If we know anything after this week, it's this much: if you're a celebrity, moving to California might not be a bad idea. One of two things could happen. You could be accused of some heinous crime, like, say, child molestation, and the odds are that you'll get acquitted and then you'll be free to do whatever the hell you want for the rest of your life because no self-respecting prosecutor is ever again going to put his or her career on the line to nail you. Or, you could be elected governor. Which would be OK too.
The latter, of course, is what happened to Arnold Schwarzenegger, and while his popularity is on a downward swing in the Golden State, he should be commended for using his unique position to push for the ultimate in political reform: putting an end to drawing legislative district lines in a manner that favors incumbents and their political parties.
As things work now in California (and everywhere else), every 10 years state legislators get together and carve up their states into legislative districts based on the latest census data. They spend more time on this than they do on, say, examining their budgets. Schwarzenegger wants to give the whole process over to a group of retired judges who, presumably having no dogs in the political hunt, would take partisanship out of the process. If he succeeds, it could mean great things for the rest of us, because, when it comes to politics anyway, what happens in California often spreads like wildfire across the rest of the country.
Why? Because the current process—known as "gerrymandering"—disenfranchises moderate, independent and nonpartisan voters for the benefit of ideologically motivated partisans. If a district is drawn to elect a Democrat, for instance, then the "real" race for the seat is in the Democratic primary, in which only self-identified Democratic voters will vote. The primary contest therefore becomes less about who is the best candidate for the district than about who is the best Democrat in the race—or, more to the point, who panders best to Democratic special interest groups.
The same is true on the other side. Nashville, for instance, has 10 state House seats and, of these, only one is drawn to be Republican (currently occupied by Rep. Beth Halteman Harwell). Harwell has announced her intention to step down next year, and there will be a bevy of upstarts vying to take her place. In a district where Republicans outnumber Democrats three-to-one, the race will be decided in the Republican primary in which candidates will try to out-Republican one another. Who's the most anti-income tax? Who's the most pro-life? Who can demagogue gay adoption the best? Whoever it is, that's the person who has the best chance to win the GOP primary, and thus, the best chance to become the next state representative. He or she may not reflect the actual political center of the district. Voters reflecting that political center don't have their proportionate say until the general election, but, alas, that election is a non-event.
The ultimate result is political polarization on Capitol Hill. Partisan Democrats face off against partisan Republicans and neither have any incentive to temper themselves, because their only concern is being reelected by the same set of doctrinaire voters who put them there in the first place. And we wonder why they can't ever get anything substantial done.
Ending gerrymandering would do more for legislative reform in Tennessee than a whole bucketful of "ethics" laws ever could. It would give all of the people, instead of just the ones with partisan axes to grind, a real voice in the process.
The new Republican
Political Notes doesn't have a Washington desk, but if we did it would be manned by this fellow, a one-time Nashvillian who now hangs his hat in D.C. and who emailed us a nice summary of what so many Democrats have been thinking about Gov. Phil Bredesen's recent national radio broadcast on Medicaid reform:
"It's outrageous that Bredesen has suddenly become the Democrat spokesman for Medicaid reform. What a damn joke! The guy is busy throwing 300,000 people to the wolves in Tennessee and has the audacity to go on the radio to tout his ideas for Medicaid 'reform.' The Dems should have their heads examined for letting this guy speak for them. Somehow I just don't see Hillary running for president in 2008 on Bredesen's plan for Medicaid. 'Let's do to Medicaid what Newt tried to do to Medicaid.' Great idea. Bredesen should join the Republican Party. Somebody should be getting ready to challenge him in the Dem primary. It just goes to show the pathetic state of political discourse in Tennessee. That's all I have to say. I feel better now."
Comments (0)