It's the cynic in me. I'm assuming there will be so many challenges to the
process and the product that it won't be possible to get it done in time for
the opening of filing for office. I understand Doug's tendency to rely on
research and I respect that position. However, I've been at this political
stuff as a news reporter and consultant to have some instincts as to what
may lie ahead. Court intervention in the case of a deadlock is one thing and
appears to be fairly straight forward. But court intervention in the case of
multiple suits brought against the composition of the commission and the
actual product of its work is quite another. I supposed a deadlocked
commission and immediate court intervention might be the best chance for
getting things done in time for the opening of filing for the 2012 Primary
Election season. If the commission actually agrees on a series of maps that
are then challenged, it might be a whole different ball game. And then
there's the result of any referenda that may be filed. Doesn't the filing of
a referendum stay the implementation of the legislation? Or is this not
legislation?
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: <bruce@cain.berkeley.edu>
To: "Larry Levine" <larrylevine@earthlink.net>
Cc: "Douglas Johnson" <djohnson@ndcresearch.com>; "'James Fischer'"
<jfischer@swlaw.edu>; "'James Lacy'" <wewerlacy@aol.com>;
<jon.roland@constitution.org>; <JBoppjr@aol.com>;
<election-law@mailman.lls.edu>
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 2:37 PM
Subject: Re: [EL] California redistricting commission
Larry
Explain your logic...the deadlines for the Congress are quite early, and
leave plenty of time for a Court to intervene. Indeed, I am told that is
not an accident. And the court could simply take the disputed plan, and
implement it for the one election.
Bruce
On Mon, 8 Nov 2010, Larry Levine wrote:
Safe bet? Everyone will be running for state and federal legislative
seats
in California in 2012 in the districts as they exist right now.
Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas Johnson
To: 'James Fischer' ; 'James Lacy' ; jon.roland@constitution.org
Cc: JBoppjr@aol.com ; election-law@mailman.lls.edu
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 12:16 PM
Subject: Re: [EL] California redistricting commission
I realize this isn't the most serious of threads, and I've enjoyed the
banter, but just in case anyone's still following it, the Commission's
work will be overseen by the voters (the redistricting plans are
subject to referendum) and by the courts (the commission must comply
with the Federal Voting Rights Act).
In California, as in Florida, the question of how active the courts
will be in overseeing the implementation of state redistricting
criteria is an open question.
- Doug
Douglas Johnson
Fellow
Rose Institute of State and Local Government
Claremont McKenna College
o 909-621-8159
m 310-200-2058
douglas.johnson@cmc.edu
www.RoseReport.org
From: election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu
[mailto:election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu] On Behalf Of James
Fischer
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 11:18 AM
To: James Lacy; jon.roland@constitution.org
Cc: JBoppjr@aol.com; election-law@mailman.lls.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] California redistricting commission
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
From: election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu
[mailto:election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu] On Behalf Of James Lacy
Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 8:51 AM
To: jon.roland@constitution.org
Cc: JBoppjr@aol.com; election-law@mailman.lls.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] California redistricting commission
Then what we will need is an additional set of computers to program
and run the computers. The first set of commuters will need randomly
selected programmers to oversee the randomly selected programers who
program the first set of computers so that the work of randomly
selected panels overseeing the randomly elected panels is as random as
possible.
James V. Lacy
Confidentiality applies
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 8, 2010, at 7:22 AM, Jon Roland <jon.roland@constitution.org>
wrote:
On 11/08/2010 08:58 AM, JBoppjr@aol.com wrote:
It will be interesting to see how Jon's promotion of
random selection works out when the Calif redistricting
comm is randomly selected. I wonder what are the efforts
leading up to that to try to manipulate the process.
I got a report, as yet unconfirmed, that the framers of
that reform got the idea from reading my stuff. Of course,
if any process can be manipulated it will be. It had
better be supervised by a grand jury for execution of the
selection.
Randomly selected panels need to supervise the selection
of other randomly selected panels. It is too important not
to have a lot of independent people watching.
That still leaves the question of how computer mapping
software is used in drawing the maps. If they do it right
they will not attempt to do things like protect
incumbents. Better to have little if any human input into
the drawing. Let the computer do it.
-- Jon
----------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society http://constitution.org
2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322 Austin, TX 78757
512/299-5001 jon.roland@constitution.org
----------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law
____________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law
_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law