UCLA law Professor Daniel Lowenstein is heading a committee
opposing Proposition 77, which would take redistricting out of the
hands of California legislators and give the responsibility to a
panel of independent judges.
The committee more than tripled its funds when it received a
donation of $4 million from Hollywood producer Stephen L. Bing.
Lowenstein signed the ballot argument against the proposition,
which states that the measure would give too much power to
unaccountable judges and that politicians would still select the
judges.
Proponents of the proposition say that the new form of
redistricting would prevent gerrymandering, the ability of partisan
politicians to draw up the boundaries of their voting districts to
their advantage.
The committee will put the money from the donation toward
television, mail and possibly radio advertising campaigns.
“Since I’ve been at UCLA, redistricting has been my
primary interest,” Lowenstein said.
Lowenstein, former head of the California Fair Political
Practices Commission, is running a non-partisan campaign against
Proposition 77.
“I think its my role as a professor at UCLA to look at
things in a more disinterested way,” he said.
There are two other major campaigns opposing the proposition,
one Republican and one Democrat.
Democrats make up the primary opposition, although just how much
their legislative majority would be affected by the passage of
Proposition 77 is unclear, said UCLA political science Professor
Barbara Sinclair.
California’s division into voting districts is currently
decided by the state legislature, in which Democrats traditionally
hold the majority.
Proposition 77 would amend California’s constitution,
giving this responsibility to a panel of judges.
A group of 24 retired judges who have not held a partisan office
or changed political affiliation would be randomly selected from
the pool of judges that meet the criteria.
The senate and assembly majority and minority leaders would then
each choose three judges with party affiliation other than their
own.
From these 12, three judges will be randomly selected to serve
on the panel for redistricting.
“You’ve got to say that (Democrats) wouldn’t
want the additional uncertainty,” Sinclair said. “But
there’s nothing to say that it would produce more
Republicans.”
Opponents to Proposition 77 question the decision to take
redistricting power away from politicians that were voted into
office.
“You’re turning it over to an un-elected
commission,” Sinclair said. “The argument would be that
it’s simply a more covert way of partisan
redistricting.”
Ted Costa, head of People’s Advocate, a group supporting
the proposition, says that Proposition 77 takes partisanship into
account by the way in which the panel is chosen.
“The legislative leaders cannot nominate judges from their
own party,” Costa said. “Tell me one system that is
more fair than this system.”
Opponents also question the small panel size and the inability
of voters to reject a certain redistricting plan before it becomes
law.
“This is bad for the people of California, regardless of
whether you’re Republican or Democrat,” Lowenstein
said.