Public Financing Needed Now More Than Ever
November, 2009
more...

Californians Favor Reform - Think Elections Should be Won, Not Bought
November, 2009
more...

Common Cause Calls for FPPC to Investigate Lobbyist Sex Scandal
October, 2009
more...

Atlanta mayoral runoff needs an ethics debate

Georgia's cities held municipal elections yesterday. We congratulate the winners and thank all candidates who stepped up for public service. You are the backbone of our representative democracy! Atlanta's mayoral race is headed to a runoff between Councilwoman Mary Norwood and former State Senator Kasim Reed. Common Cause Georgia strongly invites these two candidates to embrace our call for pay-to-play reform in City contracting. Public safety and financial responsibility are certainly important issues. However, we also need to rebuild trust, and signaling that the City is ready to depart from its patterns of cronyism in contracting would go a long way. City Council candidate Amir Farokhi (in the December runoff) has endorsed our pay-to play proposal. Common Cause will continue to build support for pay to play reform to be introduced when the new Council sits in January. To see the highlights of the Common Cause proposal: Pay-to-Play reforms. To read the full text: model legislation.

Brunswick House Party

Our house party in Brunswick drew over fifty people over the course of a sunny afternoon in western Maryland, as Common Cause sought to beef up membership all across the state. Special guests included Frederick County Commission President Jan Gardner and Delegate Rick Weldon.

A bill that all but eliminate the Electoral College and create a national popular vote in presidential elections is expected to reach the Massachusetts House before they recess in mid-November. The proposal, which has been passed in five states already, is supported by 70% of Americans.

Click here to send a letter to your legislators.

Click here to view a summary of the bill.

Click here to view the full text of the bill.

Click here to download a factsheet.

Chapel Hill’s first-in-the-state voter-owned election program got off to a strong start this year, with both voter-owned candidates winning seats in yesterday’s election.

Mark Kleinschmidt won in a tight race for mayor, despite being outraised by his main opponent by a nearly 2-to-1 margin. Though Kleinschmidt’s fundraising was identical to his 2007 race for city council, the $13,000 in public funds enabled him to compete on a more level playing field with fellow Councilor Matt Czajkowski, who funded his campaign with private donations.

In light of the result, Kleinschmidt said, “The voter-owned fund played a crucial role in making sure that I could get my message out to voters. This was one of the most substantive campaigns I’ve ever been a part of, and a lot of that is because participating in the public financing program took the focus off of money and put it on issues.”

Councilor-elect Penny Rich also benefited from the public fund. Rich had run for council in 2007, but finished sixth. This year, however, she was the leading vote-getter in a crowded field of 8 candidates.

Noting the importance of the program to her campaign, Rich said, “The voter-owned elections program really required me to get out into the community and talk with voters early in the campaign. Asking people to invest $5 in my campaign felt good—and really helped strengthen my relationships and my understanding of issues facing Chapel Hill. I would not have made the leap from sixth to first without the voter-owned election program.”

Legislation pending in the state legislature would expand public financing options to more than a dozen larger cities across the state. Josh Glasser, Director of Local Campaign Finance Reform for Common Cause, said, “The Chapel Hill example proves that voter-owned elections can work at the local level in North Carolina. It’s time for the legislature to afford other cities the same opportunity to conduct reform and strengthen democracy.”

The program, which was devised by the Chapel Hill Town Council and implemented by the NC State Board of Elections, was strongly supported by an array of democracy reform organizations, including Common Cause, Democracy NC, the NC Center for Voter Education, NC Voters for Clean Elections, and the League of Women Voters. The 2009 campaign was the first year of the pilot; the 2011 elections will offer another opportunity to see how the program works to change the dynamics of local campaigns.

Assemblyman Gianaris, Citzens Union, Common Cause/NY Contend Current State Law Allows Governor Paterson To Appoint Lt. Governor Shows How State Constitution and Public Officers Law Can Be Used to Break Albany Impasse

New York State Assemblyman Michael Gianaris, Citizens Union Executive Director Dick Dadey, and Common Cause/NY Executive Director Susan Lerner today sent Governor David A. Paterson a letter outlining how under current law he can appoint a Lt. Governor and in doing so resolve the impasse that has paralyzed state government.

Though it has become accepted conventional wisdom that a vacancy in the office of Lt. Governor cannot be filled until the next statewide election, the letter posits that the plain language of the Constitution and the Public Officers Law gives the Governor the power to appoint a Lt. Governor who can serve until next year's elections.

The letter contends that Section 43 of the Public Officers Law applies in this situation and is not precluded by the Constitutional mandate that the Temporary President of the Senate shall perform the duties of the Lt. Governor during a vacancy. Public Officer Law Section 43 states " [i]f a vacancy shall occur, otherwise than by expiration of term, with no provision of law for filling the same, if the office be elective, the governor shall appoint a person to execute the duties thereof until the vacancy shall be filled by an election…"

Read the full release here...

Statement on Senate Rules Changes: New Rules a Solid Improvement
July 16, 2009
Our groups believe that the rules changes adopted last night include changes that will make the State Senate more open and accountable, but do not go far enough to improve the arcane internal operations of the Senate.

Good Government Groups Call on State Senators to make Good on Their Promises of Reform
July 15, 2009
With the State Senate set to reconvene this afternoon, good government groups Citizens Union of the City of New York, Common Cause/NY, the League of Women Voters/N.Y.S. and NYPIRG urged senators to stick with their promises of enacting real reform. The groups pointed to statements made by various senators from both parties during the month-long stalemate declaring the crisis was fueled by the need for meaningful reform, not power politics. The good government groups urged the senators to stick with their promises for reform.

Common Cause and Serrano See Advances in Stimulus Accountability
July 10, 2009
Over the past several months, the NYS Stimulus Oversight Group, Senator José M. Serrano (D-Manhattan/Bronx), and Assemblyman Michael Gianaris (D-Queens) have led an initiative to ensure that Federal Stimulus funds are utilized with utmost efficiency. A Stimulus Oversight Panel launched yesterday by Governor Paterson incorporates many of the major components of a bill introduced by Serrano and Gianaris.

The legislation (S5879/A8941) aimed to make New York the most reliable recipient of federal stimulus funds in the country by establishing an independent Ombudsman's office to help disburse and track the impact of Federal stimulus funds.

Common Cause/NY Applauds Appointment of Ravitch as Lieutenant Governor
July 8, 2009
Common Cause applauds Governor Paterson for appointing a new Lieutenant-Governor, a bold and much-needed action that will help to bring an end to one large factor contributing to the ongoing Senate stalemate. By filling the vacancy, the Governor is ensuring the State Senate will once again have a presiding officer who can cast a tie-breaking vote and put to rest the question of succession.

Common Cause is pleased that Governor Paterson has followed the recommendation put out forth by Common Cause/New York, the Citizens Union of the City of New York and Assemblyman Michael Gianaris, and will pursue this legal and constitutional course of action. In the days since Common Cause announced its recommendation that Governor Paterson appoint a new Lieutenant-Governor, a number of legal experts and constitutional scholars have come forward in support of the idea, demonstrating its constitutional viability.

Citizens Union and Common Cause/NY Announce Support of Legal Experts Regarding Power of Gov. paterson to Appoint Lt. Governor
July 8, 2009
Citizens Union and Common Cause/NY today announced the formation of a group of state and constitutional legal experts who support the interpretation of how, under current law, Governor Paterson can appoint a Lt. Governor. The two civic groups, along with Assemblyman Michael Gianaris, on Monday called upon the Governor to act quickly in appointing a Lt. Governor as a means to end the partisan chaos in the state senate and clarify the line of succession to the office of Governor. At the moment, the issue of succession is unclear given that no one individual is universally recognized as Senate President pro tempore.

Assemblyman Gianaris, Citizens Union, Common Cause/NY Contend Current State Law Allows Governor Paterson to Appoint Lt. Governor
July 6, 2009
New York State Assemblyman Michael Gianaris, Citizens Union Executive Director Dick Dadey, and Common Cause/NY Executive Director Susan Lerner today sent Governor David A. Paterson a letter outlining how under current law he can appoint a Lt. Governor and in doing so resolve the impasse that has paralyzed state government.

Though it has become accepted conventional wisdom that a vacancy in the office of Lt. Governor cannot be filled until the next statewide election, the letter posits that the plain language of the Constitution and the Public Officers Law gives the Governor the power to appoint a Lt. Governor who can serve until next year's elections.

Reform Coalition Offers Blueprint to End Senate Stalemate
June 29, 2009
A coalition of long-time reform organizations today released the outline of their plan to end the Senate stalemate. Citizens Union, Common Cause/NY, the League of Women Voters, and NYPIRG issued their plea as the state Senate entered its fourth week of gridlock.

At this late date, it appears that efforts to develop a long-term solution have failed. Thus, the groups’ plan urges a “moratorium” on the debate over leadership, a bipartisan agreement to wrap up session and approval of new rules. At least initially, the plan focuses on achieving action on the immediate needs facing the state. There is a host of “must do” legislation that demands action. From local taxes to New York City Mayoral control of schools, from allowing additional debt to overhauling the state’s ethics laws, key items need action, now.

Legislators Propose Nationally Ground-Breaking Performance Standards for New York's Stimulus Investments
June 17, 2009
Senator José M. Serrano (D-Manhattan/Bronx) and Assemblyman Michael Gianaris (D-Queens) drafted a bill to make New York State the national leader in stimulus accountability and effectiveness, with the creation of a dedicated federal Stimulus Ombudsman‟s office. The proposal (S5879/A8941) is supported by the NYS Stimulus Oversight Working Group, the state‟s leading network pushing for fair and equitable distribution of stimulus investments.

"The leadership battle in the Senate has garnered attention that must be rechanneled in a more positive and productive direction. We must not lose focus, and we must continue to do the work of the people," said Senator José M. Serrano (D-Manhattan/Bronx). "With the country's current unemployment rate at 9.4 percent, it is incumbent upon us to move the economy forward and to create jobs. This bill gives New York the fantastic opportunity to be the most reliable recipient of federal stimulus funds in the entire country, and to set the example for other states to follow."

Home > California > Our Issues > Redistricting Reform

[+] Text [-] Text print

Redistricting Reform

Introduction to Redistricting

Prop 11 - California Voters First Initiative

Information on the Redistricting Commission

Redistricting Resources

Redistricting Links

Upcoming Events

What is Redistricting Reform?

Every ten years, following the completion fo the United States Census, California's state and federal political districts are re-drawn. Districts must be adjusted to changes in population demographics so that districts are equal in size. In the past, this process has been completed by the Califonia State legislature. This means that legislators have the ability to draw their own district boundries, dividing neighborhoods or groups of people in ways that benefit their own electoral needs.

California Common Cause believes that neighborhoods and communities are best represented when their needs can be addressed by single representatives. Districts that maintain the continuity of these communities of interest result in more accountable and responsive legislators who can better meet the needs of their constituents. For that reason, California Common Cause has supported removing the conflict of interest that exists when legislators draw their own district boundaries and use political information to do it.

Click here to read the Americans for Redistricting Reform summary of state reform efforts in 2009.

Our work on redistricting is guided by the following guidelines:

1. The Creation of Nonpartisan Independent Redistricting Commissions
Nonpartisan Independent Redistricting Commissions should be established to replace the current Congressional redistricting process and state legislative redistricting processes.

Nonpartisan Independent Redistricting Commissions could take several forms. In all instances, commissions should be made up of an odd number of members. Commissions should be structured so that if membership includes representatives from political parties that: no political party interests can advance a plan without support from other political parties; and, so that the two major political parties cannot collude to create a plan without support from other members not affiliated with either major political party.

Approval of redistricting plans shall require approval by a super-majority of the members or by consensus of the members of the Independent Redistricting Commission.

Independent Redistricting Commissions shall reflect the geographic, racial, ethnic, gender, and age diversity of the state.

2. Fair Criteria for Congressional and Legislative Districts

Congressional and legislative districts shall be composed of equalpopulations - The Supreme Court has interpreted the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as providing the guarantee of equal population of districts.

Districts shall comply with the United States Constitution and the Voting Rights Act - The Voting Rights Act (VRA) is a federal mandate that requires the drawing of special majority-minority districts under certain circumstances: where a minority population is large enough to draw a district around, and racially polarized voting patterns exist (i.e., racial groups voting for candidates along racial lines).

District boundaries shall respect communities of interest to the extent practicable- District lines shall use, to the extent practicable, visible geographic features; city, town, and county boundaries, and undivided census tracts, similarities in social, cultural, ethnic, and economic interest, school districts, and other formal relationships between municipalities.

Districts shall be geographically compact and contiguous- Compactness reflects the notion that districts should be composed of a tightly defined area so that representatives may be able to more efficiently communicate with their constituents. Contiguity requires that all parts of a district must be connected.

Competitive districts shall be favored - The commission shall make use of necessary election data in order to draw competitive congressional and legislative districts where practicable.

The redistricting process shall be "incumbent blind" - The commission shall not know nor take into account the address of any individual, including an officeholder.

3. Public Participation and Transparency
The Independent Redistricting Commission shall conduct several public hearings throughout the state on proposed plans, allowing for both comments and questions from members of the public. Regular meetings of the commission shall be open to the public and at least 10 days notice shall be given for all regular meetings of the commission. All meetings regarding redistricting at which two or more members of the redistricting commission are in attendance shall be considered a public meeting and thus shall be open to members of the public and subject to adequate notice requirements (at least 72 hours). All submitted maps, plans, revised plans, commission agendas, hearing transcripts, meeting minutes, descriptions of proposed districts, and other data shall be available in a timely fashion, free of charge, via a public website and other means. Members of the Commission shall be prohibited from all ex-parte communications with members of the legislature, other elected officials, former elected officials, candidates for office, representatives of political parties and registered lobbyists regarding redistricting.

4. Frequency
Congressional and Legislative Redistricting shall occur once every 10 years following the decennial U.S. Census and Congressional Reapportionment, unless a new redistricting regime is approved by a vote of the people or the Independent Redistricting Commission is directed by court order to create a new plan.

5. Judicial Review
States should establish a system that allows for judicial review of plans and for a clear process for timely review in the event of legal challenges.

Other Considerations
Common Cause believes that states pursuing redistricting reforms should consider the creation of proportional representation systems and multi-member districts. Proportional representation systems can more accurately reflect the will of a district's voters by allowing voters in the minority to win a share of representation alongside voters in the majority.

Prop 11 - California Voters First

Click here to read the California Voters FIRST initiative.

Click hereto read a summary of the Proposition 11 reforms from Americans for Redistricting Reform.

California Voters FIRST
November 2008 Redistricting Initiative Summary

I. Background: What is redistricting?

Every 10 years, after the census, the CA State Legislature draws new district lines for Congress and CA Senate, Assembly and Board of Equalization.
The Legislature holds hearings to receive public input, but then goes behind closed doors to make the real deals.
The end result is “safe” districts for incumbents, protected from any competition, and comprised of the demographics they choose.

II. California Voters FIRST Overview: Create a Citizens Redistricting Commission

14-Person Redistricting Commission (5 Democrats/5 Republicans/4 other).
Politically balanced among Democrats, Republicans, and others (other parties and decline to state).
Reflects our State’s ethnic, gender, and demographic diversity.

III. How is the Commission Chosen?

California registered voters invited to participate.
A pool of 60 (20D, 20R, 20o) is selected based on relevant analytical skills, ability to be impartial, and diversity by a review panel of state auditors (1D/1R/1o randomly selected by the California State Auditor).
The 4 Legislative leaders can each disqualify up to 2 in each category, resulting in a pool of at least 12 Democrats, 12 Republicans and 12 others.
8 Commissioners are named through random drawing of the State Auditor (3D/3R/3o).
The 8 Commissions select the final 6 Commissioners (2D/2R/2o) from the remaining pool in order to complement the balance of skills and diversity.

IV. Mapping Criteria (in ranked order)

Districts shall comply with the US Constitution, including equal population requirements.
Districts shall comply with the Voting Rights Act.
Districts shall be geographically contiguous.
The geographic integrity of any city, county, or city and county, neighborhoods, or communities of interest shall be respected.
Communities of interest shall not be defined as relations with incumbents, candidates, or parties.
Districts shall be compact.
To the extent possible, after the above criteria have been satisfied, districts shall be nested.

Incumbent residences may not be considered; districts may not be drawn to protect incumbents.

V. Adoption of a Plan

9 members shall represent a quorum.
9 votes shall be required for any official action.
9 votes (3D/3R/3o) are required to adopt a plan.
The Commission shall complete redistricting by a date-certain - September 30, XX11.
The final redistricting plan shall be subject to referendum.

VI. Scope

Senate, Assembly and Board of Equalization seats will be drawn by the Commission in the next redistricting, 2011.
Congressional seats will be drawn by the state legislature, following the same mapping criteria and hearing requirements as the Commission.

Click herefor a more detailed, two page summary.

Redistricting Commission Information

Now that Prop 11, the California Voters First Initiative, has passed, the State Auditor is in charge of initiating the commission selection process. The State Auditor has begun this process by holding informaiton meetings to disucss how to increase diversity within the commission's application pool. Applications are still being created. Visit our events section, here, to learn more about the upcoming infromational hearings.

If you would like to be added to an email list to recieve more information from the State Auditor about the commission, email votersfirstact@bsa.ca.gov or call the commission hotline at 866-356-5217

For more information, visit the State Auditor's website here: http://www.bsa.ca.gov/bsa/prop11.php

Click here to see a chart outlining how the commission selection process.

Click here to read more about who is eligible to serve on the commission.

Redistricting Resources

The California Voter Foundation has added a Redistricting Reform section to their website. The new page has information about the implementation of California's new Citizen Redistricting Commission as well as current and historical district maps and other redistricting resources. Visit http://www.calvoter.org/issues/votereng/redistricting/index.html to learn more.

Citizens Redistricting Commission Information Sheet
Common Cause believes that redistricting decisions must be removed from partisan legislators to make votes truly count. In this effort, our goal is to create legislative and congressional districts that are representative of the population and districting plans that result in more competitive congressional and legislative districts.

The "Redistricting Game" from USC's Annenberg Center

National Council of State Legislatures' State Redistricting Commissions Chart.

U.S. Census Bureau's 2008 redistricting data prototype.

The Rose Institute's Redistricting Reform Research (Claremont McKenna College)

Center for Governmental Studies' Redistricting Reform Research

Additional Links

Redistricting Reform Polling Results, link to results from a recent poll on redistricting.

Designer Districts Report, link to a report on drawing safe districts for incumbents.

Redistricting Research Site of the Institute of Governmental Studies, link to two reports on redistricting, one on competition in districts and the other on transparency, as well as other redistricting data.

Statement from Kathay Feng, Executive Director, link the 8/11/06 statement of Kathay Feng to the Government Reform Conference Committee.

Commonwealth Club Letter of Support for Redistricting Reform, link to a 7/19/06 coalition letter to the Governor, supporting redistricting reform.

Commonwealth Club Senate Letter of Support for Redistricting Reform, link to a 5/31/06 coalition letter to the Senate, supporting redistricting reform.

Upcoming Events

The State Auditor has planned several meetings to figure out how best to create a state citizens’ redistricting commission. At the top of the list – the State Auditor wants to hear the public’s input on how to conduct outreach and how to set up the process of selecting the redistricting commission to ensure it is diverse, qualified and independent.

To view a video of the San Diego hearing, follow this link: http://www.copswiki.org/twiki/bin/view/Common/M727

For details about these upcoming hearings, visit our events pages:

Los Angeles Redistricting Commission Meeting

San Francisco Bay Area Redistricting Commission Meeting

Sacramento Redistricting Commission Meeting

Sign Up for Email Alerts

Atlanta mayoral runoff needs an ethics debate

Brunswick House Party

Assemblyman Gianaris, Citzens Union, Common Cause/NY Contend Current State Law Allows Governor Paterson To Appoint Lt. Governor Shows How State Constitution and Public Officers Law Can Be Used to Break Albany Impasse

Redistricting Reform

What is Redistricting Reform?

Prop 11 - California Voters First

Redistricting Commission Information

Redistricting Resources

Additional Links

Upcoming Events