewed as a major conflict of
interest.
2. The California Voters FIRST Act
aims to eliminate the conflict of
interest.
3. A 14-person citizens
redistricting commission would be
created. The California Voters FIRST
Act would create a politically
balanced Commission - 5 Democrats, 5
Republicans, and 4 others.
Commissioners would be chosen for
their impartiality, skills, and to
reflect our State’s demographic and
geographic diversity.
4. The Act would protect
communities, cities, and counties.
The California Voters FIRST Act
would create a list of prioritized
mapping criteria for the Commission
to follow. This would ensure that
our Constitution, federal and state
laws are followed. California’s
communities, cities, and counties
must be respected.
5. The process would be open and
public. The Commission would hold
hearings to receive public input.
The California Voters FIRST Act
would end the closed-door political
deals by legislators to draw
districts that protect themselves.
6. The Act will be placed on the
November 2008 ballot pending count
of signatures by the Office of the
Secretary of State.
Background
1. California Voters FIRST Act is
pending count of signatures by the
Office of the Secretary of State.
2. The Commission would be formed by
inviting California registered
voters to participate. A pool of 60
(20 Democrats, 20 Republicans, 20
others) is selected based on their
skills, ability to be impartial, and
diversity by a review panel of state
auditors (1 Democrat, 1 Republican,
1 other).
3. The 4 Legislative Leaders can
strike up to 24 people from the
pool. Out of the remaining pool, 8
Commissioners are randomly picked -
3 Democrats, 3 Republicans, 2
others.
4. The final 6 Commissioners (2
Democrats, 2 Republicans, 2 others)
are chosen by the 8 Commissioners
from the remaining pool based on the
balance of skills and diversity they
would bring.
5. The mapping criteria for the
Commission to follow include, which
are ranked in order, are:
- Districts shall comply with the US
Constitution, including equal
population requirements.
- Districts shall comply with the
Voting Rights Act.
- Districts shall be geographically
contiguous.
- The geographic integrity of any
city, county, or city and county,
neighborhoods, or communities of
interest shall be respected.
Communities of interest shall not be
defined as having a relationship
with incumbents, candidates, or
parties.
- To the extent possible, after the
above criteria have been satisfied,
districts shall be compact.
- To the extent possible, after the
above criteria have been satisfied,
districts shall be nested.
6. Incumbent residences may not be
considered; districts may not be
drawn to favor politicians or
parties.
7. The scope of the Citizen’s
Redistricting Commission includes
the district drawing of the
California Senate, Assembly and
Board of Equalization seats in the
next redistricting cycle in 2011 and
after each decennial census.
8. The State Legislature will draw
Congressional seats, following the
same mapping criteria and hearing
requirements as the Commission.
9. According to California Common
Cause (also supporter of the Act):
- 66% support creating an
independent redistricting commission
to draw district lines instead of
incumbent legislators.
- 86% want an open process and an
end to back room deals in
redistricting.
- 78 - 81% want a redistricting
process that keeps their
neighborhoods and cities together
and divided as little as possible.
Click here to
visit the California Voters FIRST Web site.
August 9, 2006
Long Beach
Chamber Endorses Fixing a Broken System
Chamber moves
to back re-districting measure that places drawing
California’s legislative districts in the hands of a
non-partisan commission.
|
 |
|
Long Beach Chamber Vice Chair for Public
Policy Lori Lofstrom meets with Long Beach State Senator Alan
Lowenthal to discuss his redistricting proposal. |
|
Citing an inherent conflict of
interest in allowing legislators to draw their own districts,
the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce today announced support
for a measure by Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) that would
transfer political map-making powers to a panel of 11 citizens,
chosen by a bipartisan group of lawmakers and judges, and take
effect after the 2010 census.
Apparently, the public agrees. A poll by the Public Policy
Institute of California in May showed that nearly two-thirds of
Californians believe the state's method of drawing voting
district needs to be changed. And 62% of likely voters favored a
citizen’s commission.
Currently in California, the task of redistricting rests solely
in the hands of the state Legislature. This task is regarded as
the most political act undertaken by the state Legislature.
Redistricting by the Legislature has resulted in safe-district
seats solely based on partisanship. Safer district seats are
either uncontested or won by very large margins, and elections
are often determined in primaries. “This gerrymandering has led
to more legislative and budget gridlock in the state Legislature
in past years, and a general feeling that boundaries have served
politicians’ needs over the needs of the people of California,”
observed Long Beach Chamber of Commerce Chairman of the Board,
Byron Schweigert. Gerrymandering will be a thing of the past if
the Chamber has anything to say about it.
The Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce leads the way, as they
are the first Chamber of Commerce to advocate for redistricting
reform; joining with the Office of Senator Alan Lowenthal, as
well as California Common Cause. Upon the announcement of
Chamber advocacy efforts, Chamber President & CEO Randy Gordon
remarked, "We've put together a coalition across partisan and
ideological lines to push for the elimination of that conflict
of interest."
Long Beach Chamber of Commerce vice Chair for Public Policy &
Chairperson of the Governmental Affairs Council Lori Lofstrom
added, “It's very clear that people would like to see
redistricting and to have a different system than the way it is
now. That is why the Chamber is leading the way in calling for
an end to gerrymandering in California.”
“Fair elections are a hallmark of democracy,” said Chamber
president Randy Gordon, “we at the Chamber join this coalition
in order to do our civic duty to perfect democracy” concluded
Gordon.
Town Hall on SCA 3 (Lowenthal) Redistricting
Thursday, August 10, 2006, 7:00pm
Long Beach City Council Chambers
Good evening, and thank you for asking me to be here tonight.
I’m here on behalf of the Long Beach Area Chamber of Commerce,
in my capacity of Vice Chair for Public Policy & Chair of our
Governmental Affairs Council.
I’d like to share with you the reasons that the Long Beach
business community has joined with Senator Alan Lowenthal,
Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, and really the
countless masses of Californians who have grown weary of
gerrymandered voting districts.
We in the business community believe in the results that are
born of competition. When there is a choice, competition between
candidates ensues; as a result the public gets to make a choice
between candidates and their ideas. We at the Chamber believe
that ideas help democracy work.
California has among the least competitive congressional and
state legislative electoral districts in the nation. Experts
cite redistricting, the process that effectively determines a
district's composition, as the variable most responsible for
low-turnaround, not to mention its connection to inequitable
partisan legislative representation.
Without competitive districts, legislators have no incentive to
be accountable to the folks that send them to Sacramento to
solve our problems, such as the structural budget deficit that
has been a perennial fixture in the California State capitol
over the last five years or so.
However, most important, without change, there is no challenge
to the status quo. What’s wrong with the status quo? Why should
there be a change?
At the core of the issue is the need for change. Supporters of
the initiative argue that the current system allows legislators
to draw district lines that eliminate competition and preserve
the current partisan balance.
They maintain that taking the process out of the hands of
politicians will lead to districts that are more responsive to
voters. Supporters of redistricting reform contend that more
competitive races will lead to more moderate legislators.
Why does the Long Beach business community support SCA 3 and
redistricting? We believe that partisan fairness, public
participation and transparency would be improved by placing
control of California redistricting in the hands of an
independent commission;
We at the Chamber liken the ability of the Legislature to draw
legislative boundaries to the ability of an employee to hire
themselves, fire themselves, as well as give themselves a
raise—at the expense to the employer.
There’s no accountability in that arrangement.
And just as with the current system of gerrymandering—There’s no
checks
and balance in that arrangement.
Are there any specific examples you can give? One example that
comes to mind is the perennially late and out of balance budget.
The reality in Sacramento are the two camps of extremism that
has resulted from gerrymandering—a conservative camp and a
liberal camp. As a result, the budget has been held up by
extreme demands on either side, with no incentive or wherewithal
to compromise.
The Long Beach Chamber of Commerce believes that redrawing the
legislative boundaries will yield moderates that can work it out
for the majority of Californians.
Are there opportunities for new talent? When a new seat is
created through redistricting, or through the process an open
seat is the result. This process allows business and other
groups to recruit and present a credible candidate for the seat.
Currently, that option is unavailable because of nesting and
other forms of gerrymandering.
Will the new district lines resulting from redistricting
increase business’ opportunity to have a significant impact on
the political process?
Business and regular citizens alike will have an increased role
in the political process as a result of redistricting. New
candidates and new representation can energize the entire
community. Managers who are able to orchestrate a new working
relationship or strengthen an existing relationship can leverage
their participation based on new opportunities. From a political
standpoint, new district lines may also encourage alliances
between business and education entities that previously did not
have a reason to work together.
We view this opportunity as a great avenue to work with Senator
Lowenthal. Quite simply, we in the business community agree with
him—it’s time to take the Legislature out of the business of
drawing legislative boundaries.
As a parent I look at it in very simple terms—I wouldn’t give my
ten year old keys to the candy store and expect him to make the
decision on his own to practice restraint.
Email
us for more information. |
|
