|
Related to the Hispanic article. David "There is no virtue in compulsory government charity, and there is no virtue in advocating it. A politician who portrays himself as "caring" and "sensitive" because he wants to expand the government's charitable programs is merely saying that he's willing to try to do good with other people's money. Well, who isn't? And a voter who takes pride in supporting such programs is telling us that he'll do good with his own money -- if a gun is held to his head."--P. J. O'Rourke -------- Original Message --------
How the Redistricting Commission Screwed LatinosBy Tony Quinn
Political Commentator and Former
Legislative Staffer
Thu, June 16th, 2011
“These maps are a worst case scenario for the Latino
community. The lines drawn by the Commission gerrymander Los
Angeles Latinos into a district with the millionaires of
Beverly Hills and Pacific Palisades. These lines would
disenfranchise Latinos by denying them a fair voice in the
democratic process.†So says Arturo Vargas, redistricting
expert with the National Association of Latino Elected and
Appointed Officials.
What is this all about? Did the Arizona Legislature sneak
into California and draw the new district lines released by
the Redistricting Commission last week? Aren’t Latinos
responsible for 90 percent of the net growth in California
over the past decade? Is it possible a nonpartisan citizens
commission could treat them so badly?
Well, Mr. Vargas is absolutely correct; California Latinos
take it in the shorts in the Commission’s draft plans.
In assessing the impact of redistricting plans on minority
groups, the courts tell us to look at purpose and effect. Is
the purpose to deny fair representation? Is that the effect?
I will not go so far as to say that the Commission has been
taken over by the Arizona Legislature. Their purpose was not
to disenfranchise Latinos. But that is the effect. And the
reason for this is not nefarious motives on the Commission’s
part. It is the inexperience and lack of knowledge of
California’s demographic history on the part of the
Commission’s staff.
Exhibit one is San Jose. Back in the 1980s when I was a
Republican legislative redistricting staffer, Latino groups
came to us and said, unite all the historic Latino
neighborhoods in east and south San Jose and give us a
district we can win. Working together, the Democratic and
Republican staffers ignored their request, slicing and dicing
the neighborhoods. It was nothing personal, only business and
we knew what we were doing. This Commission apparently did it
without knowing it.
In 1991, the Supreme Court masters did create the long
overdue San Jose Latino district, and said in their report
that is what they were doing. It is today one of only two
Latino-held legislative seats in the Bay Area. But in the
Commission plan, this 20-year Latino district, now represented
by Assembly Member Nora Campos, simply disappears. The
heaviest Latino neighborhoods are in an Asian district going
north, and one to the west, while an Asian piece of the
district is placed in a Salinas Latino district. Go figure.
Then we have the overlapping Senate districts. A big piece
of Latino and Asian San Jose goes off to a district in
Modesto. This district, successor to the existing 12th Senate
District is a Voting Rights Act district, including the Voting
Rights Act counties of Monterey and Merced. You may not
regress Latino electoral opportunities in VRA counties, but
the Commission managed to do just that.
Because Monterey and Merced Counties are in the same
district today, the Commission apparently felt they needed to
keep them together in its plan, even though that creates a
crazy gerrymandered monstrosity that runs from the Salinas
Valley to Modesto, and violates the state constitution.
That monstrosity was not drawn in 2001 to enhance Latino
opportunities; it was part of a political deal between Anglo
Democratic legislators. Once again the Supreme Court masters
got it right; in 1991 they noted that putting Merced and
Monterey together would dilute Latino opportunities because
Merced is full of “Valley-crats,†conservative Democrats,
who will not vote for a coastal Latino candidate. And we saw
that exact result in 2010, when Republican Anthony Cannella of
Ceres beat Democrat Anna Caballero of Salinas in what should
have been a Democratic win.
So how to resolve this? Easy. Restore the historic Latino
Assembly district in San Jose and connect it to the heavily
Latino Assembly district covering Salinas. That creates a sure
Latino State Senate district, which would be the first one in
the Bay Area.
All of the southern Bay Area needs serious redrawing
because the chopping up does not stop with ethnic
neighborhoods. For 60 years, Santa Cruz has been united with
the Silicon Valley area of Santa Clara County, which are
connected via Highway 17. But under the Commission plan, Santa
Cruz runs down the coast in a Senate district that goes all
the way to Lompoc. The district is unconstitutional since it
violates both contiguity and compactness, held
together by Big Sur, one hundred miles of coastline with no
people, not to mention no communities of interest. People in
Santa Cruz work and shop in Silicon Valley, not in Lompoc.
Should not the Commission look at where people live and work
in forming these districts?
Exhibit two is Los Angeles. Mr. Vargas complains rightly
about the Commission’s preference for uniting wealthy areas
with working class area in ways that dilute Latino
opportunities. They do this all throughout Southern
California, and a good example is the new Congressional
District that runs from Pasadena to Diamond Bar, communities
that have never been in the same district. The incumbent in
this area is Congresswoman Judy Chu, an Asian American, who
took the former Latino seat held by Hilda Solis when she
became Labor Secretary in 2009.
The district was historically Latino and Chu won it fair
and square in 2009 and held it easily in 2010. But the
Commission decided it needed to destroy the Latino base of
this seat and unite disparate Asian American communities into
a crazy quilt gerrymander that runs around Latino
neighborhoods. What criteria tells this Commission it must
dilute Latinos because a Latino district has an Asian American
incumbent?
Perhaps most disturbing in Los Angeles is the lack of any
sense of history in forming the Latino districts. The
Commission is not supposed to consider incumbent homes in
drawing the districts, but they should consider the historical
minority areas. Their plan combines the current districts held
by Congresswoman Lucille Roybal Allard and Congressman Xavier
Becerra. These are senior members of Congress, so by combining
their districts not only do they weaken California’s clout
in Congress, they gravely weaken Latino clout in Congress.
Does that make any sense?
Congresswoman Roybal Allard is the daughter of the
legendary Latino political pioneer Edward Roybal, the first
Latino elected to major office in Los Angeles County, more
than sixty years ago, and the first California Latino member
of Congress, elected in 1962. The Almanac of American Politics
describes this district very well: “An emblem of the entry
level Latino neighborhoods of the nation’s second largest
city, the places where many immigrants come to find a cheap
place to live, doubling and tripling up with other
families.†The district also includes Boyle Heights, “once
an entry level of Irish and Jewish immigrants.â€
This embryo from which grew Latino political power in
Southern California no longer exists in the Commission’s
plan. It is no wonder that one analysis circulating these days
shows that number of heavily Latino “majority-minorityâ€
legislative and Congressional districts actually decreases
under their plan. That is an incredible accomplishment, and
one this Commission should not be proud of.
http://foxandhoundsdaily.com/blog/tony-quinn/9102-how-redistricting-commission-screwed-latinos __._,_.___
Please give us your town state and zip code when you post a message. Also please avoid personal attacks and policy pronouncements and try to stick to what you have heard or read in your neighborhood or in a publication regarding opinion in this election. Your email settings:
Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe __,_._,___
-- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org |
Title: ORourke54.htm
