\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-includes\/js\/tinymce\/plugins\/wordpress\/img\/trans.gif\" "\\"More...\\""){kind=spacer}
<\/p>\nLast week, New York State Supreme Court Judge Patrick McGrath struck down proposed language for the upcoming Proposal 1, which is a referendum question that amends the state constitution to change the state redistricting process. \u00a0The vote on Proposal 1 will be on the ballot this November.<\/p>\n
Citing the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the judge said that Prop 1\u2019s description of the proposed redistricting Commission as “independent” was inaccurate.<\/p>\n
In the ruling, Judge McGrath found the language was misleading since the proposed commission “cannot be described as \u2018independent\u2019 when eight out of the ten members are the handpicked appointees of the legislative leaders and the two additional members are essentially political appointees by proxy.”
\n<\/p>\n
The judge\u00a0is right: The proposed redistricting Commission is as “independent” as a puppet. \u00a0The redistricting Commission is appointed by the Legislature, its plan must be approved by the Legislature, and if its plan is rejected, the Legislature ultimately draws its own lines.<\/p>\n
The decision is an important one.<\/p>\n
Voters will hear a lot about the supposed virtues of Prop 1; don\u2019t believe them.\u00a0 In fact, the plan is worse <\/em>than even the miserable status quo<\/em>.<\/p>\n The proposal \u2013 a classic Albany deal \u2013 purports to reform the state\u2019s redistricting process by adding interesting and even laudable measures about transparency and access to redistricting data.\u00a0 However, any value of the new redistricting plan ultimately hinges on the decisions of the new Commission created under the proposal.<\/p>\n Voters will hear about the limitations on who can serve on the Commission.\u00a0 And it is true that lawmakers, their families, and lobbyists will not be allowed to serve.\u00a0 But here is where the bamboozle begins:\u00a0\u00a0 The Legislature (meaning the leaders) still chooses the members of this Commission.\u00a0 And if these individuals act independently,the Legislature is still the final decisionmaker of the redistricting plan<\/span>.<\/p>\n Prop 1 allows the Legislature to approve the plan developed by their hand-picked appointees.\u00a0 And here\u2019s the kicker:\u00a0 If the sitting legislators who will run in the districts don\u2019t like the plan,Proposal #1 allows the Legislature to draw its own map.<\/p>\n And that is precisely the reason why Judge McGrath struck the summary language for Prop 1 \u2013 the plan does not create anything that could be described as “independent.”<\/p>\n But it gets worse.\u00a0 The constitutional amendment requires that existing district lines must be considered in drafting the new plan.\u00a0 No such requirement exists in the current constitution.\u00a0 Forcing all future mapmakers to rely on the existing political boundaries<\/em> enshrines the awful system New York has in place.<\/p>\n Proposal 1 makes New York\u2019s miserable redistricting system\u00a0worse<\/em>. \u00a0Proposal 1 requires future mapmakers to consider the existing legislative district lines. \u00a0Nothing like that is required now.<\/p>\n This proposal is not only cynical in that it masquerades as reform when it really is not, but it actually makes the system worse<\/em> than it is now.\u00a0 And once it is chiseled into the state Constitution, it is very difficult to remove.<\/p>\n New Yorkers should reject Proposal 1. \u00a0It is not reform. \u00a0It is merely the\u00a0status quo<\/em> masquerading as reform.\u00a0 New Yorkers deserve neutral language when they step up to vote about whether to revise our fundamental charter, the State Constitution.\u00a0 This language ain”t it.<\/p>\n That\u2019s all for now.\u00a0 I\u2019ll be keeping an eye on the Capitol and will talk to you again next week.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Last week, New York State Supreme Court Judge Patrick McGrath struck down proposed language for the upcoming Proposal 1, which is a referendum question that amends the state constitution to change the state redistricting process. \u00a0The vote on Proposal 1 will be on the ballot this November. Citing the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the judge said that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[98,37,28],"class_list":["post-1149","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-prop-1","tag-redistricting","tag-voting"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1149","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1149"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1149\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1459,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1149\/revisions\/1459"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1149"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1149"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nypirg.org\/capitolperspective\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1149"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}