Contributors
Jon Coupal- Columnist

Jon Coupal is an attorney and president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association -- California's largest taxpayer organization with offices in Los Angeles and Sacramento. [go to website] [go to Coupal index]

A Gerrymandered Election
Voters Will Be Stifled ...
[Jon Coupal] 11/19/04

Despite some gains for fiscal conservatives at the national level, the outcome of California's state legislative races have put taxpayers in a bad mood.

Virtually nothing changed in the State Capitol, which means more of the same old disregard for taxpayers and a continuation of profligate spending. During the 2003-04 session, lawmakers eagerly introduced over one hundred tax increase bills, passage of which would have resulted in over $64 billion in new taxes. Only Pollyanna would think this Legislature is going to be different.

Is California really that out of touch with the rest of the nation? Perhaps not. Let's consider an alternative explanation. Those candidates -- mostly incumbents -- running for a seat in the California Legislature who won did so by large percentages. In the Assembly, 62 winners of the 80 seats received more than 60 percent of the vote -- twenty five candidates got more than 70%. In the Senate, where 20 seats were at stake, only three candidates received less than 60 percent of the vote.

Let's face it. The winners didn't prevail by such large margins because they were that qualitatively better than their opponents. These lopsided victories are the result of gerrymandering -- the practice of drawing up districts to favor incumbent candidates or those of a particular party.

When the new districts were drawn up by the Legislature after the 2000 census, members of both major parties colluded to establish districts that would guarantee that they would keep their jobs. The result is that, in all but a handful of districts, voters are effectively disenfranchised because the results are pre-ordained.

Because these "protected-by-gerrymandering" candidates go through what is, in effect, a coronation, they feel no pressure to participate in debate on important issues of public policy.

A recent poll of the statewide membership of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association shows that their number one concern is attacks in the Legislature on the taxpayer protections provided by the two-thirds vote. Ninety-eight percent would vote against any candidate who would weaken the two-thirds vote for tax increases. Most believe that tax increases are inevitable unless a more taxpayer-friendly Legislature is elected. But how is change possible when districts are designed so that lawmakers may ignore the voices of their constituents with impunity?

Other critics of the system dreamed up Proposition 62, a Louisiana-style open primary where the top two vote-getters in the primary election, regardless of party affiliation, face off against each other. This is a case where the cure would be worse than the malady. This would rob voters of what small choice they now enjoy and even further limit debate because in most districts the two candidates up for final consideration would be of the same party.

Although Prop. 62 was placed on the ballot by self-described "moderates," this description of themselves is a misnomer. The motivation behind Prop. 62 was to undermine Proposition 13's mandate that new state taxes be approved by a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. The hope of promoters was to make inroads into the approximately one-third of lawmakers who recognize that California is already a high-tax state and refuse to support new revenue-raising strategies except in response to a dire emergency. The goal was to use the new system to defeat fiscally conservative Republicans and open the door to a plethora of new taxes.

Fortunately, even voters kept mute by "rigged" district elections are able to effectively express their will in statewide contests and they rejected Prop. 62 as the scam that it was.

Now the taxpayers should take the next step and work for the establishment of fair, competitive districts. This is the only way to be sure that the voices of taxpayers, and all others, will be heard in the halls of the Capitol. CRO

copyright 2004 Howard Jarvis Taxpayers association

§