Calblog

You really trust judges?

Isn't the lawlessness out in San Francisco, and the courts' enabling behavior, enough to make you think twice?

I don't trust politicians or judges. I probably trust judges less than politicians in general. (At least politicians are being honestly political.) However, if you talk to most Rs the 1990 reapportionment was pretty fair. Ds didn't much like it because for the first time in 30 years or so the Rs captured the assembly in '94. But it was pretty even. Granted the Special Masters were appointed by judges, but when it comes down to drawing the district you run in, perhaps we should be slow to let politicians do that. What you can do, is have each political party choose a special master, and a third be a party selected by both sides, and work it out that way, or something else. I'm by no means set on a method, I just think there must be a better way.

I'd support the Costa initiative, although it's hardly perfect. But I do agree with the Clam.

I'd much rather see a reapportionment jury, picked from voters at random with appropriate party-membership controls, with the resulting plan ratified by referendum.

Pay them $50K each for their time, with a $50K bonus if the subsequent referendum is approved.

But literally anything that isn't the legislature is better than what we have. Dart-throwing, for example.

Maybe someone could come up with a computer algorithm to draw prima facie boundaries. As safeguards against the risk of the machine going haywire, before the new boundaries take effect the existing Legislature can overturn the results by a 2/3 supermajority.

It would be nice if whoever's responsible for reapportionment could be utterly deprived of any information that tells how people who live in x neighborhood vote.

But I've seen reapportionment refrm fail so often at the polls in California that I just don't see it happening.

Please, California -- surprise me.

One also has to avoid the trap that the original Texas map fell into. Three federal judges took the 1990 map and juggled the boundaries and imposed the map when the legislature deadlocked.

Unfortunately, the 1990 map was a complete gerrymander, so the result from the judges in 2000 was also a gerrymander.

Of cource, when the Texas Republicans redid the map this year, their more balanced plan undid the old Democrat gerrymander, resulting in large seat gains, and the Democrats and their lackeys in the press cried foul.

The 90's maps, drafted by judges, led to a split in CA's U.S. House delegation, and with control of the Assembly flipping back and forth a couple of times.

The 90s maps were more based on geographic continuity than anything else.

I've got a link to Ted's site at the irish lass. They need 600,000 signatures by April 15th.

Please check out some relevant pages in the field of legal gambling age legal gambling age http://www.legal-gambling-age-best-internet-site.info/ hold em strategy codes hold em strategy codes http://www.hold-em-strategy-codes-4-you.info/ gambling ages gambling ages http://www.gambling-ages-best-internet-site.info/ official rules for texas hold em poker official rules for texas hold em poker http://www.official-rules-for-texas-hold-em-poker-4-win.info/ internet hold em strategy internet hold em strategy http://www.internet-hold-em-strategy-4-you.info/ texas hold em palm serial texas hold em palm serial http://www.texas-hold-em-palm-serial-best-winning-chances.info/ gambling in lousianna gambling in lousianna http://www.gambling-in-lousianna-best-internet-site.info/ ... Thanks!!!