Daniel Weintraub: Governor gets another shot at redistricting reform

The greatest irony in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's special election debacle in 2005 was that, while he was accused of veering to the conservative right, the governor was backing an initiative that was bitterly opposed by the national leadership of the Republican Party and a majority of Republican members in California's congressional delegation.

That measure – Proposition 77 – would have taken the power to draw political district boundaries away from the Legislature and future governors, and given it to an independent commission.

The change would have ended the most egregious conflict of interest at the heart of our electoral system – a power that lets politicians pick their voters rather than the other way around. And that's exactly why so many politicians from both major parties opposed it.

Schwarzenegger thus found himself in a political crossfire. Even as Democratic legislators were telling their constituents that the governor's measure was a partisan power grab, Republican politicians were telling their voters the same thing. Somehow, the governor's reform was going to help Republicans and Democrats steal elections at the same time.

That message made no sense. But skillfully delivered, it was a powerful one. Their campaign – coupled with a $100 million effort funded by the public employee labor unions – played into voter distrust of the governor and helped sink all of his ballot measures, including Proposition 77.

But Schwarzenegger's goal was noble: To end a system controlled by political insiders that has helped polarize the Legislature into warring camps of liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. With district lines drawn to create safe seats for members of both parties, candidates for the Legislature merely have to win over their party faithful in the primaries and then glide to an easy general election in the fall. Almost no one serving in the Legislature today has ever had to run a campaign appealing to independent voters or independent-minded members of the opposite party.

Now the governor is trying again. After waiting in vain for two years for legislative leaders to make good on their pledge to reform the system themselves, he has endorsed a new measure drafted by a coalition of political reform groups and, possibly, headed for the November ballot.

The new proposal would create a 14-member citizens commission to draw district lines for the state Legislature and the Board of Equalization, while leaving with the Legislature the job of drawing congressional boundaries. The drafters made that compromise to avoid opposition from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, who would have raised and spent millions of dollars to kill a measure that in any way threatened her base of power.

The commission would include five Democrats, five Republicans and four people who are members of neither major party. The applicants would be screened by the state auditor and could have no recent ties to either major party or to legislative or federal officeholders. As part of the winnowing process, legislative leaders would be allowed to strike from the list applicants they believe would be biased for the other side.

Once selected, the commissioners would be required to comply with the federal Voting Rights Act and draw boundaries respecting the geographic integrity of cities, counties and neighborhoods. Those lines could also reflect what are known as "communities of interest" – a nebulous term of political art that leaves open the possibility for mischief if the commission's members are unduly influenced by party activists or interest groups.

The fate of this measure, like similar proposals that have gone before it, will ultimately depend on the level of opposition it attracts from the political parties – especially the Democrats. Nationwide experience has shown that no attempt to change the way district lines are drawn can succeed at the ballot box if it is strongly opposed by a state's majority party.

But if the Democrats (and the Republicans) are divided, and they and their interest-group allies stand down, this proposal might have a chance. Last week, it picked up the endorsement of a new reform group known as California Forward that is led by a moderate Democrat, former Rep. Leon Panetta of Monterey, and a moderate Republican, Orange County businessman Thomas McKernan.

Both men acknowledged that reforming the way political lines are drawn would be only the first step in ending the dysfunction in Sacramento. But Panetta said he hoped it would reduce the "trench warfare" that now substitutes for genuine debate. And McKernan said it would force at least a handful of legislators to respond to the political center, where many voters are stranded without representation.

Panetta, who served as then- President Bill Clinton's chief of staff after leaving Congress, said his Central Coast district was competitive when he was first elected.

"That made me a better representative," he said, "because I had to deal with constituents on all sides."

Imagine that.

The measure Panetta and McKernan are backing is flawed. But it would probably be better than the status quo. If you get a chance, sign the petition to put it on the ballot. That would at least give Californians a chance to debate the issue one more time in November.

About the writer:

• Call The Bee's Daniel Weintraub, (916) 321-1914. Readers can see his California Insider political blog at CapitolAlert.com.