Home  About  In the News  Publications  Blog  Join  Donate  > Inside Stanford  Stanford News CA high school exit exam op-ed in the SF Chronicle Op-ed on State Textbooks in the Fresno Bee State of the Union in Stanford Daily California Ballot Proposition Op-eds Stanford Progressive on Roosevelt Institution Hill staffers attend Roosevelt Rx briefing, Hart Senate building, September 19th 2008 News from the National Office Post-Election Center TI Launched Roosevelt LiveBlogs the Presidential Debate On Campus Midwest Regional Fall Policy Workshop Blum speaks at Vermont Campus Compact conference Coverage of the Johns Hopkins Chapter Launch > More "We cannot always build the future for our youth, but we can build our youth for the future." — Franklin Roosevelt    Proposition 77: A Step in the Wrong Direction for Clean Politics in California > Roosevelt Home > Stanford > Op-Eds > Proposition 77: A Step in the Wrong Direction for Clean Politics in California Your name: Your email: Recipient's name: Recipient's email: Message: To prevent spam, please enter the first letter of the recipient's email and the first letter of the recipient's name in the box below (for example, if the name is "John Doe" and the email is "bigjohn@johndoe.com", you would enter "jb"): by Devon Swezey, , Roosevelt Institution at Stanford University The U.S. Congress currently has an incumbency rate of 93 percent. That rate is even higher in the California state legislature, where not a single seat changed parties in the last statewide election. This statistic highlights the important implications that redistricting has for California's electoral process. Proposition 77, on the ballot in California this November, seeks to amend the state constitution by reforming state redistricting laws. The measure would do little to increase competition among candidates for elected office and would exclude the public from political debate. Prop. 77 proposes that legislative leaders select three retired judges to redraw district lines. Because judges are politically neutral, proponents say the new districts will be drawn more fairly than the current ones. But judges are seldom divorced from political ideology. Politicians have agendas, and they choose nominees for the bench based on whether they believe a given nominee will support these agendas. A group of judges appointed by legislative leaders seems unlikely to work for increased competition among candidates for elected office--especially because these judges would be selected by current legislators who, presumably, would prefer to keep their jobs. Californians should be concerned about the potential for gerrymandering if Prop. 77 is written into the state constitution. Prop. 77 is unlikely to encourage the robust competition that ensures our elected representatives will remain honest and cognizant of the needs of Californians. California leads the country technologically, economically, and ideologically. We should set the trend in clean politics as well--and Prop. 77 would be a huge step in the wrong direction.   The Roosevelt Institution is a nonpartisan, nonprofit national think tank devoted to bringing students' policy ideas to the policy process. The opinions expressed on this site are exclusively those of its members. DC Headquarters: Roosevelt Institution / 2100 M St NW Suite 610 / Washington, DC 20037 || (202) 833-1359