ACA 4
Background and Procedural Information

Assemblymembers Mike Villines and Anthony Adams introduced California Assembly Constitutional Amendment 4.  As of June 4, 2008 the proposed amendment is currently stalled in the Assembly.   

Under the proposed legislation, are single-member districts a requirement or otherwise implied?

Single-member districts are a requirement for the California Assembly, Senate, Board of Equalization, and Congress.   

Does the proposed legislation provide for Voting Rights Act compliance (e.g. can the commission use voter history information)?

The proposed commission would only use voter history information only for purposes of complying with the Voting Rights Act.

Under the proposed legislation, how is the commission formed?

The Commission would consist of eleven members.  Four members each would be registered with the largest and second largest political party while three would not be registered with either of those parties.  The Secretary of State would select the eleven acting and alternate commissioners by randomly selecting applicants from a combined active voter list compiled by the election officials from each county in California.  The Secretary of State would ask each potential Commissioner if they would like to serve as commissioner until the twenty-two active and alternate spots were filled.  After the Commission has created its final plan the voters of California must pass it in the same manner as they would a referendum.
 
Under the proposed legislation, are competitive districts favored?

Priorities of the Commission are ranked in level of importance from one to eight.  The eighth priority is for competitive districts.  

Under the proposed legislation, can members of the public submit plans?

Yes.  Members of the public may offer a complete or partial proposed redistricting plan, written comments, or oral testimony.

Does the proposed legislation allow for mid-decade redistricting?

It does not strictly forbid mid-decade redistricting, although there are no provisions for Commission action after it submits the final redistricting plan.  
 
March 31st 2005
A Good Proposal that Won't do Much
San Jose Mercury News

Newspaper endorses full representation and IRV to solve California's redistricting woes

February 19th 2005
Schwarzenegger vs. Gerrymander
New York Times

Steven Hill explains why Governor Schwarzenegger should consider full representation if he is serious about the need for more competitive elections

January 10th 2005
Recent elections drive redistricting reform:
California Aggie

Discussion of the issues leading to redistricting reform in California, and the potential benefits of a full representation system.

January 9th 2005
Consider alternate systems of voting
Sacramento Bee

How a commission to examine full representation systems in California elections would be a step beyond Governor Schwarzenegger's plans for redistricting reform.

January 1st 2005
Democracy at a Crossroads
The California Journal

Steven Hill writes an in-depth account of the various democracy reforms proposed and needed in California. He shows how a move to full representation would have a far greater impact on politics than the mooted redistricting reforms.

[ Previous ] [ Next ]