Redistricting a win for Democrats

July 20, 2011

Gov. Jerry Brown and Democrats in the Legislature were frustrated this year in seeking Republican votes to close the state’s budget deficit by asking voters to OK billions of dollars in tax extensions. [FresnoBee]

Brown was unable to garner support from at least two Republicans in both houses that he needed for the two-thirds majorities required to pass the special election constitutional amendment.

As the months-long talks collapsed, Democrats said they’d try to pick up enough seats in the 2012 elections to secure two-thirds margins, thereby cutting the GOP out of future tax issues. And the redistricting plans now nearing approval by the new independent redistricting commission could set the stage for achieving that goal, either in 2012 or in 2014, the Fresno Bee said.

A public review of the draft maps is slated for later this week with a final map planned in August.

Analysts on both sides of the political aisle have plumbed the new maps for their political content – a factor the commission is not supposed to be considering – and agree they would give Democrats a very strong opportunity to win 27 Senate seats and 54 in the Assembly, two-thirds margins in both houses, the Fresno Bee added.

In 2012, all 80 Assembly seats will be up plus half of the 40 Senate seats. The remainder will be on the ballot in 2014.

The state Republican Party is threatening to challenge the maps via a referendum.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

For anybody on the left who doesn’t think this is a very real problem, answer the following question, “Why should a company locate or expand in California?” What are your answers?

Actually the GOP has been in the minority in the California Legislature for over 40 years. Not a single GOP introduced bill was passed in California if some Democrats didn’t vote for it. Also, the GOP legislature has been unable to stop any Democratic introduced bill unless some Democrats voted against it. The exception to this is laws to raise taxes which takes a 2/3 vote of the legislature to pass.

When we have a GOP Governor in place the GOP Governor can veto a Democratic Legislative vote and sometimes there is not the 2/3 majority needed to override the veto. However, when a Democratic Governor is in office then the GOP can not stop any Democratic majority vote except a tax increase which takes the 2/3 vote rather than a simple majority.

The bottom line is the Democrats have run California for over 40 years and every law, rule and regulation has occurred ONLY if the Democratic majority wanted it. The Democrats own California. So how is California performing under 40 years of Democratic Legislative control?

Unfortunately, jobs are the number one issue in California, as well as, the entire United States. This is an ultra competitive time to be trying to attract new businesses. The current Democratic majority in the California Legislature and the current Democratic Governor seem to think all we have to do is wait and eventually the new business will show up in California.

However, businesses that are looking to expand and build new facilities are simply not willing to look at California because of the negative business climate and high expenses due to the laws, rules, regulations and taxes businesses have to now comply with in California. Some on the left would argue, so what? The problem is the businesses are going to go to the states that are most profitable for them, including the high tech industry.

We need a lot of jobs in California, but we have no way to attract jobs at this point with the current regulatory environment in California with a few exceptions. Solar Ranches are a good example where because of our weather in California these companies are willing to put up with the hassle of locating in California. Unfortunately, one out of every eight people living in the United States lives in California, so having the occasional success of a company locating a new facility here is simply not going to be nearly enough job creation.

The sad thing is that since the entire Country has a job issue right now the extreme problem of CA being unable to attract new business is being masked. The reality will not be obvious until a recovery is well under way in the Country, but CA is not participating as companies seek out more business advantaged states to locate. California has not recognized that because of technological advances in communications, manufacturing and transportation that companies do not gain any advantages by locating in CA today. In fact, companies know it is a disadvantage to locate in California and are acting accordingly.

So once again, for anybody on the left who doesn’t think this is a very real problem, answer the following question, “Why should a company locate or expand in California?” What are your answers?

By the time the Democratic Legislature figures this out it will be too late as these companies will have already made their long term decisions of where to expand their operations. California, over the last 100 years is used to “automatically” having business bounce back, but this time is going to need an overhaul to try to get back on top. It is unclear if such an overhaul is possible any time in the foreseeable future. In the end California will become a case study of how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. California had it all and over the last 40 years California has given it away.

Well California GOP you reap what you sow. Insult the voters with carpetbagger big money like you did last election and eat crow pie for the foreseeable future. What a bunch of loosers.

Some comments removed for excessive sweetness and too narrow a focus on a particular user,

If you make a comment it must be on the topic of the story,

Repying to a comment poster is fine as long as you use the reply button.

However if your comment appears at the top and is not on topic there is a good chance it will be deleted.

respect our women posters here by using their name as it appears Please, questions about moderation Email thank you.

I’m not angry, I do feel that I’m talking to a bunch of blank behind the eyes people though. After my comments about Jerry Brown no one could really find anything wrong with what I said but they still chimed in with ignorant comments. It would great to have an intelligent rebuttal instead of the ole ‘moonbeam’ and other juvenile remarks. But I’m not angry as I’ve grown to expect such silliness. There are few here that it’s possible to speak with on an adult level but they don’t come out much.

ITA, TQueen. I don’t know if its the media they listen to/read or what, but, outside of Pat Buchanan, I haven’t encountered a rightwinger who has a clue about making a sound argument in a long, long time.

Understand, I don’t agree with 95% of what Buchanan says, but he doesn’t stoop to ad hominems, red herrings, etc. to make his argument. His thinking is just screwy (IMO, of course).

I like Joe Scarborough and as I said in an another post I like Blakeslee. I also like Sean Hannity and Paul Ryan they are very balanced smart,,,,,,,,,,,HA Ha HA yea right. No I do like the first two though.

Scarborough—he gives me the creeps. He never could account for where he was when Lori Klausutis, the intern who was murdered in his office, was killed.

And then for Scarborough to joke on Imus’ show about the “dead intern”….what a sick *astard.

I was part of a small group who researched Lori’s death. I covered the sick freak of a medical examiner, Michael Berkland, who did her autopsy. I have a stack of documents on him that is at least 2-feet tall. Sick, sick, sick.

Anyway, I’d rather watch Buchanan than Scarborough because Buchanan is the real deal–he’s not so smarmy like Scarborough is, and, of course, Buchanan has never had an intern murdered in his office. That’s always a plus in my book.

The problem isn’t the redistricting commission, it’s the voters in the state that keep electing the leftists in Sacramento.

I’ve reviewed the proposed boundaries that were drawn by the redistricting commission and I have to say I think they are far sensible (to my engineering mind, anyway) than the current boundaries.

The new boundaries, for my district at least, tend follow county lines and natural geographic features without the pencil-thin “peninsulas” that are characteristic of gerrymandered districts engineered to preserve a voting demographic for some incumbent professional politician.

The fact that these “cleaner” boundaries favor leftists is indicative of problems with the people who are voting. Either they are ignorant of facts and history or they have been bought and paid for as part of a special interest group feeding at the public trough. In either case, it bodes ill for the state as more and more businesses flee and individuals begin to engage the “Atlas Shrugged scenario” and just stop producing because the fruits of their labor are taken away from them and given to someone else.

Pardon, but I don’t understand the first two sentences of your last paragraph. Would you be willing to rephrase it?

Thanks so much.

The net-net is that no matter how the boundaries are drawn, California will still be run by leftists as long as voters overwhelmingly vote for leftists either because of ignorance or because they are part of a special interest group that the left funds with taxpayer dollars.

Thank you.


You have nailed the true problem quite well. It’s apparent that the liberals in this state would never vote against those politicians that offer them their “entitlements.”

Hey, tj, in case you didn’t know, the “Atlas Shrugged scenario” is FICTION and a figment of Ayn Rand’s twisted, mean-spirited and selfish, ego-controlled imagination. It’s ridiculous and will never happen in real life, because the whole foundation of Rand’s argument is deeply flawed.

Ayn Rand wrote the ‘ soliloquies John Galt ‘ under the influence of methamphetamine

Independent commission sets stage for two thirds majority to favor Dems. this is going to hurt ….in the wallet …….. VOTE THEM OUT!!