ProPublica's probe into Democratic activities vis-a-vis California's redistricting commission drew mounting criticism from newsies, pundits and academics. The overarching verdict: ProPublica blew it.
From Jerry Roberts and Phil Trounstine at CalBuzz: " All you really need to know about their over-reaching piece is this: the reporters studiously ignored documented research and statistical evidence they were provided that conflicted or undercut their conclusion — that projected Democratic gains in the state’s House delegation are the result of a secret and nefarious partisan manipulation of the political naïfs on the commission."
"In the course of their reporting, Calbuzz has learned, Pierce interviewed Eric McGhee of the Public Policy Institute of California, one of the state’s top non-partisan reapportionment experts, who explained to her that the gains forecast for Democrats represent a logical and expected result given a) demographic changes in the last decade and b) the criteria the commission was charged with using."
"McGhee even emailed Pierce an advance copy of a 45-page analysis of the commission plan he co-authored with Vladimir Kogan of UC San Diego, which is scheduled to be published in the California Journal of Politics and Policy in a few months. Among its conclusions: given the gerrymandered districts used for the last decade, “it seems unlikely that it is possible to draw any plan that increases competition among congressional seats without also advantaging the Democrats.”
"But when the ProPublica report published Wednesday – claiming that Democratic operatives had “managed to replicate the results of the smoke-filled rooms of old” (yes, they actually wrote that) – there was no mention of the detailed and comprehensive McGhee-Kogan research, nor even a reference to the facts, background and context on which it is based."
The Bee's Dan Walters also weighed in, saying that the authors of the ProPublica piece didn't understand the redistricting plan's impact on Democrats.
"While they concentrate on a couple of Democrats whose seats were protected by intervention of some clandestine front groups and, perhaps, the gullibility of commission members, they don't mention the plan's adverse effects on other Democrats, such as forcing a high-octane shootout looming between Reps. Howard Berman and Brad Sherman in Los Angeles County."
"More importantly, the article doesn't mention that the Democrats' creation of "community of interest" front groups could be effective only because the 14-member commission, as chosen by a convoluted process, was hypersensitive to that approach."
"The Democratic members of the commission tended to be partisans, its Republicans tended to be of the go-along variety, and the supposed independents turned out to be mostly liberals inclined to draw districts that favor ethnic and cultural enclaves."
"That tendency – coupled with underlying demographic and voter registration trends – had the combined effect of not only protecting most incumbent Democrats but giving them a chance to make congressional gains."
Former Senate Leader Don Perata, who missed out in his bid for Oakland mayor, has decided not to run for the Board of Supervisors in Contra Costa County.
From the Contra Costa Times' Lisa Vorderbrueggen: "Sources say Perata, who moved to Orinda after losing the Oakland mayor's race, was deeply interested in the supervisor seat. He saw it as a way to put his vast legislative experience to use in a county with major public policy challenges."
"But Perata also feared his opponents would make the most of the now-closed FBI investigation into allegations that he participated in campaign kickbacks."
"Poll results reportedly showed high negative voter reaction to Perata's tangle with the FBI, his recent election loss in Oakland and relocation to Orinda."
"Any opposing campaign consultant worth even a fraction of her fee would clutch Perata's baggage like a prized football and run like heck toward the end zone."
The charter school movement is being roiled by recommendations from charter school advocates themselves that some schools be closed.
From the Sacramento Bee's Diana Lambert and Phillip Reese: "A list of 10 schools the California Charter Schools Association would like to see closed – including four in the Sacramento area – has caused an uproar within the charter school movement."
"CCSA officials say closing low-performing schools demonstrates that charters are willing to be held accountable. The schools on the list do not meet the minimum criteria the organization has established for academic achievement, said Jed Wallace, president of CCSA."
"We thought it necessary for the well-being of the students attending the schools, as well as for the charter school movement," Wallace said of the recommendation. But other charter school proponents say the association's criteria are flawed and that it is overstepping its authority."
