Los Angeles Times

State’s long road to fairly drawn districts

- JOHN MYERS john.myers@latimes.com Twitter: @johnmyers

SACRAMENTO — As the U.S. Supreme Court considers its role in forcing states to draw fair political maps, California­ns know well how the process can be manipulate­d. They saw it happen over and over again, for decades.

But an argument can be made that California rocketed from worst to first in making redistrict­ing fairer. Few believe that more strongly than former Gov. Arnold Schwarzene­gger.

“I say it is the time to say, ‘Hasta la vista’ to gerrymande­ring,” he said at an event outside the Supreme Court in Washington last week as the justices considered the battle over the district lines drawn in Wisconsin.

Much of California’s modern political history had been shaped by battles over political boundaries fought over a 60-year span that parallels the state’s transforma­tion into the country’s most populous and diverse. Unpreceden­ted social and cultural change fueled the political gamesmansh­ip, but the real prize was clout in Washington.

“It was all driven by those seats in Congress,” said Tony Quinn, a longtime Republican political consultant and redistrict­ing expert.

California’s growing population resulted in an astounding 29 new seats in the House of Representa­tives in just the last half of the 20th century. Quinn cites 1951 as “the first modern gerrymande­r” in California, as then-dominant Republican­s intentiona­lly skewed the once-adecade reshaping of legislativ­e and congressio­nal boundaries. When the map making was over, they held a majority of the state’s congressio­nal districts.

Those maps slowed, but didn’t block, the growing clout of Democrats. In 1961’s redrawing, newly empowered Democrats exacted revenge and skewed the maps in their favor.

By the time Ronald Reagan was governor and California had 20 million people, each redrawing of maps led to open political warfare. Reagan vetoed redistrict­ing plans sent to his desk in 1971, calling one version “a mockery of good government.” The result was a legal stalemate. The task of drawing legislativ­e and congressio­nal boundaries was left to the California Supreme Court. The courts again intervened in 1991, when then-Gov. Pete Wilson rejected maps drawn by Democratic legislator­s.

Voters were pulled into the 1982 fight when Republican­s — accusing Democrats of blatantly attempting to fill the new California congressio­nal seats with their own party’s lawmakers — tried to overturn maps through a statewide referendum. The only time the two parties worked together, when they jointly signed off on new legislativ­e and congressio­nal seats in 2001, it was to protect incumbents. The message by then was clear: The redistrict­ing process was a mess. Multiple efforts to strip the Legislatur­e of the job failed before voters approved Propositio­n 11 in 2008. That created the California Citizens Redistrict­ing Commission to draw state legislativ­e districts, and in 2010 voters handed over congressio­nal district map drawing to the panel.

Not that it’s been easy ever since. The citizens panel struggled with how to define “communitie­s” that should be kept in single districts. And the Schwarzene­gger-led supporters routinely over-promised how many competitiv­e political races would result from reasonably drawn maps.

Even so, California’s commission-drawn maps won praise for being thoughtful and transparen­t — a far cry from the state’s ugly history of political power brokers divvying up cities, counties and voters behind closed doors.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States