Real hope for fair districting in California

I've long favored fair districting practices as an important step in regaining the public's sense of fairness in politics, in reducing political polarization, and increasing the effectiveness of the California delegation to Washington.

This week, in a move that seems to improve the chances of some actual reform, Democratic State Senator Alan Lowenthal has sponsored a counter-proposal to the the Governator's plan.

The main differences seem to be the precise composition of the redistricting committee, the inclusion of “communities of interest” in the Lowenthal proposed criteria, and the time-table, with Schwarzenegger shooting for new districts by 2006, and the Democrats shooting for the traditional decennial redistricting effective in 2011.

While these differences have important ramifications to the parties as well as individuals running for state office, the most significant point about both plans is that they exclude the legislature itself from the redistricting process.

To me this is the key point. Although ideally redistricting would be an entirely non(as opposed to bi) partisan affair, I believe it's unrealistic to expect the districting commission to be composed without ANY political input whatsoever. To my way of thinking, it then suffices that the commissioners themselves will not have elected positions a stake in the process.

And regardless, the mere fact of a Democratic counter-proposal gives me hope, for even non-partisan measures require bi-partisan support. In negotiation an offer requires a counter-offer to proceed.

Let the horse-trading begin!

[x-posted @ Daily Kos]