Redistricting. Initiative constitutional amendment.

Redistricting in California is predictable. Done every ten years to “reflect the changing demographics of the state” according to the national census, the redistricting has become a way for politicians to lock-in their district for their party. Democrats, with control of both state houses, make sure their voting districts have enough people who traditionally vote Democratic to continue to hold that seat for the party. Republicans do not block changes to the districts, because they too receive districts likely to vote Republican. This proposition seeks to discontinue this practice.

Proposition 77 would allow for the appointment of 3 retired judges—called “special masters”—to set the voter districts. The new plan would then go up for a vote of the people. While there is a complex system designed in the proposition to pick these judges, the main thrust is that the two major parties would receive at least one judge, despite several requirements to keep judges from being recently involved in partisan politics.

So, the system is kind of broken. You can see evidence when a state district combines such geographically distinct cities as Lodi and Davis. This proposition should be approved if you believe this new system will result in better districting. However, it doesn’t look like this is the case. The judges are still chosen through the two major parties. After the new districts are agreed to, the election results may not appear any different, causing people to blame the district lines.

Furthermore, when the “special masters” pick the new districts, the voters, who are already inundated by proposals, must approve the plan. If voters decline to improve the districts, then a new plan must be proposed, a process potentially costing millions of dollars.

Plain and simple, if the voters dislike a candidate, or disapprove of an incumbent’s job performance, then they will not vote for that person. Traditional voter alliances in political districts are important indicators of how voters might decide, but not necessarily how they WILL. Alliances do change. If you were looking at California politics 10 years ago, you would have never thought voters would recall a Democratic governor in favor of a Republican. People are less loyal to a particular political party than in the past, mostly because the parties have both become more centrist. The electorate does not need to try to fix manipulation by state gerrymandering politicians. If the voters want change, change will be made. This is an unnecessary amendment to the state constitution. Vote No on Proposition 77.