• Jesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    I bet CA goes through.

    They’re proposing some conditional logic in their legislation. If others do ____, then CA does ____.

    If the other states do nothing, then CA does nothing.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      They’re proposing some conditional logic in their legislation. If others do ____, then CA does ____.

      Ah, yes. They’re modeling it after the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, another famously effective piece of collaborative interstate legislation.

      If the other states do nothing, then CA does nothing.

      States have been gerrymandering themselves since the 17th century. Texas already pulled this out-of-cycle redistricting shit as recently as 2003, ffs. Its already happened. All the CA Dems are managing in this is to make clear that they’re bluffing.

      • Jesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        One of those things triggers after a bunch of states fight long hard battles to update their constitutions. The other one triggers as soon as a single opponent gerrymanders.

        It’s also worth noting that CA has only been free of gerrymanders for a little over a decade. The’ve gerrymandered before and they can do it again.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          46 minutes ago

          The other one triggers as soon as a single opponent gerrymanders.

          Again, the gerrymandering happened two decades ago. This is mopping up.