“COMPETITIVE” ASSEMBLY SEATS IN CALIFORNIA – IS REDISTRICTING REFORM NEEDED?

[courtesy of California Progress Report]

OR, DO G.O.P. CANDIDATES NEED BETTER CANDIDATES AND BETTER POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS?

By Bill Cavala
A veteran of over 30 years in Sacramento

An election district is either “safe” for the Democrats or Republicans or it is “competitive” - a seat where the outcome is not predetermined by party registration numbers.

I would argue that any Assembly District carried by Phil Angelides is a “safe” Democratic seat. Logically, then, seats carried by Governor Schwarzenegger that were also won by the Democratic candidate for Assembly are “competitive” districts. Or safe Republican seats. I would argue any seat where Richard Mountjoy defeated Diane Feinstein is a safe GOP seat.

Schwarzenegger carried 22 districts won by the Democrat for Assembly.

Mountjoy carried 19 seats against Feinstein, all also carried by the Republican for Assembly.

So 41 seats in the Assembly are invulnerable to challenge by the party out of power.

But that leaves 39 seats that have been carried by either the Democrat or the Republican. These seats are competitive between the two parties – by definition.

So why don’t seats change hands? Why have the Democrats controlled the Legislature from time immemorial (excepting only 1994-6)? Well, we Democrats have a slight edge in registration. If you count only Democrats and Republicans, we have about a 51-49 edge 6, 667,437 of the 12,029,910 voters registered with either the Dems or the Reps. With 51% of the two-party registration, we control 54% of the Assembly seats.