TRUTH NOW on Proposition 11…the Fake Redistricting Reform Brought to You by Gov. Schwartzenegger and His Wrong-Wing Republican Gang

arnold_schwarzeneger.gifWant to live in a Red State? Want to have gridlock on redistricting in addition to the budget? Want to have the Republicans put in charge of “protecting” our coastline?

This is the reality of the so-called “Voters First” proposition being put on the ballot this year by Arnold and his Republican fat cat cronies. The only “voters” who are elevated will be the Republicans who are attempting to circumvent their declining registration statewide by fooling the voters into the idea that Prop 11 is “independent” and “nonpartisan.” You’ve got to hand it to them. They come up with such good titles that mean exactly the opposite!!!

Under the guise of “reform,” Proposition 11 creates a new state bureaucracy with an unlimited budget. This new drain on the state resources would essentially operate as a parallel second set of employees, since a redistricting staff already exists in the state legislature. Along with the 14-member Citizens Redistricting Commission (paid $300 per day plus expenses to attend a meeting), this new unlimited bureaucracy would include political staffers (civil-service exempt), private contractors, and private attorneys.

If this commission, stacked in the Republicans’ favor, does NOT reach agreement, and the rules ensure it will not, redistricting is handed to the California Supreme Court who appoints “special masters” to complete the boundary lines. NOTE that six of the seven justices currently sitting on the court were appointed by Republican governors.

Few people can defend the bizarre configurations of our legislative districts that are currently under the direct control of our politicians. Often neighborhoods are split into “communities of interest,” and this is one of the arguments used in favor of this measure that will be on the ballot this November. But, the politicians ARE responsible for what they have done, and they CAN be held accountable by the voters. If Prop 11 passes, all accountability ends.

Proposition 11 sets up a convoluted maze to choose 14 commissioners. The restrictions on selection of applicants are such as to ensure their ignorance of the political process. Excluded are people who have been candidates for office within the last 10 years, or had a family member who was, anyone who has served on a political central committee, anyone who has been on a political staff or been a lobbyist, anyone contributing $2000 or more to a candidate, any staff people to elected officials or their relatives. Thus, the pool of applicants will be severely restricted to those who have the least possible experience dealing with the complex decisions they will be asked to make. Or, maybe not. Interestingly, politicos from the Republican institutes and think tanks are not excluded.

The maze begins with the State Auditor. You say, “Who?” Who, indeed. It’s not as though we’ve ever heard anything about this unelected state official. But now this unknown takes front and center stage and begins the Prop 11 process by choosing three so-called “independent” state auditors to oversee what follows. This is Step #1, in the multiple-step procedure laid out by this proposition.

For the record, the State Auditor is currently Elaine M. Howle. She is a POLITICAL appointee of the governor’s, selected from a list of three submitted to him by the state legislature. The State Auditor, however, is “accountable solely to the California Legislature” after appointment.

The next step (#2) proceeds by choosing from a pool of applicants 20 Democrats, 20 Republicans, plus 20 not in either major party. This formula bears NO relationship to the actual political party registration in the state which as of May 19, 2008 is 43.75% Democrat, 32.53% Republican, and 23.72% all others. The losers here are obviously the Democrats who have gained a substantial margin in registration and would now be required to forfeit that plurality.

Moving on to Step #3, the state party leaders (only Dems and Reps now) get veto power. The President pro Tempore of the Senate, the Minority floor leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the Assembly, and the Minority Floor Leader may EACH strike up to two applicants from each sub-pool of 20 for a total of eight possible strikes per sub-pool. So, the whittled down lists of possibly only 12 Dems+12 Reps+12 Others now go back to the State Auditor.

In Step #4, The State Auditor is to draw random names from the pool submitted by the previous step, and they become the first 8 on the Citizens Redistricting Commission. There are to be 3 from the largest political party (Dems), 3 from the second largest political party (Reps), and 2 from all others. Again, the LOSER on this cozy little split is the Democrats who AGAIN forfeit their significant voter registration plurality to…guess who??? The REPUBLICANS.

Now to Step #5, and if you’ve zoned out by now, well, that IS the point. But, please stay for the finale. The 8 from step #4 review the names in the remaining pool from which they had been drawn, supposedly randomly, and now themselves APPOINT 6 more. These are to be evenly split: 2 Dems/2 Reps/2 Others. Each one of these must then be approved by 5 votes of the existing 8 commissioners with a required 2 each from each major party and 1 other. And there you have it, the FOURTEEN who have made it through this convoluted sieve and are now charged, on paper, with redrawing the district lines after each decade’s census. And again, the losing party is scheduled to be the Democratic Party that holds the greatest voter registration in the state.

By now you’re probably wondering IF those 14 will even have the expertise to know where to begin! But, not to worry. At the end of the text of this ballot measure, glossed over in the ballot summary, we find the fine print detailing all the undisclosed new expenditures of this ill-conceived boondoggle, and you’re welcome to read it yourself.

“The commission shall hire commission staff, legal counsel and consultants as needed.” These employees shall be EXEMPT from civil service requirements, which means they will be POLITICAL appointees. Civil service would have meant appointment under a general system based on merit ascertained by competitive examination (CA Constitution Article VII). And, listen to this, ONLY ONE of those hired as legal counsel needs to have “extensive experience and expertise in implementation and enforcement of the federal Voting Rights Act.”

There are NO LIMITS on number of staff, consultants, or legal counsel. There’s also no limit on the funding that the governor submits for this new bureaucracy created through Prop 11 OR for the “statewide outreach program” that is to be set up “to solicit broad public participation” — public relations events. Be assured, however, that there is planned fiscal oversight, from the GOVERNOR’S Department of Finance!!!

The greatest travesty is the gridlock built into the commission by a requirement of 9 votes to approve final maps. These votes must be evenly split between Democrats, Republicans, and Others. Can anyone who has watched state government in recent years even imagine agreement? This is where the Republican-appointed State Supreme Court steps in to dictate the final maps.

If Proposition 11 passes, and it WILL if people do not read more than the title and blurb provided by the Secretary of State, there will be a huge faucet of state funds funneled to private consultants and attorneys, overseen by political appointee staff and citizen commissioners paid $300 plus expenses per meeting, and Republicans will be in charge.

And this is being sold to voters as an improvement??? THIS is reform??? Certainly there will be the well-connected who will profit from this new bureaucracy, but it’s not going to be the average taxpayer who will again be stuck with the bill for this privatization of the redistricting process. And the Democrats, who have gained significantly in voter registration, again will be stymied by this seizure of power by the Republican elite.

We now move to the more interesting part — the financing of this interesting excursion into the redistricting wonderland. WHO would be funding this?

Turns out that anyone who wants to check into the FUNDERS of any of the propositions OR candidates can do so quite easily through our Secretary of State’s website. From the main page, click on “political reform” on the top bar, then find the link part way down that page.

I’ve done this and you would not believe WHO is there!! How about New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg to the tune of $250,000! And there’s Boone Pickens, the Texas oil tycoon, for $100,000. And CEO’s and Chairs abound. I wonder if the shareholders of these companies know where the profits go. From Williams Sonoma –W. Howard Lester, $250,000; from Guess–Maurice Marciano $25,000; from Trust Company of the West–Robert Day $100,000; from Charles Schwab–$100,000; from the Gap–Donald Fisher $50,000; from PIMCO–William Powers $100,000; from Netflix founder Reed Hastings $147,307.01; from Rick Caruso, RE Development, $100,000; from the LA Chamber of Commerce, $32,500. Then there is the New Majority California PAC (more on this follows) with $175,000. Here’s where you check out the donor list.

And that’s just from under the first listed committee, California Voters First, #1299492, that is supporting the measure. They report $4,826,382.01 received for only the first six months of 2008.

Additional donors, insurance companies, land developers, etc., are tucked away under what is called the New Majority California PAC (a major donor to Voters First) here.

Homebuilder William Lyon kicked in $8,000; the Irvine Company $8000; Bank of America PAC $5600; Heritage Development $8000; Robert Follman of RA Industries $8000; Robert Grimm of Strategic Financial $8000; Stephen Fry of Fry Steel $8000; Yokohl Ranch $8000; Horowitz Management $8000. (David Horowitz, that is, who is also within Voters First with an additional $5000); Marion Knott Montapert $8000 (another multiple donor with an additional $2000 disclosed within Voters First too); William E. Simon $8000; Syd Liebovitch of Rodeo Realty $5000.

But for those research wonks you really want to go for it, please check out the New Majority California PAC EXPENDITURES here.

This is where you find the actual FUNDING of petition gathering by Kimball Petition Management for Voters First (indeed), the Republican Governors Association donations, the contributions to Gov Scharzenegger’s committees, various Republican county parties, mailers for Bernard Parks (candidate for LA County supervisor), and $10,000 for Karl Rove!!!

For those of you who have gotten this far, I have a challenge. Within the California Voters First PAC, Governor Schwarzenegger’s Dream Team is listed multiple times for both in-kind and monetary contributions…$280,000 here, $300,000 there…get the idea? Try to figure the total in millions and call his office to ask what each of these contributions represented. I’m curious and have simply run out of time. I also suspect many who were behind Arnold’s failed Prop 77 in 2005 are behind this new incarnation.

What I am certain of is that this proposition #11 is as “fair and balanced” as Fox News. This is yet another one of these “by the rich and for the rich” propositions being marketed by the high priced Republican propagandists to harried voters. Democrats living in the Red Zones are particularly vulnerable, since they are hoping this will benefit them. It won’t. It also only applies to STATE districts, and NOT to Congressional districts.

Expect the Republicans will be continuously pounding the airwaves with their lies using credible-looking endorsements from credible sounding “good government” organizations and people.

linda_sutton.jpgDon’t fall for it. Vote NO on PROP 11 and keep the politicians directly accountable for these critical decisions. As bad as some of them have been in the past, this certainly is not a viable alternative. The Republicans are attempting to circumvent their continuous losses in registration over the last Bush years. Don’t let them do it. VOTE NO ON PROP 11 and pass this around.

by Linda Sutton
Truth Now Productions

Recent articles by Linda


  1. says

    Linda points out the Republican bias of the latest proposed ‘redistricting reform’.

    But there are deeper reasons why ALL recently proposed redistricting ‘reform’ proposals are PHONY. These reasons go beyond partisanship. They were noted recently (March or April) in the blog on my website, Here is a summary.

    Kevin notes that redistricting schemes already are supposed to provide for ‘compactness’ and other features. However, neither the present redistricting method nor any of the proposed alternatives in fact contain any guarantee that these agreeable and objective-sounding terms like ‘compactness’ actually have to mean much of anything. Still less is there any guarantee of overall ‘fairness’.

    Yes, the correct and laudable objective IS fairness. This objective could be carefully defined and quantified, by carefully measuring each of its intended components, such as ‘compactness’ and by carefully specifying the intended priorization and weight of each of these components. Then all submitted redistricting plans could be objectively evaluated and scored and thereby be compared.

    Arriving at the required measures and weighting would call for a lot of protracted discussion before sufficient agreement results. However, modern math and stats modeling methods would enable us to do it. And today’s computer technology would enable precise scoring of any submitted redistricting plan.

    But, instead of going directly (or at all) for the correct and proclaimed objective of fairness, all the proposed ‘redistricting reform’ proposals instead duck this objective and instead introduce the irrelevant: elaborate rules to achieve supposed (and never defined) ‘unbiasedness’ of an unneeded commission.

    In fact a commission (not to mention its costs) would be unneeded. Given an objective quantified accepted measure of fairness, the adopted redistricting plan could simply be the highest-scoring plan submitted (to Sec of State, or whomever); in case of tie, toss coin. In case of desire to flavor the redistricting process with more of the ‘human’ element or partisan politics, require the desired human deciders (legislature, commission, etc.) to choose any submitted plan that comes within 1% of scoring highest.

    Again, for more argument (or fun) on this, see my blog at .

  2. Kevin Lynn says

    I commend Linda for her research and interest in the topic, But I think her analysis is missing some key points with the most salient being there are strict non-partisan rules governing redistricting. For instance, districts will be required to be compact and contiguous. There is just isn’t a lot of wiggle room there. And if it appears the map has been drawn up unfairly in the final analysis, it can be subject to initiative referendum.

    Also, I think the fact that the citizens’ commission will be composed of amateurs as opposed to professional politicos is a plus for the state. Citizens within this state who will be on the commission may not havepolitical experience but how much experience do we want them to have in creating $20 billion deficits, one of the worst revenue collection systems in the country, and the tactics I have seen over the past two years to keep incumbents in power.

    Further I find the statement ” . . .and they CAN be held accountable by the voters. If Prop 11 passes, all accountability ends” to be wrongheaded. The fact is, there is no accountability now. If an elected representative is in a safe district they don’t have to take into account the minority shareholders/party members of that district. Dave Sirota in his book Uprising provides a great example when he stated that over 70% of the American people disapprove of the Iraq War but year after year the majority of our legislators vote to approve funding. He surmises the reason for this disconnect is a lack of accountability. Safe districts allow the most radical fringe candidates to be elected. So again, there is no accountability now.

    I believe a good progressive candidate, one who is fiscally responsible and socially progressive, can win in any district in this state providing they do not have their legs broken by a system of gerrymandering that was designed maintain the status quo. Granted, after redistricting there will still be districts that tend to be more conservative and some that are more liberal based on a compact and contiguous formula. There are no utopias. Nothing will be perfect and frankly, nothing created by man ever is. But I
    believe Voter First is a big step in the right direction.

    For some reason the discussion left me thinking of the words of Wavy Gravy and his poem “Bozos on the Bus.” So, I will close with that poem and some commentary on it from Elizabeth Lesser:

    “We’re all bozos on the bus,
    so we might as well sit back
    and enjoy the ride.”
    -Wavy Gravy

    “I believe that we are all bozos on the bus, contrary to the self-assured image we work so hard to present to each other on a daily basis. We are all half-baked experiments-mistake-prone beings, born without an instruction book into a complex world. None of us are models of perfect behavior: We have all betrayed and been betrayed; we’ve been known to be egotistical, unreliable, lethargic, and stingy; and each one of us has, at times, awakened in the middle of the night worrying about everything from money to kids to terrorism to wrinkled skin and receding hairlines. In other words, we’re all bozos on the bus.

    This, in my opinion, is cause for celebration. If we’re all bozos, then for God’s sakes, we can put down the burden of pretense and get on with being bozos. We can approach the problems that visit bozo-type beings without the usual embarrassment and resistance. It is so much more effective to work on our rough edges with a light and forgiving heart. Imagine how freeing it would be to take a more compassionate and comedic view of the human condition – not as a way to deny our defects-but as a way of welcoming them as part of the standard human operating system. Every single person on this
    bus called Earth hurts; it’s when we have shame about our failings that hurt turns into suffering. In our shame, we feel an outcast, as if there is another bus somewhere, rolling along on a smooth road. Its passengers are all thin, healthy, happy, well-dressed and well-liked people who belong to harmonious families, hold jobs that never bore or aggravate them, and never do mean things, or goofy things like forget where they parked their car, lose their wallet, or say something totally inappropriate. We long to be on that bus with the other normal people.

    But we are on the bus that says BOZO on the front, and we worry that we may be the only passenger on board. This is the illusion that so many of us labor under- that we’re all alone in our weirdness and our uncertainty; that we may be the most lost person on the highway. Of course we don’t always feel like this. Sometimes a wave of self-forgiveness washes over us, and suddenly we’re connected to our fellow humans; suddenly we belong.

    It is wonderful to take your place on the bus with the other bozos. It may be the first step to enlightenment to understand with all of your brain cells that the other bus – that sleek bus with the cool people who know where they are going – is also filled with bozos – bozos in drag; bozos with a secret. When we see clearly that every single human being, regardless of fame or fortune or age or brains or beauty, shares the same ordinary foibles, a strange thing happens. We begin to cheer up, to loosen up, and we become as buoyant as those people we imagined on the other bus. As we rumble
    along the potholed road, lost as ever, through the valleys and over the hills, we find ourselves among friends. We sit back, and enjoy the ride.”

    Elizabeth Lesser

  3. Linda Sutton says

    Hey–I LOVE the Arnold cartoon. It really does put into perspective the BIG BOSS nature of his current manipulation of the proposition process.

    We all recall his disastrous first foray in this area back in ’05. I’m looking at my “Governor,You Can’t Shut Me Up! No on 74,75,76″ button now and recall walking the hills in my precinct to let my neighbors know how bad these were.

    The redistricting then was Prop 77. And there was a massive mobilization against ALL of these. This time, however, the Gov has tried to keep himself under the radar, so to speak. His lackeys have gotten out of the gate way early and made serious inroads into the Red Zones, where Democrats feel neglected and think this will somehow rescue them from their location choice.

    I sympathize with their plight, but ask that they look at the WHOLE CALIFORNIA picture and understand that this is NOT about FAIRNESS, it is NOT about INDEPENDENCE, it is NOT about NON-PARTISANSHIP (I don’t believe that is possible in politics). It IS about the Republican takeover of the redistricting process…and Democrats’ complicity in allowing it to happen. The Republicans WILL NOT WIN this seizure of power without Democratic help. I urge those of you who are thinking this will somehow be “better” to study this more.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *