Redistricting dogpile


The California Legislature's Democratic leadership is signing on to a lawsuit, filed by Attorney General Bill Lockyer, to prevent Prop 77 from appearing on the fall special election ballot.

At issue in the suit is the fact that the petitions circulated to qualify the redistricting initiative weren't the same as the version approved for circulation by the AG's office. The discrepancies, a total of 11 in number, are small but substantive. Two of the changes involve language that defines the amount of time allowed for certain key steps in the redistricting process (for selection of the panel of retired judges, and for challenging a judicial choice).

The combatants are weighing in on both sides. On ours, the issue is framed as one of expediency vs. integrity of process, with an eye toward the dangerous precedent that would be set if small substantive changes in ballot measures were allowed to slip through the cracks.

On the other side is a cross between "What's the big deal?" (see the Ted Costa quotes) and "We must listen to the voice of the people." The problem with the former argument is, of course, the precedent that could be set. And as for the latter: How can we know what the people's real voice says if we bait and switch them in even the smallest way?

Of course, Democratic lawmakers are jumping in because they smell blood, and are eager to see Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger face yet another high-profile public reversal. Will they get satisfaction? Well, that's a matter for the courts.

More elsewhere:
Redistricting initiative challenged in court (audio) (KQED)

Posted: Thu - July 14, 2005 at 08:24 AM   | Category:     |   |   | |


©
eXTReMe Tracker