REDISTRICTING PLANS: GLOOM & DOOM PREDICTED AFTER CALIFORNIA DECISION?

In reading Sarasota Herald Tribune political columnist Jeremy Wallace's blog early this morning, the first thing that hits me is the headline for Wednesday's entry:

Redistricting reforms defeated in Calif.; Florida next?

Sounds like Wallace --- or at least whoever writes his headlines for the blog --- are already predicting gloom and doom for the efforts of the Committee for Fair Elections to change the way congressional and legislative districts here are drawn, and who does the redistricting.

In California Tuesday, a somewhat similar effort championed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was defeated. Between the governor's approval ratings being in the toilet and the number and subject of propositions on the ballot to consider (there were six), along with the predictable off-year low voter turnout, it was simply a reciepe for the effort to crash and burn.

Florida will be different. If the proposal to for a bipartisan, independent committee to redraw districts makes the ballot, voters will decide the matter next November when they choose a new governor along with their U.S. Senator, congressional representative, and other state and local races.

Supporters of this measure are hard at work. In Sarasota County, Wallace notes that Common Cause of Florida Executive Director Ben Wilcox spoke there Monday in support. And the co-founder of the Committee for Fair Elections, former Education Secretary and U.S. Senate candidate Betty Castor, will speak to the Democratic Club of Sarasota Saturday.

But some legislative leaders, led by House Speaker Allan Bense (R - Panama City) are working to keep their clear conflict of interest alive...and using taxpayer money in the effort. Up to $50,000 of taxpayer money, to be exact. Even Senate President Tom Lee (R - Brandon), who also opposes the independent committee proposal, "could find no justification" to follow Bense's lead.

From Monday's Orlando Sentinel:

The controversy began this month, when Bense signed a contract with Tallahassee attorney George Meros to help block the proposed amendment. The deal calls for taxpayers to pay Meros $250 an hour up to $50,000, plus expenses.

The amendment they are targeting would take the once-a-decade job of redrawing political boundaries away from the Legislature and give it to a 15-member commission appointed by both parties and the chief justice of the state Supreme Court. A related amendment would force a redrawing in 2007, rather than waiting until after the 2010 census.

But even if backers collect the necessary 611,000 signatures, the Florida Supreme Court must also rule that the proposed amendment is not inaccurate or misleading and that it is limited to a single subject before it is placed on the 2006 ballot.

That's where Meros comes in. He is helping House lawyers try to convince the court that the amendment fails those tests because, among other issues, it does not alert voters that it is an "unprecedented" shift in powers from the Legislature to the courts and that it could jeopardize racial diversity among political districts.

Friends, that is a crock. It is by no means a shift in powers to the courts. The proposal, as you read above, creates a 15-member commission with representation by both major political parties AND the Florida Supreme Court. Also --- believe this --- any move to dilute racial diversity among political districts would be closely monitored by groups such as the NAACP and challenged immediately in court.

And when it comes to the political parties disagreeing on redrawing boundries, I say this: As long as you have reasonable individuals who have the best interest of Florida who are willing to comprimise when and where needed, it can work. If not, there is always the California proposal which would form a commission with retired judges. But the current system, which is clearly a conflict of interest, must end ASAP.