California Commonwealth
We Are Restoring Representation in California
Latest News
June 18, 2009
Website redesign complete. Details continue to be refined. If you see any errors or problems, please let us know.
January 21, 2009
At the hearing today, the judge did not dismiss the case as the opposition had hoped, but instead said he would read our brief more carefully before he makes his ruling!
December 1, 2008
Lawsuit filed in Federal Court, charging that Californians do not have true representation.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
This is what 400 representatives looks like. Does this look adequate or overwhelming for 1,200,000 persons? The citizens have access to their representatives. In California we do not. How many Assembly reps should we have for our population of 38,000,000? At least 400?
What are the Benefits to better Representation?
- Better Access - The common citizen would have more access to their representative.
- Competitive races - More representatives and smaller districts would make races for the Assembly more competitive and less costly. The value of each citizen’s vote would be greater and candidates would go to the voters to get these votes.
- Accountability - Smaller districts increase accountability. Not only of the Assembly members themselves, but all of Government. The closer the average representative is to the persons they represent, the more they are like them and hold their values.
- Less Gerrymandering - Smaller districts would be more representative of common community interests. There is less chance to create fractured or orphan districts.
- Fewer Assistants - Try contacting your Assembly member. Unless you are a personal friend, a major VIP or a large donor, you are likely to get sent to one of your Assembly representatives army of personal assistants. You should have access to the person you voted for and not be forced to pay more taxes for these unaccountable officeholders.
- Lower Taxes - Studies show, the fewer representatives, the more Government spending. More Government spending translates into higher taxes! The correlation for this was 97%!
- Less corruption - Simply speaking, the greater access that each citizen has to their representative the less chance of corruption.
GENERAL QUESTIONS
What is this lawsuit about?
California has over 38 million people living within its borders. By most modern standards it is a country unto itself and it is run by 120 people half a continent away in Sacramento : 80 in the State Assembly, 40 in the State Senate.
The Assembly, the Lower chamber was intended to be the part of the elective branch of the Government in which the common citizen was supposed to have access. They no longer do and have not for decades.
These Assembly electoral districts are so overpopulated that any serious contest to hold such a seat requires mega-bucks in mass media campaigning just to get the contestants names heard. Further, the districts are deliberately gerrymandered to make them safe for incumbents, be they Democrat or Republican. Consequently, new faces are seldom elected until old faces have been termed out, and third parties don’t stand a chance at all of being elected.
The present dis-representative size of Assembly districts (more than 475,000 persons for every member) has not always been the case. In 1850, when representation was more carefully valued, there were 36 Assembly members or one for every 2,500 citizens. After the 1854, the size of the Assembly was expanded to its present size of 80 to give the greater number of citizens access since there was tremendous population growth at the time. However since 1854 the population has mushroomed continuously, doubling many times over, without any new concern for maintaining representational integrity. Consequently, today’s Assembly is so out of touch with the people that the only way to get real reform is through the initiative-petition process.
Of all the 50 states in the US of A, California has the worst representation in its lower chamber. Texas is second worst, and it is 3 times better than California (150,000 member districts as opposed to 475,000). Even the State Senates of other states are more representative to their constituents than California ’s Assembly.
The Founders of the United States Assumed that representation, especially in the lower chambers would increase with the population. Time has shown us, that is not what has happened.
What would a victory in this case accomplish?
It’s all about representation and who has it!
Right now, the common citizen does not have access to the legislators or the representatives they vote for. When you call your representative, you are lucky if you get a hold of one of their assistants and the chances you will speak to your representative directly are between slim and none. At this time, only lobbyists and those who have money have access. An increase in representation would bring representation back into the common citizens realm where they too would have access and their vote would mean something. Government of the people and for the people will once against be restored.
"Don’t we really have enough Politicians already?"
When we have no access to those who represent us, they are Politicians. When we gain access, they will become Representatives.
Most people I know feel that their representatives are "Politicians." I do not believe that this word is generally used in a positive manner either. It is pretty clear to most people, that when an officeholder becomes divorced from his or her constituents, they cease to be "Representatives" and become "Politicians." Many people feel that they’re all Politicians.
There may be little difference by definition, but to most citizens, this means something. Most of the people who support me in this effort expressed this fact and are disgusted with the system as it stands. Thos elected to office do what they wish. The common citizen is left merely to pay for the circus and in the end few people feel there is much merit to Government. In my experience, this issue is felt by everyone, not just third party members, but Prominent Republicans and Democrats.
Could a large body work effectively?
It will function better and in the interests of the citizen’s of the state.
The real business of the Legislature is done in the committees. Right now, the committees are so overloaded, they cannot possibly do their jobs. They bundle jurisdictions so tightly, a contortionist could not find room to twist.
Large Legislative bodies do exist and there are a number of examples that we can look to:
In our own United States , New Hampshire’s House of Representatives is a prime example as it boasts having the most democratically elected, representative body in the World. There are 400 members and each district of their lower chamber has one representative for every 3,000 or so citizens.
When elected, the new representatives often put their home phone number into the local paper inviting people to come see them. Money is not a major factor in getting elected as most people running for office have the ability within a two-year elective cycle to visit everyone in their district. Still further, those elected are paid $100 per year and citizens may give input directly to this body at the State Capital at sub-committee meetings. It is a citizen’s legislature and they have their citizen-constituents interests in mind. It is also of interest to note that their motto is "Live free or die". Few doubt that good representation does lend a hand to freedom.
The British House of Commons in Parliament was (which the Assembly is more or less modeled after) is a very effective body with its over 600 members. The word Parliament comes from Parler La Ment which means to speak the mind. As it stands today in California , even with the freedom of speech, few believe that their voice is being heard and certainly not for the common good in the Halls of power in our state government!
There are other such large deliberative bodies of over 1,000 members in the world that we look to as examples. Great Britain ’s House of Lords was for a long time almost 1,000 members in size. A recent change has reduced that to almost 800 members. The Soviet Union used to have more than 1,000 members in its Politburo before the country was split into smaller nations. Surely in this age of electronic communication California can do as well as others have with large legislatures?
In History, there were a number of Representative Bodies that were enormous by today’s standards. The Athenian Ekklesia had at one point over 6,000 members!
What’s the cost to the taxpayers?
What the voters decide the costs to be.
With the increase of representation, the citizens compensation committee would have to reset the salaries of the Assembly. One key factor in determining the salaries of the representatives is their duties. Whatever the increase in representation, their duties would be decreased proportionally. This means there would not be a need for as many staff members and thus less pay.
How would elections be effected?
They would be more competitive and less costly.
Smaller districts would have the effect of making it les costly to run for office. Therefore, they would be more competitive and more dependent upon their own constituents for their votes. Right now, the districts are so large, no one runs for office because the task is just so daunting. No one in the Assembly has lost election in the last 4 election cycles in California . In essence, once elected, you stay in. This is known as an "Autocracy" and it is a very sad state of affairs to be in. It represents an unhealthy system of governance that bases itself on elections. It means, elections don’t work.
-- Michael C. Warnken, Chief Plaintiff
Visitors Since July 6 2009: 484