Approval of measure could determine if Republicans keep full control of government in next year’s midterm elections
It was a decisive victory for Democrats in deep-blue California, who had raced to counter a gerrymander in Texas, engineered at the US president’s behest, to carve out new safe Republican districts. The Associated Press declared Proposition 50 had passed almost instantly when polls closed statewide.
In approving the measure, voters chose to toss out the work of California’s independent redistricting commission and temporarily adopt maps drawn by the state legislature to help Democrats pick up five additional seats in the US House of Representatives.
Newsom and Democrats framed the measure as a way to safeguard US democracy from Trump’s “wrecking ball” presidency. By contrast, opponents offered a mixed message, with Republicans alternatively attacking Newsom and praising the work of the independent mapmaking panel.
Superintendent Chalmers references aside, feel free to prove me wrong. I’m going to have a hard time proving the negative.
Just a couple examples, no smoking guns:
https://factually.co/fact-checks/politics/court-ordered-redistricting-changes-since-2015-83113b
https://www.justice.gov/crt/status-statewide-redistricting-plans
I guess I’m thinking of the wrangling that goes on after they blatantly and illegally gerrymander Democrats out of power as they’renow openly doing in Texas.
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/redistricting-litigation-roundup-0
All I’m seeing there (feel free to tell me what I missed) is either court-ordered, or part of the typical redistricting cycle.
The US census happens every 10 years on the 0’s, and remapping happens soon after especially as states lose and gain districts (some may have a shift in where their populations are and with that the boundaries chance as well). I’m not talking about any gerrymandering there, because that’s (unfortunately) part of the “normal” process.
Sometimes those maps get challenged in court, and the court agrees with those challenges, forcing a new map outside of that usual cycle. I’m not talking about that either, because that’s done involuntarily after a court makes them do it.
Texas started it all by changing their maps about halfway through the typical census cycle, without any court requiring it. THAT is what I’m trying to say is so abnormal and where I want to be proven wrong. It sounds picky, but any other redistricting I’m aware of is common enough and can have good reason to do so, but not this.