Our Issues – Election Reform
In this section:
Current Redistricting Bills and Initiatives
Redistricting News
About Redistricting
Instant Runoff Voting / Ranked Choice Voting
Voter Owned Elections / Clean Money Elections
Initiative Reform
CalVEC organizations are working on many different election reform issues. As with all of our issues, the policies and issues outlined on this page do not reflect the positions of all CalVEC members.
Current Redistricting Bills and Initiatives:
A number of redistricting reform Bills and Initiatives and been introduced. The following is a list.
Click here for a redistricting coalition letter on ACA 1 and ACA 4.
Click here for a comparison chart of the four Legislative bills.
Click here for a comparison chart of the major proposals.
Bills:
ACA 1 (Price, Nunez)- The California Constitution requires the Legislature, in the year following the year in which the federal census is taken at the beginning of each decade, to adjust the boundary lines of the Senate, Assembly, congressional, and State Board of Equalization districts in accordance with specified standards. This measure would assign the responsibility for adjusting boundary lines of Senate, Assembly, congressional, and State Board of Equalization districts to a commission that consists of the 9 public members of the Milton Marks "Little Hoover" Commission on California State Government Organization and Economy, subject to specified conditions. It would require the Legislature to establish, by statute, procedures to ensure compliance with specified requirements for membership on the commission.
ACA 4 (Villines) - The California Constitution requires the Legislature, in the year following the year in which the national census is taken at the beginning of each decade, to adjust the boundary lines of the senatorial, Assembly, congressional, and Board of Equalization districts in conformance with specified standards. This measure would repeal these provisions and instead require the Independent Citizens' Commission on Redistricting, to be comprised of an unspecified membership, on or before February 1 of the year following the year in which the national census is taken, to adjust the boundary lines of the Senate, Assembly, congressional, and State Board of Equalization districts in conformance with certain standards, prioritized in a certain order consistent with specified federal law.
SCA 9 (Ashburn) - Existing provisions of the California Constitution prohibit a Senator from serving more than 2 terms of 4 years each and a Member of the Assembly from serving more than 3 terms of 2 years each. This measure would instead allow a person, during his or her lifetime, to serve not more than 12 years in the Senate, the Assembly, or both, in any combination of terms, except that a Senator or Member of the Assembly in office on the effective date of this measure, whether or not he or she has previously served in the other house, would be eligible to serve a total of 12 consecutive years in the house in which he or she is currently serving. This bill contains other related provisions and other existing laws.
SCA 10 (Lowenthal) - The California Constitution requires the Legislature, in the year following the year in which the federal census is taken at the beginning of each decade, to adjust the boundary lines of the state Senate, Assembly, congressional, and State Board of Equalization districts in accordance with specified standards. This measure would delete these requirements, and would instead create a procedure for the appointment of an independent redistricting commission, composed of 11 members, that would be charged with establishing Senate, Assembly, congressional, and State Board of Equalization districts in accordance with designated goals prioritized in a specified order. This bill contains other related provisions. Click here for a SCA 10 fact sheet.
Initiatives Filed with the Secretary of State's Office:
1240: Redistricting. Constitutional Amendment (Fadem Initiative) - Amends process for redistricting California's Legislature, Board of Equalization, and U.S. House of Representative districts. Establishes Citizens Redistricting Commission comprised of 11 qualified registered voters formed by the Secretary of State pursuant to detailed selection process. Requires Commission to submit redistricting plan, consistent with specified criteria, after each national census. Requires Commission to hold public hearings and receive public input before finalizing the redistricting plan. Requires legal challenges to be made within 45 days of certification of plan. Subjects adopted plan to challenge by referendum. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Potentially increased redistricting costs every ten years-probably of less than $1 million. Any such costs would be accommodated within the Legislature's existing budget.
1241: Redistricting. Constitutional Amendment - Amends process for redistricting California's Legislature, Board of Equalization, and U.S. House of Representative districts. Establishes Citizens Redistricting Commission comprised of 11 qualified registered voters formed by the Secretary of State pursuant to detailed selection process. Requires Commission to submit redistricting plan, consistent with specified criteria, after each national census. Requires Commission to hold public hearings and receive public input before finalizing the redistricting plan. Requires legal challenges to be made within 45 days of certification of plan. Subjects adopted plan to challenge by referendum. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local governments: Potential reduction in redistricting expenses of a few hundred thousand dollars every ten years.
Redistricting News
Assembly Democrats Unveil Independent Commission Redistricting Proposal
February 1, 2007: Speaker Fabian Nunez has taken a leadership role in crafting redistricting reform legislation. After three years of promises, the legislature has announced publicly and unequivocally its support to pass a redistricting reform bill that will take the self interest and extreme politics out of district line drawing.
The Speaker and Asm. Curren D. Price, Jr. (Chair of the Assembly Elections Committee) announced the principles of the reform bill they are putting together:
“The current system is indefensible,” said Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez. “Legislators should not cherry-pick their votes. But changing that is easier said than done. Redistricting is complex. Mapmakers need to consider the Voting Rights Act, communities of interest, boundaries, and dozens of other issues.”
“Fairness and diversity are the cornerstones of our proposal,” Assemblymember Price said. “We are committed to making this happen this year.”
Governor Schwarzenegger Reaffirms Call for Independent Redistricting Commission
January 9, 2007: Speaking before a packed joint session of the state legislature on January 9, Governor Schwarzenegger reaffirmed his call for an independent redistricting commission.
From his speech:
“And one last item. And I don't want to be a pest about this. I again this year raise the issue of political reform. California politics is a centrifuge that forces voters and policies and parties away from the center. The centrifuge is powered by the way our legislative and congressional districts are drawn. Now we all know what they're talking about here. They are drawn to eliminate party competition. They work against the mainstream, which is where most Californians are. Currently, ours is not a system of the people, by the people and for the people. It is a system of the parties, by the parties and for the parties.
In the past three election cycles, only 4 out of California's 459 congressional and legislative seats changed hands. There was more turnover in the Hapsburg monarchy than in the California legislature.
I ask you to work with me to create an independent commission to fix a political system that has become petrified by self-interest. California certainly is not alone in this. No state legislature in U.S. history has put a redistricting reform on the ballot. California though can be the first, we can be the leader.
You will not benefit politically from this. I will not benefit politically from this. But the people will benefit from this. I ask you to work with me to do the right thing for the people.”
California Common Cause is working with Governor Schwarzenegger to create an independent commission to draw California's congressional and legislative districts.
Click here for the Governor's redistricting agenda.
Click here for the Governor's full state of the state address.
Reform Groups Join Governor Schwarzenegger to Call for Redistricting Reform! !
Independent Citizens Commission Proposed to Draw the State's Legislative and Congressional Districts
December 5, 2006: A broad, bipartisan coalition of organizations joined Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger at a press conference at the state Capitol this week to introduce a proposal to create an independent commission to draw California's legislative and congressional districts. Representatives from the Voices of Reform, League of Women Voters of California, AARP, California Common Cause, Rose Institute, Center for Governmental Studies, and others all stood with the governor in calling for an end to gerrymandering in California.
Currently, California's state legislators have the power and responsibility to draw state's political districts. Politicians have used this power to their own benefit, rigging districts to ensure that incumbents from both parties get re-elected and that voters don't have meaningful choices. For example, not one of the 200 state legislative races in the 2004 and 2006 elections saw a seat change party control.
In drawing these districts to suit their own ends, politicians have carved up communities and cities across the state, weakening the ability of California communities to hold their elected officials accountable, the lynchpin of any representative democracy.
Under the proposal, the commission would be selected at random from a pool of qualified citizens vetted by local elections officials to ensure independence, partisan balance, and diversity among its 11 members. The commission would draw districts to comply with the constitution and Voting Rights Act, preserve communities of interest, and to bar the consideration of incumbent politicians' addresses, among other criteria. Click here to see the full proposal.
Last year, redistricting reform bill SCA3 (Lowenthal) passed the Senate, only to die on its way to the Assembly. This week's proposal was a step to ensure that we move forward on this important issue, not backwards.
About Redistricting
"Redistricting" refers to the process by which state legislatures (or a designated independent body) uses census data to redraw the lines and boundaries of districts within a state. The people living in each district elect their representatives to positions at all levels of government - from local school boards, wards and city councils to state legislatures and the United States House of Representatives.
Redistricting takes place every ten years, soon after data from the census, or population count, is received. For the 2000-2010 year period, redistricting took place after April 1, 2001, when the Census Bureau released the data collected from the 2000 National Census. The key purpose of this once a decade redistricting process is to use the latest census data to draw districts that are equal in population.
In California, the state legislature (our state Assembly and Senate members) have the power to draw the district lines for the U.S. House Representatives from California, the State Senate, the State Assembly, and the Board of Equalization.
Recent redistricting reforms have been proposed to take the power of redistricting from state lawmakers and place it in the hands of an independent redistricting commission. CalVEC members have produced two model acts which propose different ways which this commission might be selected, the criteria it might follow, and the hearing process it might implement.
Independent Redistricting Commission Model A
Created with input from the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, California Common Cause, Center for Governmental Studies, Demos, League of Women Voters of California, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Independent Redistricting Commission Model B
Created by Asian Pacific American Legal Center, California Common Cause, and Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund.
Instant Runoff Voting / Ranked Choice Voting
Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) and a related system, Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) are two alternatives to the more widely implemented primary and general election systems. In an IRV election, voters rank their top choices for candidates (for instance, in San Francisco, voters ranked their top three for their city council seat).
If a candidate wins a majority of first choice votes, that candidate is declared a winner. If no candidate wins more than 50% of the first choice votes, the lowest ranked candidate is eliminated and the second choice votes of their voters are transferred to the other candidates. If this distribution produces a candidate with a majority of first and second choice votes, that candidate is declared the winner. If not, the process of transferring second choice and then third choice votes continues until one person ends up with a majority. While the process sounds complicated, it’s one that can be automated by the election officials.
Voters vote in one IRV election instead of a primary and a general (or runoff) election. When they vote, they are ranking their top three choices for each seat. Advocates assert that election administration costs are significantly reduced, and voters can vote their conscience, even if that means casting a vote for a minor party candidate or a less popular candidate.
FairVote website
Voter Owned Elections / Clean Money Elections
"Clean Money" or "Voter-owned" elections are voluntary systems of publicly-funded elections where candidates who demonstrate a broad base of support can qualify for public funds to finance their elections and refuse private contributions. Arizona, Maine, Connecticut and various cities have already enacted publicly-financed elections. In California, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, San Jose, Sacramento and other cities have or are exploring public-finance for city elections.
California Clean Money Campaign
Initiative Reform
California Common Cause initiative reform recommendations.
League of Women Voters Initiative reform recommendations
|
