Talk:Props 2010/20/

From Michael Rubin:

Props 20 and 27 -- Redistricting -- (No on 20, Yes on 27):

When Prop.11 was on the Nov, ballot in 2008, we wrote “ Creating a redistricting process with unelected, unknown, faceless people chosen by a Kafka-esque process is moving away from accountability”. Unfortunately Prop 11 passed and now 2 years later, do you know the status of this alternative redistricting process? If you do, you’re ahead of us. In other words, our worst fears have been realized.

The Nov. 2010 ballot offers a clear choice as we consider the fiasco of Prop.11. Prop 20 extends Prop. 11 to the redistricting of the California congressional districts. Prop. 11 dealt only with Assembly, State Senate and Board of Equalization districts. On the other hand, Prop 27 eliminates the State Redistricting Commission set up by Prop. 11 and gives redistricting of Assembly, State Senate and Board of Equalization seats back to the legislature In addition, it limits the amount of money the legislature can spend on redistricting. It provides that voters can subject any redistricting plan of the legislature to the referendum process. It requires that all districts for the same office have the same number of voters. It mandates that the legislature make its own redistricting process more transparent; most notably by requiring 14 day advance public notice for each meeting dealing with redistricting.

The Green Party recommends a “no” vote on Prop. 20 and a “yes” vote on Prop. 27. We do note that the provisions of Prop, 27 are relatively modest considering the language in the finding and purpose section of Prop. 27. We also note an antagonism towards districts that have a majority of people of color. We do not agree with it and will be watching what happens if Prop. 27 passes. The Green Party continues to favor proportional representation as a real method for more choices and more participation.