The latest from David Drucker over at Roll Call Newspaper…
As California officials on Wednesday moved one step closer to severing politicians’ ability to gerrymander themselves safe seats, a Democratic-affiliated 527 group is launching today with the intent of maximizing partisan gain in the 2012 redistricting process in states across the country.
After it appeared the measure was dead, the California Senate Wednesday passed State Constitutional Amendment 3 with the requisite two-thirds majority. If approved in similar fashion by the state Assembly and ratified by voters, the amendment would remove from the Legislature the power to draw legislative and Congressional districts, granting that task instead to an 11-member independent commission.
In a direct but unrelated counter-move, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is unveiling this afternoon a new 527 organization, to be headed by Gerald McEntee, the union’s president — and run in concert with the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee and other groups. Dubbed “Foundation for the Future,” its goal is to raise and spend $17 million over the next six years to influence the 2012 redistricting in the Democrats’ favor.
AFSCME, in announcing the organization’s creation, attributed its launch to the 2003 remap of Texas House districts that netted Republicans five seats in the 2004 elections, and the June Supreme Court decision that upheld as constitutional the principle of mid- decade redistricting.
A conference call is scheduled for later this afternoon to reveal more details of Foundation for the Future’s planned operations. But AFSCME Political Director Larry Scanlon did indicate the group is likely to focus in particular on the redistricting processes in Florida, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington.
“The goal really is to try and short-circuit some of nefarious doings of Republicans,” Scanlon said in a telephone interview.
In California, meanwhile, redistricting reform continues to progress, though it remains on life-support.
The current legislative session concludes Aug. 31, and the deadline for placing constitutional amendments on the November ballot is Friday. Yet state lawmakers continue to haggle over the existing plan.
The state Senate passed the amendment, co-written by Democratic state Sen. Alan Lowenthal and Republican state Sen. Roy Ashburn, with the bare minimum of votes needed (27 out of 40). This action came after Democratic and Republican leaders of the Legislature announced jointly at the end of last week that the proposal was dead — though they said they hoped it could be resurrected in January.
Passage in the state Assembly by a the required super majority is uncertain — even though Democratic Speaker Fabian Nuñez and Republican Leader George Plescia support redistricting reform in principle — as the influential Latino Legislative Caucus, and others, continues to express reservations.
“It’s not as though judges aren’t politicians,” Latino caucus member and state Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero (D) told the San Francisco Chronicle, adding that 89 percent of retired jurists are white males. “It’s time to retire the concept of retired judge.”
As written, the amendment would transfer the power to draw legislative and Congressional districts from the Legislature — both houses currently are controlled by Democrats — to an independent, 11- member commission for the next round of regularly scheduled redistricting, set for after the 2010 census.
The proposed state constitutional amendment, which has gone through several incarnations since first introduced last year, calls for a panel of 10 retired appellate court judges — five Democrats and five Republicans — to establish a pool of 50 candidates to be chosen for the 11-member Independent Redistricting Commission.
The Democratic and Republican leaders of the Legislature would be allowed to veto up to two candidates each from the opposite political party and replace them with individuals from their own party.
The eight commission members selected by legislative leaders would then choose three additional members who are Independent — bringing the total number to 11 — with one of those Independent members serving as chairman of the commission. Legislative staff, political consultants, and any individual with financial or familial ties to the governor or Congressional and legislative Members, would be prohibited from serving on the commission.
Commission members would be barred from running for public office or working as a paid lobbyist for three years following the end of their stint on the commission.
The amendment would require the commission to disregard party registration, voting history and where an incumbent lives in the “initial phase” of the mapping process, but it allows consideration of those factors before the final boundaries are agreed on. The proposal mandates that all districts must comply with the Voting Rights Act, and, “to the extent practicable,” that cities and counties not be unnecessarily divided.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), having long supported an overhaul of California’s redistricting process as a centerpiece of his plans to reform state government, is pushing the Legislature to put a proposal on the ballot (putting a state constitutional amendment before voters does not require the governor’s signature).
"The Senate should be commended for passing redistricting reform.
Competitive and fair elections are the hallmark of our democracy and allowing legislators to draw their own district lines is an obvious conflict of interest," Schwarzenegger said in a prepared statement.
"I call upon the Assembly to join their counterparts in making the state’s redistricting process more independent and passing this important political reform this year."
State Treasurer Phil Angelides (D), who is challenging Schwarzenegger for governor this fall, also has announced his support for redistricting reform.
Last year, House Democrats raised and spent tens of millions of dollars to defeat Proposition 77, an initiative sponsored by Schwarzenegger that would have transferred the power to draw legislative and Congressional districts from the Legislature to an independent three-judge panel.
In the political equation is an adjustment to California’s term limits law, which holds legislators to three, two-year Assembly terms and two, four-year Senate terms. Democrats are more willing to support redistricting reform if it includes a loosening up of term limits.
Republicans, who generally are supportive of the current term limits regime, have indicated they might agree to adjusting term limits if it is explicitly tied to a redistricting overhaul. The proposal that has gotten the most attention would allow legislators to serve as many as 12 years in one house, though they would not be allowed to serve any more than 12 years total.
Term limits are not part of the proposal approved by the Senate on Wednesday.