I am writing in response to Jack Teoli’s letter of Dec. 1, “A Concerning Endorsement,” which criticizes the City Council’s 5-0 vote recommending a “no” vote on Proposition 50 regarding the redistricting of California’s congressional districts, which was a response to a similar redistricting action in Texas initiated by Donald Trump.
In his letter he says, “The thousands who supported Prop. 50 did so for many reasons. As a Democratic constituent, I see this as a vote against the kind of partisan gamesmanship that has damaged our political landscape.”
I’m sure many people voted “yes” for that very reason. I understand and accept that line of reasoning. But as a die-hard moderate, I just do not agree with it.
He further states, “Whether residents were registering their opposition to Donald Trump’s gerrymandering efforts or his administration’s damaging overreaches on tariffs, the ‘yes’ vote signals a desire for fairness and accountability.”
Again, as a moderate, I don’t disagree with your opposition to Donald Trump and the damage he is doing to our country. However, if the stated intent is for “fairness and accountability,” a “yes” vote has the exact opposite effect.
By definition, gerrymandering is an effort to manipulate voting districts to give one political party an unfair advantage over the other. Gerrymandering is about gaining power and avoiding accountability. It doesn’t matter which party initiates gerrymandering, which party benefits from it, or the reason for supporting it: Gerrymandering is the very enemy of democracy.
As for the City Council’s 5-0 recommendation to vote “no” on Prop. 50, I can think of only three reasons that might happen. First, they understand and agree that gerrymandering is evil and should be eliminated, not endorsed. Second, they recognize that the Santa Clarita Valley is currently consolidated within one congressional district and did not want to see our position diluted among three far-reaching districts. Either position is justified.
The third possible reason, which was alluded to in the letter: “If you continue to vote 5-0 for Republican priorities while ignoring the will of the people,” that would certainly be wrong and should be condemned.
However, I cannot imagine that was the reasoning behind their 5-0 recommendation to vote “no.” I don’t always agree with every decision the City Council makes, but on this particular position they have my 100%, unconditional support.
Jack Crawford
Saugus
