I guess Californians believe that Marin and 'Jefferson' have equivalent interests and can be well served the same representative without disenfranchising anyone... and that because it's more natural for a state with 2.23 democrats per republican to have 5.3 democrat representatives for every republican rep than the current 4.7 dem reps per republican.
Ah, the bridge jumping argument. What about if someone takes a slug at you when you’ve done nothing wrong? Or challenges your HN comment? You respond.
No, Texas has no such law, and that’s a shame. If Texas had, it might have prevented this situation. California is being repeatedly threatened by the Trump Republican government. The threat was exacerbated by the Texas Legislature (not the voters, of course). California voters would never have approved Prop 50 without them.
I suspect it won’t be temporary. A lot of things aren’t. Patriot Act. ACA subsidy expansion. Etc. instead it’ll normalize a new era of political extremism. I hope I’m wrong.
> instead it’ll normalize a new era of political extremism
That ship sailed in the Clinton era when Republicans turned a breach of workplace ethics into a coup. Every time the Republicans held any sort of power in Washington, they would keep pushing the needle to the right. There's nothing new about any of this. We are where we are because of the path we've been on.
In this case, the measure itself is temporary. That's in the text of what we voted on. For it to not be temporary, we'll need to vote on it again.
Also, it only affects Federal congressional districts, not State Senate or State Assembly districts, so there's less feedback: the US Congress has little say over how CA draws its maps.
The effects on normalization are another question that you're right to be concerned about, but I can argue that either way. It's clear who started this mid-cycle redistricting, and it's obviously not actually a response to Joe Biden doing the last census wrong. Credible threat of retaliation may reduce the tendency to break further norms, when compared to the available alternative of not pushing back.
I agree with you! But that’s not where we are, and this is a valid response to the Texas Leg trying to disenfranchise Democratic voters everywhere and Texas’s Democratic voters in particular. The Leg had months to undo this when they saw the possible response from CA. They chose to assume Democrats couldn’t fight back after the first blow. They were wrong.
I guess Californians believe that Marin and 'Jefferson' have equivalent interests and can be well served the same representative without disenfranchising anyone... and that because it's more natural for a state with 2.23 democrats per republican to have 5.3 democrat representatives for every republican rep than the current 4.7 dem reps per republican.
And what does the Texas Legislature believe about Texas’s Democratic voters? Do tell.
What do I care about texas? If a texan jumped off a bridge would you do so too?
Did Texas have a nationally leading and hard won anti-gerrymandering law shown to be meaningless?
Ah, the bridge jumping argument. What about if someone takes a slug at you when you’ve done nothing wrong? Or challenges your HN comment? You respond.
No, Texas has no such law, and that’s a shame. If Texas had, it might have prevented this situation. California is being repeatedly threatened by the Trump Republican government. The threat was exacerbated by the Texas Legislature (not the voters, of course). California voters would never have approved Prop 50 without them.
[dead]
[flagged]
It’s a temporary measure, through 2030. Then the independent commission reverts back.
I suspect it won’t be temporary. A lot of things aren’t. Patriot Act. ACA subsidy expansion. Etc. instead it’ll normalize a new era of political extremism. I hope I’m wrong.
> instead it’ll normalize a new era of political extremism
That ship sailed in the Clinton era when Republicans turned a breach of workplace ethics into a coup. Every time the Republicans held any sort of power in Washington, they would keep pushing the needle to the right. There's nothing new about any of this. We are where we are because of the path we've been on.
In this case, the measure itself is temporary. That's in the text of what we voted on. For it to not be temporary, we'll need to vote on it again.
Also, it only affects Federal congressional districts, not State Senate or State Assembly districts, so there's less feedback: the US Congress has little say over how CA draws its maps.
The effects on normalization are another question that you're right to be concerned about, but I can argue that either way. It's clear who started this mid-cycle redistricting, and it's obviously not actually a response to Joe Biden doing the last census wrong. Credible threat of retaliation may reduce the tendency to break further norms, when compared to the available alternative of not pushing back.
Just curious, did you have this reaction to what Texas did? Or is the problem here just that California responded in kind?
Same reaction. I prefer some neutral automated way or just a very different system than districts.
I agree with you! But that’s not where we are, and this is a valid response to the Texas Leg trying to disenfranchise Democratic voters everywhere and Texas’s Democratic voters in particular. The Leg had months to undo this when they saw the possible response from CA. They chose to assume Democrats couldn’t fight back after the first blow. They were wrong.