Prop. 77 – Redistricting. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.
- Amends process for redistricting California’s Senate, Assembly, Congressional and Board of Equalization districts.
- Requires panel of three retired judges, selected by legislative leaders, to adopt new redistricting plan if measure passes and after each national census.
- Panel must consider legislative, public comments/hold public hearings.
- Redistricting plan effective when adopted by panel and filed with Secretary of State; governs next statewide primary/general elections even if voters reject plan.
- If voters reject redistricting plan, process repeats, but offi cials elected under rejected plan serve full terms.
- Allows 45 days to seek judicial review of adopted redistricting plan.
My Vote: Yes.
Currently district boundaries are drawn up by the people who have the most vested interest in the matter, the people who represent those districts. No politician on either side of the aisle would be willing to make their district more fair at the risk of reducing their chance of reelection. The Wall Street Journal (the only newspaper worth reading and actually paying for) made a great point March 11, 2005: “California lawmakers are so adept at designing their own districts that of the 153 seats—80 Assembly, 20 state Senate, 53 Congressional—theoretically up for grabs last November (2004), not a single one switched parties.” To me, taking this process out of the hands of politicians with a clear conflict of interest and letting the people approve the final disctricting plan is a good idea. If you want to see how messed up looking the districts are, check out these district maps.
