A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
February 22, 2005Press Release On RedistrictingWe've done the first-ever press release for the centrist coalition, and sent it to the wire services and newspapers in California and Texas. If you know of a media outlet that might be interested, please send it to them. I've also sent it to Common Cause, which has taken an active position in the California redistricting. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Centrists Propose Texas-California Compromise on Redistricting COLUMBUS, Ohio., Feb. 22 Political moderates meeting online in the first-ever Centrist Townhall proposed a Texas-California Compromise which would address redistricting in both states simultaneously. The Centrist Townhall is a project of the Centrist Coalition(http://centristcoalition.com), a grassroots organization of political moderates. "In California, Democrats currently have an advantage," said William Swann, Policy Director of the Centrist Coalition. "Non-partisan redistricting as proposed by Gov. Schwarzenegger might result in the loss of Democratic seats in Congress. In Texas, Republicans have carved out districts very favorable to their side. Non-partisan redistricting might help Democrats. The prospective losers in each state are likely to block non-partisan redistricting. The only fair way to do this is to work on both states at the same time." Under Gov. Schwarzenegger's plan, an independent panel of retired judges would redraw congressional and state legislative lines in time for the next round of elections. In Texas, a mid-decade partisan Congressional redistricting plan adopted in 2004 resulted in the defeat of four incumbent Democrats. The Texas districts are currently under court challenge. "Once the two largest states in terms of population adopt non-partisan redistricting, other states are sure to follow," Swann said. "If President Bush were to indicate support for non-partisan redistricting, its prospects would gain immensely in Texas. That would strengthen Gov. Schwarzenegger's hand in dealing with California's Democratic legislature. This would be a cost-free way for the President to demonstrate that he is a uniter." Contact: Rick Heller, Executive Director, Centrist Coalition Other blogs on Redistricting Posted by rickheller at February 22, 2005 12:40 PMComments
Well done! You may have a future in PR. Posted by: Jack (CommonSenseDesk) at February 22, 2005 02:17 PMNice job, Rick. Posted by: William Swann at February 22, 2005 02:30 PMVERY nicely done. And any politician who supports it can use it as evidence of support for the idea that he or she is a "uniter not a divider" and someone who looks for creativee ways to get movement going on an issue congress isn't interested in. It's a nice end-around. OTOH, it relies on Texans and Californians seeing eye-to-eye... Posted by: bk at February 22, 2005 02:35 PMWhile I appreciate the implied support, and I'm all for Texas to also have impartial redistricting, I'm curious why you accept the argument that redistricting in California will necessarily help Republicans. The evidence here is decidely mixed, and our Republicans are hardly in favor of the idea. My take is that Democratic incumbents are positioning it as a Republican power grab purely to protect their own skins, not because it will really impact national politics. Do you have evidence otherwise? Posted by: Dr. Ernie at February 22, 2005 03:06 PMI think that all incumbents, both Democrat and Republican, are likely to be anxious about redistricting--particularly if it's non-partisan, and they have no control over it. Given that the California districts were designed by Democrats to pack Republicans into a few safe districts,, redistricting would probably result in more Republicans total, but in the defeat of a several incumbents, including some Republicans. See http://www.sfcall.com/issues%202004/11.22.04/ll.23.04%20hill.htm http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-congress8feb08,0,4950889.story?coll=la-home-headlines Posted by: rickheller at February 22, 2005 03:23 PMHouse Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) has spoken with several Democratic governors in recent weeks about the possibility of revisiting their states' Congressional lines in response to the ongoing Republican-led redistricting in Georgia, according to informed party sources. More here. Posted by: Todd Pearson at February 22, 2005 03:28 PMA truly non-partisan effort in Texas would probably only shift one seat to the Dems. In a state that votes albout 60% Republican you will expect to get 60% of the seats. Texas has been geryymandered to favor the Dems for 30 years, it doesn't seem fair to want to do something now. If Republicans really wanted to gerrymander like the Dems before them, they could have squeezed out 2 more seats, but minority issues would have thrown that out. Posted by: anselm at February 23, 2005 03:59 PMAnselm, That's useful information. Thanks. Going to non-partisan redistricting in Texas would probably not be that great a sacrifice for Republicans. It would certainly not restore the status quo ante. All the more reason to do it. Posted by: rickheller at February 23, 2005 11:42 PMaren't a large numb er of states under consent decrees required to provide majority minority districts? how do these go about being repealed to enable non-partisan redistricting? or would there then be race constraints on nominees in certain districts (majority minority districts essentially have that now) Posted by: hey at February 25, 2005 01:18 AM |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|
