CA: Special Survey on Californians and the Initiative Process. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 24, 2024, 11:34:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Gubernatorial/State Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  CA: Special Survey on Californians and the Initiative Process. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: CA: Special Survey on Californians and the Initiative Process.  (Read 1177 times)
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« on: October 01, 2005, 02:25:16 AM »

Want sure where to put this?

PPIC Statewide Survey: Special Survey on Californians and the Initiative.
   
          o Proposition 77 (redistricting), 33% yes, 50% no
Poll respondents were also asked whether they thought it a good idea or a bad idea for the legislature and governor to be involved in redistricting.  22% good idea; 66% bad idea; 12% don't know.

But among those who thought that it was a good idea, 54% favored Proposition 77, which would remove the legislature from the process, other than a role in selection of the judges, while 32% were opposed.

On the other hand, those who thought it was a bad idea, were 27% in favor; and 59% opposed' even though failure would leave control in the hands of the legislature.

The only sane part of the poll was that 42% of those who didn't know whether it was a good idea or not, also didn't know how they were going to vote on the proposition.
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,817
Marshall Islands


« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2005, 02:47:39 AM »

77.  Gerymandering.  I don't buy the idea that judges are automatically politically impartial.  This does have the interesting twist that the judges are drawn by lot from a pool, so they could be biased overwhelmingly Repbulican, overwhelmining democratic, actually have some good ideas, or have some weird half-assed ideas.  Might be well suited for Nevada Tongue .  The lack of any sort of interviening voter approval kills it for me.
Retired judges could apply to serve as special masters.  24 would be drawn by lot, with at most 12 from a single party. 

Four legislative leaders (Speaker, Senator pro tem, and the minority leaders of the two houses) then each select 3 judges, who must not be of their own party (Democrats pick the non-Democrats, and Republicans pick the non-Republicans).  If a leader fails to select 3 judges, their choices will be made by lot, maintaining the opposite party rule.

The legislative leaders could then peremptorily strike one judge selected by another leader.  The final 3-member panel would then be chosen by lot, with at least one from each of the two major parties.

Has a redistricting plan ever been overturned by the voters?  I don't see any provision in the current Constitution that would provide by voter review other than by an initiative.  This proposal includes an automatic vote on any plan at the next election.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 11 queries.