[EL] The COI-ness of California's Redistricting Commission

[Bruce Cain]

For those of you who have had your fill of "member" related issues, I
thought I would offer an observation on the eve
of the CRC releasing its preliminary maps.  I have occasionally tuned into
their meetings (which have all the excitement you would expect from
a group chosen by the state auditor), and noticed the frequent use of the
term "coi" which they pronounce like "coy."  When they use the term
they mean a short-hand for "community of interest," which has become their
primary consideration after equal population, contiguity and their version
of the VRA.
But ironically "coi" in the election law world can stand for "conflict of
interest" and that applies as well since the commission was purportedly
scrubbed clean of political conflicts
of interest.

But "coy" also applies as the commission clearly hopes that the two senses
of "coi" will protect them from the inevitable onslaught of political
criticism
that will follow after the maps are released.  Looking through their
visualizations, their maps are a decent start, but a start only, and there
will be many throny and heated
issues to resolve in the coming weeks, particularly in the southern part of
the state.  Rumor has it that they will not release political data, trying
to keep people in a "coi"
framework.  But in fact this will be hard to do when others report the
political data.  How will they shield themselves from this information? This
will seem coy or perhaps disingenuous.
People will want to know how many of the seats will be competitive.  They
will want to know the prospects in the majority minority seats for minority
sucess. Perhaps
the commission should be a little less coy.

Bruce Cain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110609/c91a18e7/attachment.html>