|
ProPublica Ignores Worst Redistricting Lines
By JOHN HRABE Pulitzer Prize-winning ProPublica published an investigative report Wednesday into how Democratic political operatives influenced California’s independent redistricting commission. National media outlets lavished praise on the piece, describing it as “explosive,” “startling” and “exceptionally researched.” Charlie Mahtesian, national politics editor at Politico, tweeted, “Newsroom consensus: ProPublica piece on Calif is prob the single best piece of redistricting reporting all year.” However, the ProPublica story ignored the most explosive allegations first uncovered by CalWatchDog.com nearly six months ago. The exclusive CalWatchDog.com series exposed the political activities, campaign contributions and special interest connections of two redistricting commissioners. Neither the commissioners nor the California State Auditor’s background checks revealed such political affiliations. ProPublica’s story ties Democratic witnesses to the redistricting commission and connects the dots between a redistricting consultant and Democratic elected officials. The CalWatchDog.com series did one better: it directly connected commissioners to Democratic political candidates, campaigns and organizations. One redistricting commissioner, Dr. Gabino Aguirre, made several undisclosed campaign contributions to Democratic candidates. One contribution to Assemblyman Das Williams, D-Santa Barbara, posted on the California Secretary of State’s website nine days after the California Bureau of State Audits completed its background report on Mr. Aguirre. ‘Favorable Democratic District’The Ventura County Star, Williams’ hometown newspaper, reported on July 29, “Democratic Assemblyman Das Williams of Santa Barbara finds himself in a favorable Democratic district that includes Ventura, Ojai, Santa Paula and Fillmore.” ProPublica also detailed how Democratic front groups shaped the commission’s mapping. CalWatchDog.com first reported this fact in July and demonstrated an extensive relationship between a front group and Commissioner Gabino Aguirre. The Central Coast or Coastal Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy organized witness testimony, urged public comments, sent top personnel to testify before the commission and even proposed its own maps for California’s Central Coast. Maricela Morales, CAUSE’s co-executive director, spoke on the same panel as Gabino Aguirre at the 2011 California State Conference of the League of United Latin American Citizens. Just five days after the LULAC Conference, Morales made a 25-minute presentation to the redistricting commission in which she presented the organization’s proposed maps for Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Ventura Counties. At no point during the presentation did she or Commissioner Aguirre disclose any prior connection. Relationships Not DisclosedAssemblyman Das Williams previously served as a legislative analyst to the Coastal Alliance. Aguirre served as a member of the CAUSE advisory committee and contributed money to the organization. Neither CAUSE nor Commissioner Aguirre disclosed this relationship. The CalWatchDog.com series also first reported on four campaign contributions made within the past eighteen months by Commissioner Jeanne Raya’s business to a state political action committee. Campaign finance watchdogs have criticized the failure to disclose the business contributions valued at $1,000. The California State Auditor’s Office, which was legally obligated to complete background checks on commissioners, never reported on these campaign contributions. It explains why the State Auditor’s internal memos described their review process as “obviously rather brief” and “routine.” Based on the original CalWatchDog.com investigation, California Republican Party Chairman Tom Del Beccaro called for Commissioner Aguirre’s resignation. Del Beccaro called for another investigation following the ProPublica story. For more information on the California Redistricting Commission, see the links below to the CalWatchDog.com series and other articles: Part 1 of the Redistricting Series: “Gabino Aguirre’s Secret Political Past.” Part 2 of the Redistricting Series: “Did Gabino Aguirre Flout Code of Conduct?” Part 3 of the Redistricting Series: “Chart Shows Aguirre Conflicts of Interest.” Part 4 of the Redistricting Series: “Jeanne Raya Failed to Reveal Donations.” Part 5 of the Redistricting Series: “Muzzling Redistricting Commish Mike Ward.” Part 6 of the Redistricting Series: “Mike Ward: Redistricting Panel Broke Law.” CalWatchDog.com: “GOP Chairman Del Beccaro Demands Aguirre Removal.” Ventura County Star on the CAUSE/Aguirre/ Williams connection. City Journal on Voting Rights Act violations. Huffington Post on the commission’s problems. Flash Report on the Democratic strategy of front groups. OC Register Editorial on the CalWatchDog.com investigation.
Tags: California Citizens Redistricting Commission, California State Auditor, Das Williams, Gabino Aguirre, Jeanne Raya, John Hrabe, redistricting, Tom Del Beccaro Comments(5) |
June 19, 2013
CrimanlsDrawTheLines.ca.gov
Redraw the lines? Criminal investigation?
It is pretty clear state politics today are dominated by the recession and budget shortfall. The only way out is controlled spending which means across the board cuts from education to pensions. In addition the state should cut payroll taxes for newly started business for up to four years. Or some other program to incentivize small business. California has a great entrepreneurial spirit. Government leaders must encourage the flow of investment capital to the state. Rebuilding this sate goes through small business.
Too much special interest. Too much political contributions. Too much favors. Makes for a disaster in governance as witnessed by the citizens of California!
The whole ProPublica thing is a huge joke. Even the “ultra-liberal” Redding Record Searchlight says that: “the Republicans’ pose as innocent victims of a terrible deceit doesn’t pass the laugh test.”
Here’s the complete editorial:
Republicans in California are shocked — shocked! — that politics was going on in this year’s political redistricting.
A detailed article released online Wednesday by the investigative-reporting shop ProPublica — “How Democrats Fooled California’s Redistricting Commission” — reported on how Democratic operatives, organized out of Washington, used a variety of sub-rosa angles to try to influence the Citizens Redistricting Commission. That independent board, created by voter initiative, for the first time this year drew new political district boundaries without making incumbents’ interests the top priority.
The Democrats’ prime method, according to ProPublica? They offered testimony, nominally in the name of citizens or independent groups, that favored their own congressional representatives, all the while hiding their own party affiliation. In essence, they used front groups to manipulate the commission.
This bit of political subterfuge, to hear Republicans tell it, undermines the integrity of the entire redistricting. Tom Del Beccaro, the state party chairman, wrote in a message to party supporters, “The report systematically lays out the corrupt manipulation of what should have been an open and transparent process.”
Please. The Republican operatives’ real beef is that they tried to play the same game but failed to pull it off.
We’re not privy to insider discussions among congressional Republicans about their redistricting strategy, but we did closely follow the new maps’ unfolding as they affected the north state.
And what did we see? We saw Erin Ryan testify to the Citizens Redistricting Commission at Shasta College in April. She talked about how her work with the Girl Scouts, the United Way and private business had taken her all over rural Northern California over the years, and how the rugged geography made it implausible to link the conservative inland north state with the liberal North Coast — an idea floated by those keen for more political competition. She argued instead for a district centered on Interstate 5. Ryan’s geography lesson was persuasive and accurate, but somehow amid her list of bona fides she never got around to mentioning that she worked for Sen. Doug LaMalfa, who was very keen to keep a safe Sacramento Valley district for himself.
We saw comment letters to the commission from at least one other aide to LaMalfa and members of the Shasta County Republican Central Committee, again arguing about the importance of Sacramento Valley districts (which would have suited LaMalfa and Assemblyman Jim Nielsen) — and again neglecting to mention their partisan ties.
We saw the Shasta County Board of Supervisors corralled into the argument, sending a letter to the redistricting commission that advocated keeping Shasta County in a Senate district with Rocklin (as it has been for the past decade) instead of Roseville (as it will be under new maps). That change would have maintained a convenient status quo for LaMalfa and his fellow state Sen. Ted Gaines, and indeed it turned out LaMalfa’s office had drafted the letter for the supervisors to sign.
Are these dirty, underhanded machinations? Or just the rough rules of hardball politics? Take your pick. Either way, though, the Republicans’ pose as innocent victims of a terrible deceit doesn’t pass the laugh test.