THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Opinion: No on Prop. 20, Yes on Prop. 27


image_pdfimage_print

By Daniel Lowenstein

Charles Munger Jr., son of Wall Street player and billionaire Charles Munger Sr., donated $1 million in 2008 to the campaign supporting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s bizarre legislative redistricting initiative scheme, Proposition 11.

Now, Munger Jr. is the major sponsor and so far only contributor (well, others have given $100,000; Munger Jr. has given $3.7 million as of Aug. 31) to what he calls the Voters First Act for Congress – Proposition 20.

Prop. 20 would give power over redistricting of California’s congressional districts to a panel of 14 randomly selected volunteers – who must, by law, have no experience in government or real-life redistricting. Those volunteers would be chosen by a process that only a tax accountant could love. In fact, anonymous tax accountants play a big role in the selection but what is most puzzling about Munger’s Prop. 20 is that it mandates that all California’s political districts be segregated by income level – each district to include only people of the same income. That’s right, Munger’s initiative orders that all districts be segregated according to income – “similar living standards … similar work opportunities” – these are the exact words he put into Prop. 20.

Read the whole story

Daniel Lowenstein is director of the Center for the Liberal Arts and Free Institutions at UCLA. He has served as deputy secretary of state of California and was the first chair of the California Fair Political Practices Commission.
image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (3)
  1. Alex Campbell says - Posted: September 15, 2010

    Reads like an excerpt from the Karl Rove book “How Too For republican Dummies

  2. Jeff Ponts says - Posted: October 4, 2010

    For an Independent who hates how California has fallen Yes on 20 & no on 27 seems like the best solution. Polititians have prooven to be self serving. More interested in self preservation than what is best for the citizens. Look at the current state of the state and the current 10% approval of the legislature to see that this argument of this article is flawed. Not to mention Yes on 27 is funded significantly by legislators themselves.

  3. Matthew Lorono says - Posted: October 15, 2010

    As someone who has gone through the applicant process for the Prop 11 Citizens Redistricting Commission, I can say from personal experience that the process is very bizarre. The Applicant Review Panel, which selected the applicants, is not (REPEAT *NOT*) following the constitution requirements in how they have selected the applicants. They’ve extended deadlines in direct violation of the Prop 11. They have selected a body 60 individuals, many of whom might be described as academic elitists and career bureaucrats. The semi-final random selection process (random drawing) will not be guaranteeing compliance with Prop 11 either! Prop 11 and Prop 20 are good in principle, but have just turned out yet another Sacramento mess, in my opinion.