Politics in California: Redistricting Process 2011 and Open Primary Election - Essay Example

? s School Politics in California: Redistricting Process and Open Primary Election The redistricting process has recentlybeen changed in one of the most populous states of the U.S, California, which is expected to result in massive changes in the district demographics of the state. This will in turn lead towards major political changes in the state over which efforts for gerrymandering are taking place to protect the positions of the most competitive and influential incumbents. However, if the current maps proposed by the citizen`s committee stays, there will be intense political changes in the state which will further be reflected in the congress as even slight changes in the results from the primaries of these 53 districts can affect the congress rulings, considering the current political situation. Moreover, the decision to hold primary elections will further intensify the situation as the position of the influential incumbents dominant in the Congress for years is at stake. Also, in the aftermath of the redistricting process some of the incumbents will be forced to retire however in other case, incumbents will be running against each other for elections, thus the open primaries would be significant in this context. In this case, it is being expected that the extreme Republicans or even Democrats will be replaced by new and neutral candidates by virtue of the open primaries, thus about a quarter of the seats owned by California in the Congress will be replaced by new candidates who wouldn’t have experienced the process before. To elaborate on the effects of the redistricting process, it is crucial to highlight the significance of redistricting to analyze the issues and implications of the process in California. The process of redistricting relates to the congressional allocation of seats to the population of U.S. There are basically 435 seats whereby all seats have been uniformly distributed amongst the entire population of the U.S. However, the population census and the demographics keep changing with time, and thus they have to be re-analyzed with time to come up with fair allocation of congressional seats to the entire population, thus, after every 10 years the government goes through the process of redistricting based on the changes in population demographics of the U.S. California is one of the most populous state of U.S with 53 representatives assigned to this state alone. Historically, when redistricting took place it had no effect at all, and there was just a change in one of the seats which was swapped between the seats as a result of the primaries. Gerrymandering is one of the ways how the incumbents influence the redistricting process to avail the best chances to secure their positions, by changing the inclinations of the maps in such a way that the maximum number of voters` base is covered in the areas representing their districts. This results in the distorted figure of the maps that are produced after the gerrymandering process. The redistricting process held in 2011 was indeed a unique one as an effort was made to appoint neutral members for the purpose. In case of California as well, 14 members were appointed all of whom weren’t seasoned politicians or incumbents, rather amateurs which suggests that the chances of political point scoring or distortion of results was near to impossible. For this reason, many of the congressmen seemed unhappy with the decision. "When you go from a system that allows incumbents to draw districts that favor themselves to one that disallows considering incumbents at all, you're bound to have some incumbents paired together and some open districts," suggests Tom Bonier who`s the adviser for Democrats redistricting process. This implies that if the issue of incumbency is not taken into account, chances are that multiple incumbents will end up running for the seat in the same district. Some of the general trends which emerged or are expected to emerge in the future can conveniently be traced after an analysis is conducted over the resultant maps from the redistricting process. The biggest issue that has emerged is the weakening of the positions of those either already on the top positions in important committees or aiming at acquiring these important committee appointments. “Some voters want more say at the ballot box and they want their elected officials to pay attention to them, while some want their elected officials to be able to get things done in Congress," suggests Professor Brown. "The two are not mutually exclusive, of course, but rare is legislator who is attuned to his/her district and senior enough to make his/her constituents' priorities the nation's concerns.” However, one point of view in this regard is in the favor of democratic candidates both in the state elections as well as the primaries (Blake 2011). The current situation in the house is a crucial one as the Congress is four members short of Democrat’s supports after which they will be forming two third majority. This aspect is significant in the context of the new legislature being proposed over the taxation trends for U.S, whereby the increased numbers of democrat representatives from the California districts would be suitable for the Democrats in the Congress. Analysts are predicting that about half the incumbents will end up running against each other in the 2012 election, which will benefit the democrats in the long run. The general division of Democrats to Republican states was initially 33-19 whereby the seats for the Democrats are expected to further increase in the after math of the redistricting. Even the consultant for Republican redistricting process, Max Redroax has indicated that democrats are expected to take away about 3-5 seats in the 2012 elections, thus Democrats would heavily benefit from the redistricting process held in California as well as Illinois where the situation is similar. The positions of a few republicans will clearly be at stake in the prevailing scenario, which includes influential candidates including David Drier, Elton Gallegly, Brian Bilbray and Gary Miller as their voter`s base will be most influenced by the redrawing of the districts. Similarly, the position of Dan Lungren along with Jeff Denham will also be effected negatively as they already had a tough match in the previous elections. Similarly, a few of the democrats are also at a comparatively vulnerable position as Loretta Sanchez, Lois Capps and Jim Costa hold the voter`s base which will be distorted and changed as a result of the redistricting process. Similarly, another Democratic candidate Dennis Cardoza is at a vulnerable position when it comes to the results of the redistricting process. In this scenario Gallegly might have to quit as he would have to share the district with another Republican Buck McKeon, and there doesn’t seem any option for switching places as there isn’t any vacancy available in any nearby district, and since Gallegly is already about to retire in a few years, he might have to consider this option, otherwise due to the open primaries a democratic candidate might take advantage of the divided votes. Same is the case with Drier who has a stronghold in the Los Angeles Hispanic community, however since he would now have to run against an incumbent from the same party Lewis thus he might also consider the option of backing off. Miller might even consider moving East, however even that region is dominated by another democratic candidate. Howard was one candidate who had benefitted the most form the redistricting held in 2001, however due to the changes in territory his district now falls under a controversial region, thus he will also have to take risks in future elections. Thus, many other districts can be traced where the incumbents will have a strong competition not only with those from the opposite party, but also the ones from the same party. Thus, the effect of the redistricting is most apparent on Drier who was the chair head for House Rules Committee and Howard Berman who has been on the House Affairs Committee. (Wood 2011) Alongside another effect of the redistricting, and a very important one, will be the inclusion of about 40% of new candidates to the 120 legislation seats, thus being a way forward for progression. This will further be complimented by the open primaries which will be held from the next primaries. The open primaries were introduced under proportion 14 whereby people will vote for the candidates irrespective of their party affiliation. This was a step taken towards progression of America so that the issue of polarity can be dealt with (Whallen 2011). Thus, it is being expected that the moderates will take lead this time which will result on the introduction of the new candidates, i.e. the first timers to Congress will be a progressive step for the government as this is symbolic for the minimization of the party politics. Thus, a run-off election will take place the next time elections take place with new and neutral territories where the one with more than 50% votes will win. Thus, it would be interesting to see how the course of campaigning is changed to meet the needs of the changing times especially by the incumbents. In this context, given the scenario three major changes are expected to result from the two developments that have taken place. “Now all voters matter. You’re not just playing to your primary base,” said Republican strategist Kevin, “The thought is it will create Republicans and Democrats who are less ideological because they have to attract a broader coalition to gain office.” (Blake 2011) This indicates the first and the most major change in the system which can prove to be a way forward in the process and change the course of politics in even other regions where the effect might penetrate. This implies that partisanship will be replaced by genuine votes, which the sole decision is taken by the people of the state in the form of the support for open primaries. Earlier, those Democrats of Republicans taking extreme positions on the party lines were dominant, however the public wanted to elect representatives who would be more considerate of the districts rather than the wishes and desires of the party lines. Thus, the decision was laid upon on the intentions of the people to have a fairer system which is more considerate about the issues and concerns of the district, by gaining the attention of the representative when they seek votes from individuals. Secondly, the issue of the incumbents running against each other is also a significant effect of the developments in California, i.e. the redistricting and the inclusion of the open primaries in the process, as these changes would result in the allocation of same districts to more than one incumbent. The issue becomes more intense when the incumbents are from the same party, since one of them might have to quit the course of politics completely to save the other incumbent of the same party. However, the most complication and saddening situation arises when the incumbents were holding important committee positions, and they weren’t expecting that as a result of the changes they will have to give up the position. Lastly, the entry of the new candidates to the legislative process will add to the progressive thinking as the new minds will bring along their diverse thoughts which may add value to the already prevailing legislative system. However, politically looking at the larger picture, the democrats seem to be benefitting the most out of the scenario, as their seats seem to be expanding. Conclusively, the most immediate and the most current effect may seem to result in the passage of the tax legislation by the Democrats if only four more democrats are added. Thus, one may conclude that there will be sudden changes in the political system in the aftermath of the changes in the procedures of elections in California. References: Blake, A. (2011, 1 13). Retrieved 06 18, 2012, from Washington Post: The fix: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/mapping-the-future/14-angry-men-means-53-concerne.html Blake, A. (2011, 06 10). Incumbents lose, democrats win the California Redestricting process. Retrieved 06 18, 2012, from Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/incumbents-lose-democrats-win-with-california-redistricting-proposal/2011/06/10/AGYXoIPH_blog.html Whalen, B. (2011, 05 20). California’s Open Primary: An Open Can of Worms? Retrieved 06 18, 2012, from Advancing a free Society: http://www.advancingafreesociety.org/2011/05/20/can-of-worms/ Wood, D. B. (2011, 10 30). How new redistricting maps could reshape California politics. Retrieved 06 18, 2012, from CS Monitor: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0830/How-new-redistricting-maps-could-reshape-California-politics Read More