California Proposition 77

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/09/27/BAG4OEUHN51.DTL" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/
article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/09/27/BAG4OEUHN51.DTL</a>

>>Legislative Democrats complained at Monday's hearing -- held to debate details of the measure on the Nov. 8 special election ballot -- that Prop. 77 is unfair and unworkable.

"This is simply about a political power grab,'' said Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles. "One party is trying to get more control, and another party is trying to defend against it.''

Republicans argued that the redistricting initiative is a much-needed reform that would take the power to change the lines of California's Assembly, state Senate and congressional districts from the politicians and give it to a bipartisan panel of three retired judges. Voters would then have to approve the new lines.

"This is not about Republicans or Democrats,'' said Assemblyman Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield. "It's about the people having their say.''

Prop. 77 backers say it would take the politics out of the redistricting process by forcing the new districts to be drawn without any partisan considerations -- making elections more competitive. <<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-bunzel27sep27" target="_blank">http://www.latimes.com/news/op
inion/commentary/la-oe-bunzel27sep27</a>,0,3747452.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

>>IT IS NOTHING less than a scandal that 90% of the seats in Congress and the California Legislature are not competitive. It is also why Democrats, who have long championed a level playing field in elections as an important progressive goal, should be leading the call for an end to the "incumbent protection racket."

Democrats strongly supported the concept of "one person, one vote" established in 1962 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Baker vs. Carr, a ruling that also required equal representation in all legislative bodies in order to reflect the interests and wishes of the people in a fair and balanced manner.

The reality has been just the reverse. The court-ordered mandate to reflect the popular will has been subverted by the openly self-serving agreement between Democrats and Republicans to create safe election districts that would protect every incumbent from a serious competitive race. As Ed Kilgore, vice president for policy of the Democratic Leadership Council, has put it, "politicians are choosing voters, rather than voters choosing politicians."<<

 

Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger

IIRC, the Democrats are pushing the exact same initiative in another state, and the Republicans are trying to fight it.

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

^ Which state is that CT?

And some of the "sitting" Republicans are against Prop 77 here in California... I wonder why??? Because they like the "special" treatment it gives them....

 

Originally Posted By CrouchingTigger

I thought it was someplace like Idaho or the Dakotas, but googling makes it look like Ohio.

It's kind of tough to google for, 'cause California pretty well dominates the results.

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/12798250.htm" target="_blank">http://www.mercurynews.com/mld
/mercurynews/news/opinion/12798250.htm</a>

>>Politicians are picking the voters instead of voters picking the politicians.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger uses this formula to sum up his case for Proposition 77, reform of redistricting. It encapsulates what's wrong with the current system of drawing legislative and congressional districts. Politicians create districts to advance their own political prospects.

It's a conflict of interest, plain and simple, that should be eliminated.

Proposition 77 would put the redistricting pen in the hands of an independent panel. It has its flaws. But they are outweighed by its central virtue: It takes redistricting away from the people who regularly exploit it for partisan and personal advantage. Voters should pass it Nov. 8.

New district lines are drawn every 10 years, after the national census, to adjust for population growth and movement. Under the current system, the Legislature -- meaning party leaders and consultants -- prepares a plan. Like a bill, it requires passage by the Legislature and the governor's signature to take effect.

When one party controls the Legislature and the governor's office, it's a pig-out, with the alpha party drawing as many friendly districts as it can. Even when party power is divided, redistricting tends to be a bipartisan conspiracy that creates safe districts for each party, eliminating real choices for voters. The parties also cater to individual incumbents, protecting them from potential challengers.

Examples abound of outrageously designed districts that result from this ``gerrymandering.'' One local example will suffice. To create a Republican seat, the 15th Senate District runs 200 miles from South San Jose to northern Santa Barbara County. About all the two ends have in common is proximity to Highway 101.

Statewide, districts are so uncompetitive between Democrats and Republicans that in 2004, none of the 153 Assembly, Senate and congressional seats on the ballot changed from one party to the other.

The alternative proposed by Proposition 77 is a bit convoluted, but it amounts to this: A panel of three retired judges would draw political districts.<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.insidebayarea.com/dailyreview/oped/ci_3083006" target="_blank">http://www.insidebayarea.com/d
ailyreview/oped/ci_3083006</a>

>>The study, by the Rose Institute at Claremont McKenna College, is the best evidence yet that Proposition 77, by taking that power away from politicians, would lead to more competitive elections.

Today's politicians, using modern computers and advanced databases of voter characteristics, are able to add a neighborhood here to a potential new district and take away a neighborhood there until they find the exact collection of voters they are looking for. When they're done, they can predict with near certainty the partisan result in district elections for years into the future.

That's what happened in 2001, when leaders of both major parties got together with then-Gov. Gray Davis to create new district lines that all but eliminated the modest amount of political competition California enjoyed in the 1990s. In the most recent round of elections, not one of the 153 Assembly, Senate and congressional seats in the state changed hands from one party to the other. And that was by design.

Proposition 77 would do two things to change this. First, it would give the line-drawing job to a panel of three retired judges, the same way lines are drawn in California when a deadlock between the Legislature and the governor throws the issue to the state Supreme Court. This happened in the 1970s and the 1990s, and both times the new districts were fairer, more sensible and more competitive.

Second, the initiative would create a firm set of rules for the line-drawers to follow so that the districts are all but guaranteed to be common-sense collections of communities rather than the grotesquely misshapen works of art that result when the politicians go on their hunt for friendly voters. The rules would require that counties and cities be kept together whenever possible, that districts be as compact as possible, and that past election results and voter registration data not be used to help shape the boundaries. As always, the federal Voting Rights Act would apply as an umbrella to protect the interests of ethnic communities. <<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.modbee.com/opinion/state/boren/story/11298189p-12047720c.html" target="_blank">http://www.modbee.com/opinion/
state/boren/story/11298189p-12047720c.html</a>

>>Don't listen to politicians; redistricting good for state

Supporters of redistricting reform like to point to California's 23rd Congressional District as one of the best examples of the manipulation that takes place to keep an incumbent in office. The district is 200 miles long and darts along the Pacific coastline from Monterey to Ventura County picking up pockets of Democrats and avoiding Republican neighborhoods.
This district has only one purpose: To keep Rep. Lois Capps, D-Santa Barbara, in Congress. There's no other reason. Not public policy. Not to give citizens a voice in their government. Not to help a retiree find out what happened to a missing Social Security check.

The 23rd once was a tossup district, what's referred to now as a "competitive seat" in which the incumbent actually has to work to get re-elected. But the politicians in Sacramento decided they could make Capps' life a whole lot easier if they eliminated competition by drawing district boundaries that would give her as many friendly voters as possible.

The district came out of the 2001 bipartisan gerrymander that has served as a wake-up call to those who have thought that redistricting is merely a housekeeping issue for the Legislature. It's hardly a simple technical task; it has a lasting impact on public policy and politics in the Golden State.

Over the next several weeks, voters will hear a lot of misinformation about Proposition 77. When they do, they should picture California's 23rd Congressional District. It's a symbol of arrogant politicians thumbing their noses at voters, and one more reason to take redistricting out of the Legislature's hands.<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.times-standard.com/opinion/ci_3068471" target="_blank">http://www.times-standard.com/
opinion/ci_3068471</a>

>>Ever wonder why it is that even though we have elections every two years, the names and faces in the Legislature never seem to change? Or, why it is that no matter how poor a job an elected official does, they still seem to get re-elected? The reason for all of this is simple: Gerrymandering. Our elected officials are not accountable to the voters because they do not have to be. Their district lines virtually ensure that they will be re-elected every year. But there is a solution; it is called Proposition 77, the Voter Empowerment Act. <<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/insider/" target="_blank">http://www.sacbee.com/static/w
eblogs/insider/</a>

>>Three prominent reform groups -- Common Cause, CalPIRG and TheRestOfUs.org -- have endorsed Prop. 77, the redistricting reform measure. These groups, especially Common Cause, have been working for fair, independent district boundaries for a long time. Perhaps their backing of this measure will help dispel the opposition argument that it's a partisan power grab -- for either the Republicans or the Democrats, depending on who is making the accusation.

From the statement by Common Cause national president Chellie Pingree:

“The current system, where self-interested politicians are responsible for drawing political boundaries, is rotten to the core. It’s time to get the fox out of the henhouse and to put an end to California’s rigged system of elections. Prop. 77 takes the power to draw legislative and congressional districts out of the hands of partisan legislators in Sacramento and puts the issue before the voters. This proposal is not perfect, none ever is. But this is an important first step and I urge the people of California to vote yes on Prop. 77."<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

Here are some real examples of how the current system is totally screwed up...

<a href="http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/election/story/13707392p-14549989c.html" target="_blank">http://www.sacbee.com/content/
politics/ca/election/story/13707392p-14549989c.html</a>

>>Dickerson, a Redding assemblyman in 2001, angered Republican Party leadership by breaking ranks and voting to end a bitter budget impasse after Democrats promised millions for his Redding district.

"A few of the senators from my own party actually said, 'We're going to get you,' " Dickerson recalled. "That's how the game is played."

Two months later, the Legislature approved new district maps that ultimately ended Dickerson's legislative career.

Now a Redding councilman, Dickerson was burned when district lines for a Senate seat he was planning to seek were extended into the Sierra foothills just far enough to enable then-Assemblyman Sam Aanestad to challenge him in a fiery Republican primary.

Aanestad, backed by a majority of GOP legislators, won the election handily.

"It was a message to anybody who puts their constituents ahead of their party," Dickerson said of the redistricting. "I don't have a problem with anything that gets (redistricting) out of the hands of elected folks, because they're out to protect their own positions, first and foremost."

Brunner has a similar story, but ultimately, a different point of view.

Four years ago, Brunner was in the process of running for the seat of termed-out Assemblywoman Dion Aroner, D-Berkeley, when her north Oakland neighborhood suddenly was dropped from the 14th Assembly District.

"There was a little two-block bubble, and I was out," she said.

Lines were redrawn in a manner that benefited Democrat Loni Hancock, who soon thereafter announced her candidacy and ultimately won the seat, thus carrying on a long tradition.<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

Common Cause Press Release......

Statement of Chellie Pingree, President of Common Cause Endorsing Proposition 77: The Voter Empowerment Act


Common Cause endorses Proposition 77, the Voter Empowerment Act, and urges the people of California to support this important initiative, which will take the power to draw legislative and congressional district lines out of the hands of partisan legislators and put that power in the hands of an independent commission.



In California and around the country, we have a broken redistricting system that allows incumbent politicians to choose the voters they wish to represent, instead of allowing the people to elect those who best represent their interests. This system is not only a fundamental conflict of interest, but it is anti-democratic and rotten to the core. In California, legislators from both political parties collude to create safe seats where they will face no competition from opposing parties, or from challengers within their own party.



The 2001 redistricting map passed by the legislature created safe seats for all incumbents of both major political parties, and even their handpicked successors. The result has been two rounds of state elections where not one incumbent lost and not one seat switched parties.



The resulting plans have created districts that stretch on for hundreds of miles, divide communities and leave millions of Californians disenfranchised, without any real choice in their elections, and with no opportunity to elect representatives of their choosing.



This is both a California problem and a national problem. In the 2004 election for the U.S. House of Representatives:



More than 85 percent of House incumbents won by landslide majorities of more than 60 percent.



Only seven incumbents, of 399 running, lost their seats. That's a 98.2% re-election rate.



Outside of Texas, where a mid-cycle Republican redistricting effort led to the defeat of four targeted incumbent Democrats, only three incumbents lost their seats -- a greater than 99 percent incumbent re-election rate for House members in 49 states.



Common Cause, which has pushed for reform of the anti-democratic redistricting process for 30 years, renewed the call for reform in January of this year. In February we called on the California legislature to act by voting on reforms that would create:



A truly independent redistricting commission,


Strong and fair criteria for drawing the districts, and,


A fair and transparent public process.



Common Cause devoted considerable resources and effort to push for a legislative solution. Although the legislature considered several pieces of legislation in its past session, and legislators of both political parties committed to removing themselves from the redistricting process, partisan legislators were unable, or unwilling, to pass a redistricting reform bill.



Without aggressive action, the people of California will likely face many more years of elections in which they have little ability to determine the outcome.



There is a better way:



We must start with redistricting reform that meets the straightforward and fair principles laid out above.



We must remove the redistricting process from the hands of partisan legislators and give the task over to an independent commission.



We must establish fair criteria that guide the process by which the commission develops plans for the state, and we must establish an open and transparent public process.



Proposition 77 meets these principles. The initiative is not perfect; none ever is. However, Proposition 77 is an important first step in reforming the broken redistricting system in California, and I urge the people of California to vote yes on Prop. 77.



Prop. 77 will take the power to draw legislative and congressional boundaries out of the hands of partisan legislators in Sacramento, and puts the issue before the people of California. The responsibility for drawing the lines would be placed in the hands of an independent panel of three retired judges who must be removed from partisan politics.



Prop. 77 establishes fair standards that the independent commission must meet in development of its plans. These standards require that the commission:



Create districts of equal population,



Comply with the U.S. Constitution and the Voting Rights Act,



Create districts that are nested, so that each board of equalization district be made up of 10 Senate districts and each Senate district be comprised of two Assembly districts,



Develop plans where each district is contiguous,



Respect city and county boundaries,



Create compact districts,



Not fragment census blocks, and



Not give consideration to the effect on political parties or incumbents.



Prop. 77 also provides that the commission's activities and proceedings be transparent and open to the public, in accord with California's Bagley-Keene Open Meetings Act.



Common Cause has been working to reform the redistricting process since 1975. In 1977, Common Cause published a model redistricting law, advocating an approach to redistricting reform that was based on the goals of establishing independent redistricting commissions, in lieu of state legislatures, to draw redistricting plans, and relying on the use of "neutral" standards and criteria to guide the development of a plan.



To date, several states have established independent or semi-independent commissions to carry out the redistricting process. In the 1980 and 1990 rounds of redistricting, Common Cause worked to reform the redistricting process, either through the legislative process or by initiative. Several of those state efforts were successful. Most recently Common Cause worked with a broad coalition to pass a redistricting reform measure via the ballot in Arizona. We are also active partners in efforts to pass redistricting reform via the ballot in Florida, Massachusetts and in Ohio.



It's time to get the fox out of the henhouse and to put an end to California's rigged system of elections. Common Cause urges the people of California to vote "YES" on Prop. 77

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

CALPIRG Press Release.....

COMMON CAUSE, CALPIRG, AND THERESTOFUS.ORG JOIN COALITION TO TAKE THE POWER TO DRAW ELECTORAL DISTRICTS OUT OF HANDS OF PARTISAN POLITICIANS


Sacramento - Today, three key reform organizations joined a diverse coalition of organizations in favor of Prop. 77, a measure on the November 8 ballot that would remove the redistricting process from the hands of politicians and give the job to retired judges who would draw fair district lines.



Common Cause, a national organization that called for a nationwide movement to take the redistricting process out of the hands of partisan officials in January, CALPIRG, a state consumer advocacy organization with a long, rich history of working on political reform, and TheRestofUs.org, a non-profit political watchdog that has often critiqued Governor Schwarzenegger's political fundraising, announced their support of Proposition 77.

"The current system, where self-interested politicians are responsible for drawing political boundaries, is rotten to the core. It's time to get the fox out of the henhouse and to put an end to California's rigged system of elections. Prop. 77 takes the power to draw legislative and congressional districts out of the hands of partisan legislators in Sacramento and puts the issue before the voters. This proposal is not perfect, none ever is. But this is an important first step, and I urge the people of California to vote yes on Prop. 77," said Chellie Pingree, national president of Common Cause.

In January 2005, Common Cause launched a nationwide campaign to reform how state legislative and Congressional districts are drawn, with the goals of taking the redistricting process out of the hands of partisan politicians, and to establish fair criteria to guide the redistricting process. Common Cause is pushing to reform the redistricting process in states across the nation in order to create competitive legislative and congressional districts that are accountable to the people.



Today, California's system of drawing election districts is rigged. Partisan legislators are in charge of drawing their own districts - letting politicians choose their voters instead of the other way around.



"Politicians grow less responsive to their constituents when they sit in districts drawn by them to protect themselves from competition," said Steve Blackledge, Legislative Director of CALPIRG. "Time and again they defeat popular public interest measures while passing laws that please special interests. Prop. 77 will bring about greater competition, thus ensuring greater accountability and responsiveness. Politicians, though, would prefer safe seats to competitive elections, and that's why they're so vehemently opposing this measure."



"The current system is a sham," said Derek Cressman of TheRestofUs.org. "When politicians don't have to worry about reelection, it tilts the scales in favor of the moneyed special interests, to the detriment of the people's interests. Prop 77 restores fairness and balance to the system where voters once again become relevant. The opposition of Republican Congressman John Doolittle and Democratic Congressman Howard Berman shows that politicians of all political stripes prefer safely gerrymandered districts to robust competition," added Cressman.



Under the reforms in Prop. 77, a bi-partisan and independent panel of retired judges will be in charge of drawing fair and competitive district lines. These judges would be required to solicit input from the public and draw district lines that are fair and respect the integrity of communities, cities and counties. They won't be able to consider political registration or party affiliation - unlike the current system. Prop. 77 gives voters the final input by requiring the new districts be approved by voters.



In addition to removing the process from self-interested incumbents and making it harder for individual politicians to protect their own seats, Prop. 77 will likely produce a modest increase in the number of districts that are competitive between the two major parties. Competitive districts will provide a new level of accountability to voters. Requiring legislators to stand for reelection in competitive districts will ensure that politicians pay closer attention to the people.



Common Cause is a national network of active citizens who fight to ensure that powerful institutions in society - including government, corporations and the news media - serve the public interest, not narrow special interests.

<a href="http://www.commoncause.org" target="_blank">http://www.commoncause.org</a>


CALPIRG is a statewide consumer advocacy organization with a long, rich history of working on political reform. For more information about CALPIRG's positions on the special election ballot questions, visit

<a href="http://www.calpirg.org" target="_blank">http://www.calpirg.org</a>.



TheRestofUs.org is a non-partisan watchdog committed to exposing the role of big money in politics and telling citizens what they can do about it. In February, the organization endorsed Governor Schwarzenegger's call for redistricting reform. TheRestofUs.org supports redistricting reform that will result in fairness, competition and a plan that maintains geographic communities.

<a href="http://www.TheRestofUs.org" target="_blank">http://www.TheRestofUs.org</a>

 

Originally Posted By jimminy44

It will be interesting to see a majority of Democratic voters in California, who I would guess outnumber Republican voters, voting to "level the playing field" for the Republicans in the state. That will be nice of them.

I remember seeing one of Darkbeer's other posts stating that all of the propositions are leading in the polls.
Are they polling Democrats and Republicans in these polls, and the numbers are still showing overwhelming support for the initiative?

Again, how nice of the Democratic voters to do such a nice thing for Republicans. Perhaps, the people being polled are leaning toward passage of this proposition because it makes politicians more accountable to the voters in their area no matter what party they are from and not because of party affiliation at all.

I think this proposition does not threaten governors or senators but it does threaten the status quo for other elected officials. Apparently, a majority people in California do not think, according to the polls, that they are getting effective representation. Some politicians are threatened by this concept and they know who they are.

 

Originally Posted By cmpaley

>>I remember seeing one of Darkbeer's other posts stating that all of the propositions are leading in the polls. <<

Of course, it all depends on how you answer the question, doesn't it? The questions in the poll so loved by DB are skewed to the Schwarzenegger spin on them and not the whole truth.

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/237vezfy.asp?pg=2" target="_blank">http://www.weeklystandard.com/
Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/237vezfy.asp?pg=2</a>

>>What the initiative does test is the depth of public outrage. California is no stranger to political power plays: A Democratic gerrymander in the 1980s gave their party five more seats in the House, at a time when the state was voting Republican in presidential elections. But that's small potatoes compared to what occurred leading up to September 2001. Democrats paid Michael Berman almost $2 million over 18 months to redesign 93 congressional and state Senate districts. California's 32 Democratic House members paid $20,000 apiece to guarantee their day jobs, prompting this quote from Rep. Loretta Sanchez: "Twenty thousand is nothing to keep your seat . . . If my colleagues are smart, they'll pay their $20,000, and Michael will draw the district they can win in. Those who have refused to pay? God help them."<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/opinion/12976812.htm" target="_blank">http://www.mercurynews.com/mld
/mercurynews/news/opinion/12976812.htm</a>

>>But this is not Tom DeLay and Texas all over again. In Texas, Republicans remapped the state for themselves when they won control of the Legislature in the middle of the decade. In California, those Republicans who support 77 -- many Republican incumbents do not -- are just asking for neutrality.

My favorite phony argument from Democrats takes this form (quoting a scathing post-news-conference e-mail: ``Those on stage [in San Jose] today will look a lot like those who the governor would have [draw] our legislative lines -- mostly elderly, relatively wealthy, white men.''

Let's review the key players in the current district map drawn by the Legislature: John Burton, Democratic Senate leader; Robert Hertzberg, Assembly speaker; Jim Brulte, GOP Senate leader; and Gov. Gray Davis, who signed it. All white, all male but not -- to be fair -- all elderly. And behind the scenes, there was mapmaker Michael Berman, who, among other maneuvers, made sure there were not too many Latino voters in the congressional district represented by Howard Berman, his brother.

Gosh, you wouldn't want to change a system like that, would you?

McEnery and Jordan do and for their trouble they got labeled ``Benedict Arnolds'' by the Democratic die-hards.

Do you want any clearer indication that opponents of Proposition 77 are putting their party before the public?<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

CRT Press Release

Hypocritical New “No on 77†Attack Ad,
Paid for by Politicians,
Calls Prop 77 a “Politician’s Power Grabâ€


SACRAMENTO – The “No on 77†campaign this weekend released a new TV ad attacking Prop. 77, calling the reform measure a “Politician’s power grab.†Incredibly, and hypocritically, the ad itself was paid for with more than $500,000 in campaign cash donated by politicians opposed to Prop. 77.

The ad states, “Stop Prop 77, the politician’s power grab. It’s a bad idea for three retired judges, handpicked by politicians, to redistrict for 37 million Californians…And Prop. 77 changes our Constitution just for political gain. No on 77. Stop the power grab.â€

“Let me get this straight: the politicians paid for an ad attacking Prop. 77, calling the reform measure a ‘politician’s power grab?†stated California Recovery Team spokesman Todd Harris. “This is the absolute height of hypocrisy. The only power grab going on is the one by these very politicians, who have grown so comfortable and unaccountable to the voters that the mere thought of actually having competitive elections scares the hell out of them. I hope the voters see this ad for what it is: the last desperate and dying gasp of air from the status quo politicians who are terrified of real reform in Sacramento.â€

Proposition 77 will allow independent judges to draw election districts instead of the politicians. It then allows voters to approve or reject those districts. It is about giving more power to the people and making politicians more accountable. It has been endorsed by, among others, the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Sacramento Bee, San Jose Mercury News, Orange County Register, Fresno Bee, Riverside Press-Enterprise, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Contra Costa Times, Bakersfield Californian, Stockton Record, Santa Barbara News Press, Santa Cruz Sentinel and the Santa Maria Times.

Money from Politicians to Fund Anti-77 Campaign:

Grand Total: $533,000 (excluding returned contributions)

No on 77
Total: $78,000

Friends of Zev Yaroslavsky - $15,000 (loan) on 9/2
Friends of Zev Yaroslavsky - $10,000 (loan) on 9/7
Diane E. Watson for Congress - $1,000 on 10/18
Solis for Congress - $25,000 on 10/20
Hooley for Congress - $1,000 on 10/21
Murtha for Congress Committee - $1,000 on 10/21
Lofgren for Congress - $25,000 on 10/21

CA for Fair Representation - No on 77
Total: $455,000

Kehoe for State Senate - $25,000 on 9/16
Pavley for Assembly 2004 - $1,000 on 9/19
Steinberg for Senate 2006 - $49,000 on 9/7
Steve Westly - $5,000 on 9/1
Friends of Wesley Chesbro - $25,000 on 10/7
Dave Jones for Assembly 2006 - $25,000 on 10/7
Levine for Assembly 2006 - $25,000 on 10/7
Torlakson for Senate - $25,000 on 10/11
Democrat Deborah Ortiz for Sec. of State - $5,000 on 10/11
Friends of Noreen Evans for Assembly 2006 - $10,000
Joe Baca Jr. for Assembly 2006 - $10,000 on 10/13
Wilma Chan for Supervisor 2006 - $15,000 on 10/13
Wesson for Senate - $15,000 on 10/13
De La Torre for State Assembly 2006 - $25,000 on 10/13
Friends of Barbara Matthews 2004 - $25,000 on 10/13
Simitian for State Senate - $25,000 on 10/14
Ronald Calderon for Senate - $5,000 on 10/14
Calderon for Assembly 2006 - $10,000 on 10/14
Albert Torrico for Assembly - $30,000 on 10/14
Gloria Romero for Senate 2006 - $15,000 on 10/14
Bass for Assembly 2006 - $25,000 on 10/19
The Klehs Committee 2006 - $10,000 on 10/18
Denise Moreno Ducheny for Senate 2006 - $25,000 on 10/21
Patty Berg for Assembly 2004 - $25,000 on 10/21

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

<a href="http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/state/12987158.htm" target="_blank">http://www.contracostatimes.co
m/mld/cctimes/news/state/12987158.htm</a>

>>A Northern California lawmaker broke ranks with fellow Democrats on Monday and endorsed Proposition 77, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's attempt to take away the Legislature's power to draw legislative and congressional districts.

"The only way we're going to be able to get electoral reform is through the initiative process," said Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla, D-Pittsburg. "If we fail in this effort we are providing a mandate for those who want to keep the status quo."

Canciamilla said he was a freshman lawmaker when he voted for the current districts.

"I didn't view it at that time as that big an issue," he said. "I was new. I thought that was the way things were done. I didn't realize how dysfunctional the climate here was.

"The difficult issues that we need to deal with and address aren't being done because of partisan politics and a lack of open debate. I believe that safe districts and lack of a fair redistricting process help support that kind of dysfunction."<<

 

Originally Posted By Darkbeer

The LA Times Editoral Board says YES on 77!!!

<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-districts23oct23" target="_blank">http://www.latimes.com/news/op
inion/editorials/la-ed-districts23oct23</a>,0,1383517.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials

>>THE GREATEST POLITICAL SWINDLE of the last 50 years in California has been the conspiracy between Democrats and Republicans to protect their own hides by redrawing the state's legislative and congressional districts. Proposition 77, which would take the redistricting process out of the hands of politicians, offers voters a chance to prevent such mischief. Californians should vote yes on Proposition 77 on Nov. 8.

The state Constitution says that redistricting must respect "the geographical integrity of any city, county or of any geographical region" to the extent possible. But the plan drafted by the pols in 2001 laughs at the idea of local or regional integrity. The 21st Senate District, for example, sprawls from west of Tarzana to east of Pasadena, containing all or portions of eight Assembly districts.

Critics say that retired judges aren't free of bias. But the redistricting plans of the 1970s and 1990s were drafted under court supervision. Both were good plans — in fact, among the best ever. Besides, we already know that politicians cannot be trusted to draw fair districts.

Proposition 77 will restore some reason and moderation to the political process. <<