On December 18, a statewide initiative petition was submitted to the Michigan Secretary of State’s office. It would set up a non-partisan redistricting commission to draw U.S. House and state legislative district boundaries. See this story. Thanks to Thomas Jones for the link.
Obvious Donkey plot to copy the CA gerrymander commission (controlled by undercover CA Donkey agents — ie LIARS who claimed to be *independent*).
PR and AppV
Hey Richard – Are there any states with such a Commission already in place?
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2017/12/18/gerrymander-redistricting-michigan-petition-constitutional-amendment/962509001/
Another news story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistricting_commission
1/2 or less votes x 1/2 districts = 1/4 or less control —
whoever / whatever is making the district lines.
IE — MORONS with their commission schemes.
—
PR and AppV
Unfortunately, the proposed commission isn’t truly non-partisan. The Titanic Two have guaranteed seats, as well as some veto power (five peremptory challenges for the leaders of each in the two legislative houses). The alternative parties don’t have any such guarantee, and in fact may have a hard time finding people eligible to apply. Michigan Libertarians in particular would suffer for Gary Johnson’s success by having anyone active enough in MLP to even run for precinct delegate (thousands across the state, as they’ll have to do to avoid having their party taken over) disqualified for the commission. Oh, and those “independents” on the commission — nobody would be allowed to look behind their declarations of independence.
Basic PR (NOT exact) —
Total Party members = Total Members X Total Party Votes / Total Votes
TPM = TM x TPV / TV
— whatever districts are used.
Both majority rule — Democracy — and minority representation.
Difficult ONLY for math MORONS and gerrymander oligarchs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Citizens_Redistricting_Commission
including the undercover Donkey agents = NO chances for non-Donkeys
= TOTAL rigged gerrymanders
@JALP, Since Michigan does not have partisan registration, and any affiliation is made in secret, there is no way to know someone’s partisan identity. Practically anyone who has a public partisan identity (through being a candidate or party official) is disqualified.
Practically any qualified applicant may declare whatever identity they want to (and they have a constitutional right to do so). About the only protection is that the selection is random, and probably most applicants will be somewhat honest. Some persons who claim to be independent may not be capable of doing an objective self-evaluation, and because someone is not a Republican or Democrat does not mean that they are moderate or middle-of-the road. They might drive on the shoulders, or even in the ditches on either side.
Applicants may either be volunteers who send in an application, or solicited at random by the SOS (do you want to be on the commission?, if so sent this back in). The process appears to be quite different from California which screened for qualifications, and also required a statement of financial interest, which drove off a lot of potential applicants.
After pools of 60 Democrats, 60 Republicans, and 80 Know-Nothings are formed (1/2 from volunteers, 1/2 solicited) randomly selected but geographically and demographically balanced, the four legislative leaders will get 5 strikes each, as they attempt to get rid of the sleeper agents.
From the remaining 180+ persons in the pools, 4 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and 5 Know-Nothings will be chosen. These 13 will be expected to hire experts to guide them in drawing a plan.
If there is no concurrence (a majority of the commission, plus two members of each group) then each commissioner may submit a plan, and the commissioners will rank them like in a college football poll, and the plan with the highest score that is in the top half of at least two commissioners from the other groups will be chosen. This would be an opportunity for Rick Rino or Denny Dino to submit a plan that the commissioners in the “other” groups like.
The criteria for the plan are vague enough that the commissioners will feel threatened about getting sued if they don’t follow the advice of their expert advisors.
Summary: It’s got a good beat and you can litigate to it.
Stuck with a party label forever ???? — a really l—o—n—g time ???
One more gang of oligarchs — having more rigged gerrymander districts and more oligarchs ??? Duh.
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2017/08/31/voters-politicians-petition-committee/105151114/
31 Aug 2017
Donkey agents doing the petition — NOOOO surprise.
Some points back to @Jim Riley — building on my comments to the Board of State Canvassers in August:
https://www.facebook.com/jalp4thePeople/posts/1570498686335152
Alternative parties have proportionally more active supporters with “public partisan identities” — a certain amount of personnel “overhead” is needed to run any party. Past “public partisans” and their close family members would also be barred. And this disadvantage would be accentuated particularly for the Libertarians . . . or any other party that crosses the 5% primary threshold but doesn’t leap all the way up to being one of the top two parties in the legislature in a single bound.
If the idea were to treat fairly those who are active in politics but aren’t affiliated with either of the Titanic Two (those you call Know-Nothings but who at least know whom they don’t like), then either
* at least any party on the ballot at all should get its own guaranteed seat[s]; or
* only “public partisans” of the Titanic Two should be excluded from the “independent” pools.
But the descriptive text at the top of the petition gives the game away when it says that the “Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission” it would create would “consist of four members who self-identify with each of the two major political parties and five non-affiliated, independent members.” That’s as clear as anything needs to be — if you’re not a Democrat or a Republican, you can’t possibly have any other affiliation. At least not and take part in redistricting. Despite the fact that there are five other parties on the ballot in Michigan, and others also active in the state.
Also worth noting is that the ratio is still a bit off. Gallup’s most recent poll last month showed 25% self-identified as Republicans, 30% as Democrats, and 42% as independent of both; see http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/Party-Affiliation.aspx for a history of this poll. And Michigan is likely to be more independent, if anything, since as you point out citizens aren’t required to give a party affiliation in order to register to vote.
The peremptory challenges of the legislative leaders need not be used for eliminating “sleeper agents” as you call them. And are they more likely to be used on DINOs, RINOs, or IINOs?
Michigan may soon become the last state that doesn’t require financial disclosures of its sitting legislators, so of course there wouldn’t be a proposal to require them for this commission to help determine who gets to keep sitting . . . or enable economic/class as well as “geographic and demographic” sampling.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to argue by saying that “because someone is not a Republican or Democrat does not mean that they are moderate or middle-of-the road. They might drive on the shoulders, or even in the ditches on either side.” First, if we’re talking one-dimensional judgments, both Ds and Rs are considerably “right” of the true “magnetic” popular center. And considering where the “main road” has been for so long on gerrymandering (okay if you can get away with it), why should anyone be required to drive in the middle of that road to participate?
Summary: It may offer some benefits to the people, but bi-partisan is not non-partisan . . . and when the two parties claiming virtue for bi-partisanship are both tilted so far toward the 1%, the result is liable to be all too close to this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydAYWAQtqeo
@JALP,
I’m not disagreeing with you. My use of Know-Nothing was not necessarily meant to be pejorative, but simply to recognize that “independent” should not be construed as independent-thinking, disinterested, or moderate.
In Arizona, there were two Democrat commissioners, two Republican commissioners, and one independent. The four partisan commissioners chose the “independent” chair from 5 put forward by retired judges. One of the “independents” had a framed picture of herself and Nancy Pelosi. Another was so far left, that in comparison it made the Democratic Party look like Barry Goldwater. They basically agreed to the least worst. The commission agreed to have Republican counsel and Democratic counsel. The two Democrats and the independent chair then picked the Republican counsel. All the decisions were a 3:2 vote. In California a couple of the none Democrat-Republicans appeared to have political leanings to the left of Democratic, and perhaps P&F and Green parties.
60 Republicans will be chosen for one of the pools. 30 will be by persons who actively apply. Some will be by nerds. Others will be encouraged by their “friends” more active in the Republican Party. Someone who is a dues paying member, or regular contributor is not barred. I don’t know how many people will apply. If they were going to meet for two months at Mackinac Island in the summer, more would. If it was going to mean long drives across dreary Michigan in the winter, less so. A particular problem is that it doesn’t make clear how much time and effort might be required. The other 30 will be chosen based on random solicitation from the SOS. Who knows who would respond?
The 60 member Democratic pool and 80 member Know-Nothing pool will be chosen similarly. You seem to think it will lead to merry Democrat-Republicans driving the bus over a cliff, but I think it is more likely to be subverted. With no selection process other than not being overtly affiliated with a political party, the commission may be leaderless, or lead by someone who is randomly selected, or lead by the experts they hire. The 60, 60, and 80 group panels will be selected based taking into account geographic and demographic information. So they will deliberately ensure that 3% of the 200 are Yupers, a total of 6. And it is not clear that there will any stratified selection. What if there are only 200 applicants? Then all 200 will advance.
The SOS is required to send out 10,000 applications randomly in hopes of getting 30D+30R+40KN applicants. I have no idea how many would respond, or be particularly qualified if they do.
The legislative leaders get 20 strikes out of 200. If you were a Republican leader, you might try to keep Trump Democrats. You might strike lawyers or others who might be more inclined to lead, while keeping business leaders. But it is not going to have that much overall effect, when only 13 will be drawn from the 180 remaining applicants.
Then you get to the actual criteria which are warm and fuzzy and contradictory. The “experts” will explain everything. The commissioners won’t be able to contradict.
I think the “Independent” pool is the one most likely to be subverted, and the Titanic Two have various ways to do that — and the proposal is bi-partisan not non-partisan — and someone who canvasses for signatures or campaigns for votes using the claim that it is non-partisan is misleading either themselves or others or both.
(Not to mention that VNP would/will use up a lot of the support around for actual non-partisan, or possibly omni-partisan and non-partisan, redistrictring reform. If one wants to have voters not politicians making the decisions, and to keep sitting officeholdesr from protecting their own seats and their parties’, IMO it is not the best plan to leave so much control in so many ways in the hands of those who have made redistricting what it is today.)
I was reading through the literature of the group, and it claims;
Applicants must:
– Submit a completed application, resume, and two supporting letters of recommendation.
– Be a registered voter in Michigan.
– Identify the party (if any) that they affiliate themselves with, to ensure a balanced commission.
– Not be, or be closely related to, a current or former (in the past 6 years) political insider, including a candidate for partisan office, elected official to a partisan office, registered lobbyist, and party officer.
– Not be otherwise disqualified from office.
The text of the amendment does state that a completed application is required, but is there anything in the actual text that would indicate that a complete application would require a resume and two letters of recommendation? Does the SOS have an implied authority to make up the application, and then who is to judge the applications?
An application could require the following (some information would be redacted from public records, particularly before someone is selected as one of the Bakers Dozen.
Name
Address
Phone
E-mail
Birthdate (to confirm over 18)
US Citizen
Not Felon (or franchise restored)
Not Adjudicated as Mentally incompetent
Information to check registration (county and town or city)
Party Identification:
Since 2014:
[] Not elected.
[] …
[] Names and ages of children and stepchildren.
[] Names of parents and stepparents.
[] Names of spouses.
[] Agree not to run for partisan office (except federal) for five years.
[] Oath, Signature, and Date of Signature.
I don’t think any person should be presumed competent to know the political activities of any other person, including their spouse, children, and parents.
In California, applicants were screened, including interviews at the final stages. But I don’t see that in the Michigan initiative.
The concept is that the commission would be independent of the political class – but the selection process does nothing to ensure that the commissioners would be capable of independent thought. That is a particular problem given the nebulous nature of the redistricting requirements.
The original draft petition language did require a resume and two letters of application, but the final draft submitted to the Board of State Canvassers didn’t keep those requirements. I posted about this and other changes made during the process:
https://www.facebook.com/jalp4thePeople/posts/1568530809865273