Will a Jury-rig Prevent Gerrymandering?
October 28, 2005
I f you’re like me, your mailbox is starting to fill up with slick campaign brochures. The endless political ads on TV are also starting to get tiring.
So you may be wondering: “Why are we spending millions of dollars on an unnecessary special election?” These public funds should be spent on education, transportation, housing and health care. But still, if you’re like me, you’ll be sure to vote, because there is too much at stake to sit this election out.
Take the redistricting measure, Prop. 77. It would rewrite the rules governing the drawing of political districts for members of Congress and the state legislature.
As the consultant to the Asian Pacific American Legal Center (APALC) during the last reapportionment process, I can tell you that the proponents are selling Prop. 77 as reform, but that’s a smokescreen. Redistricting is about power, and the backers of Prop. 77 want to change the state constitution to get more power for themselves, even at the expense of our community.
There’s no doubt in my mind that the system for drawing political districts should change. But respected reform organizations – the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, the League of Women Voters and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund are calling Prop 77 “harmful and misguided.”
Why? Because Prop. 77 turns the power of drawing political districts over to three unelected retired judges who don’t reflect California’s diversity and therefore, cannot be expected to fairly represent the interest of 37 million Californians. This process would become more exclusive than inclusive.
The chances are very slim that an APA would be selected to serve on the three-member panel. California has very few APA judges in comparison to our overall population. A recent survey identifies only 25 APA surnames among the 1,200 retired judges in California –– only 2% of the total. Yet the APA population in California is over 12%.
Under Prop. 77, whatever these three judges decide will take effect immediately. Voters lose their right to challenge new district lines before they go into effect. That’s an important protection we shouldn’t sacrifice just to cater to one party’s political agenda.
As Stewart Kwoh, executive director of APALC stated, Prop. 77 is just not fair to the fast-growing APA community because it uses old data, numbers from the 2000 census. That means anyone who has come to California since the census was taken, including thousands of immigrants, would not be counted when the new lines are drawn.
Prop. 77 would also eliminate protections that keep APA communities together. During the last round of redistricting, activists from our community worked to keep traditional APA neighborhoods from being divided into different districts, which would have diluted our political influence.
No districts are perfect, but APA representation in the state legislature grew substantially after the last round of redistricting. We had no APA representatives for 12 years in the state legislature until 1996! Today there are nine California lawmakers, and they have formed a permanent Asian Pacific Islander Legislative Caucus.
Some of the accomplishments of the Caucus include an annual legislative summit to voice community concerns directly to the legislature and administration; passing a bill to establish an Asian Pacific State Commission; and developing an Asian Legislative Caucus Institute to help politically empower the APA communities and train future political candidates.
As the number of caucus APA members has grown, so has their influence. Assembly Member Judy Chu chairs the powerful Assembly Appropriations Committee, which considers every bill’s fiscal impact on the state. Assembly Member Carol Liu chairs the Higher Education Committee, while Assembly Member Wilma Chan chairs the Health Committee. Freshman member Alberto Torrico oversees the committee that deals with Social Security and Assembly Member Leland Yee serves as the Speaker pro Tem, presiding over the Assembly’s daily floor sessions.
So why should we change the rules now, when this community’s political clout is greater than ever?
Why should we give up our ability to hold the people who draw political districts accountable?
Why should we give up our ability to influence the existing process through community participation?
The simple answer: We shouldn’t.
This is why it is vital for every APA voter to vote on Election Day to defeat this measure.
While I may not like this special election, or that my mailbox is filling up with political ads, I have a responsibility to participate. And that’s just what I plan to do, once I get through all this mail.
Final installment of assembly members’ report cards will return Nov. 10.
Comments
Got something to say?