On December 15, the California Redistricting Commission finished determining who the 14 commissioners will be. None of them is a member of any party other than the Democratic and Republican Parties. There are five Democrats, five Republicans, and 4 independents.
Are we really surprised? I hope not. Until we make the equal ballot access movement a 21st century civil rights movement, we are all kidding ourselves.
It’s just the good old boys network. Since Tom did so well in Colorado, would the Cp get some seats on a Colorado version of the Gerrymandering process?
OF course they didn’t because no major party is going to let a minor party have any say in how corrupt they are.
Who are the four independents? Are they really independent?
Has anyone considered a lawsuit asking why the 4 minor parties, whose total vote in the 2010 General Election for at least one statewide office exceeded 1,000,000 votes collectively, are being discriminated against? I don’t have any problem with real “independents” serving, but the 4 ballot-positioned minor parties should be included also.
To: Richard Winger
So the four selected non-Republican and non-Democrat commission selectee are all decline to state a party
affilation electors. If so, who checked on what type
of ballot they selected in the last three direct primaries? Has all of these four, declined to select
a primary ballot under the terms of SB 28 rejected the
quilified party primary ballots as declined to state a party affliation at the time of registration.
Also, with the “double bubble” Presidential Primary issues
in Los Angeles County in 2008, did any of the four ask for
an SB 28 style ballot if the were Los Angeles County electors? Has anyone check this out?
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party
The 14 party hacks will be the New Age gerrymander commission.
Result – more circa 25 percent minority rule in CA —
half the votes in half the gerrymander districts for control by one gang of robot party hack gerrymander control freaks — even if all of the districts are perfect mini-copies of the shape of CA.
——–
P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.
NO gerrymander commission is needed.
NO top 2 primary is needed.
Who has ANY brains in CA — to do a PROPER PR/App.V. petition or even a PROPER gerrymander math case — to even perhaps SAVE Western Civilization from a minority rule gerrymander COLLAPSE ???
#6 There is a requirement that commissioners had to have been consistently registered with a political party or DTS for 5 years prior to their appointment, and the application required that applicants provide addresses where they had been registered previously within the 5 year period so that this could be verified. The registration information was verified.
It was also a requirement that a commissioner had voted in at least two of the last three general elections. There is nothing about voting in the primary. Is selection of the primary by DTS/other party members public record in California? Maybe you should have checked that out during the screening process (it might still be possible to make a public comment on the final 6 commissioners).
One of the criteria for selection to the commission was “ability to be impartial”. If a DTS voter had consistently voted in the Republican or Democratic primary, it could suggest the possibility of partiality towards one of the major parties.
Voters who had a more active partisan activity such as membership on party central committees, were not eligible. For an ordinary voter, party affiliation doesn’t mean much beyond intent to participate in the party primary. Someone who declines to (publicly) state in advance which party they intended to affiliate with at the next primary, yet consistently did affiliate with a party are not meaningfully distinguishable on the basis of non-partisanship. It is unlikely that either the Democrats or Republicans would permit participation if they did not feel that the voters who chose their primary favored their party.
How about a high tech brain scan of the 14 ??? — show a Donkey or Elephant and detect any brain waves of each — assuming robots have any brain waves.
To: Jim Riley
To the issue of DTS a party affliation at the time of registration, what about being registered in two parties
at the same time. In the case of Rayna Mike King, wife of
the person using the labal AI for Lt. Governor in 2010,
back in 2007 she was registered in one county as American
Independent and an other county as Republican. She waa
removed from the National Committee and State Central
Committee for being registered Republican in Los Angeles
County by a meeting of the State Central Committee, even
though Gary Odom ask that not happen. Also, at the time
of the removal she had received three awards for being
Republican Businesswoman of the Year.
Sincerely, Mark Seidenberg, Vice Chairman, American Independent Party.
P.S. Even Don Grundmann voted for the removal of Rayna
Mike King from the national committee and state central
committee of the AIP at the 2007 meeting of the state central committee in Sacramento. It should be noted that
Don Grundmann’s last day on the state central committee
was September 2, 2008.
An Alabama Independent Says:
December 15th, 2010:
“Are we really surprised? ”
Lake: Told ya so, told ya so!
The deflection(s) given to my allies whom allied to the commission were just ridicules. Not long enough as ‘declined to state’ and or party member. Not long enough at current address. On and on ……….
NONE OF the folks associated with Citizens For A Better Veterans Home types, NOT ONE, made it over the first, initial screening. Not one!
#10 There were a number of conflict of interest provisions. Participation on a central committee or close family relationship to a candidate might have disqualified her.
The forms required an applicant to note all addresses they had been registered at over the past 5 years.
What does a registration residence have to do with how much each New Age gerrymander commission person is a Donkey or Elephant robot party hack ???
P.R. and App.V. — NO moron/robot gerrymander commissions are needed.
#13 If someone had changed their party affiliation recently (last 5 years) it indicates that they are not a reliable donkey or elephant robot hack for purposes of filling those slots on the commission. Including on the application the addresses at which a voter had been registered over the previous five years simplifies the process by which the hackfulness criterion is verified.