Helping Nancy — Projections for Congressional Redistricting
Redistricting is still a year and half off, but the first solid numbers indicating what to expect have now appeared. At a conference on 2011 district drawing, researchers at the Rose Institute at Claremont McKenna College unveiled population projections for all 53 California congressional districts.
The Rose researchers relied on data developed by Caliper, the nation’s leading redistricting software company, the US Census Bureau, and the state Department of Finance. The Census Bureau currently projects the 2010 California population at 36.8 million; Caliper at 37.4 million; and Department of Finance at 38 million. The Rose analysis used the middle number and disaggregated the figures to the census block level – and then combined the blocks into existing congressional districts.
The figures are obviously not exact – the actually census will not be taken until April 2010 – but Caliper’s population models take into account housing patterns and county projections, and so they provide a remarkably reliable projection of what the actual count will show.
Campaign Finance Laws Giving Government Excuse to Regulate Online Content
Thankfully, Internet content remains largely free of government intrusion and regulation. Americans are increasingly going online for news, to plan their travel, and perform other everyday tasks like banking and keeping up with relatives. They’re also going online for the information they need to determine how they will vote. As candidates and parties consequently step up their online presence, outdated campaign finance laws are giving the bureaucrats a new opening to impose restrictions and regulations on Internet content.
Consider Scott Wagner, the candidate for St. Petersburg mayor whom the Florida Elections Commission ordered to take down an online ad because it didn’t include a “Paid for by” disclaimer. Wagner argued the “paid for by” disclaimer should not have been required because it was only “paid for” by someone once it was clicked on, not before.
Legislature Takes A Mulligan on Water Bill
About that water vote this week …
Last Sunday, the governor and legislative leaders announced that amazing progress had been made on the water bill and suggested a magic agreement that would leave everyone happy was just days, or even hours, away.
Still, as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger admitted, the negotiators “still have a few remaining issues to work out.”
Remaining issues like, well, everything.
State Sen. President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, who had talked confidently of having both a bill and a vote by this week, decided Thursday to take a mulligan. Not only won’t there be a vote this week, he announced, but the state Senate – and the Assembly, for that matter – won’t even be in session. But next week everyone will be back in Sacramento for a vote on that pesky water bill. Maybe.
A Grim Statistic
Since the state’s employment peak in July, 2007, California has lost over a million jobs. Don’t lose sight of that grim statistic as we hear some qualified, “it’s-getting-worse-more-slowly-and-maybe-we’re-seeing-the-bottom-down-there-somewhere” news.
California’s latest unemployment rate, released last Friday, remained steady this month at 12.2%. Part of the reason is that the actual number of unemployed blipped down, and the labor force also shrank. Month-to-month changes should be viewed with caution: California’s unemployment rate is double what it was just 20 months ago, and is the fourth-highest in the country, behind Michigan, Nevada and Rhode Island. Inland rural California is suffering even worse; its 14.7% unemployment would be second-worst nationally.
Overall employment dropped again this month, but only by a hope-stirring 39,000 jobs. (This is about half the average monthly job loss from last November through June.) Major sectoral losses were in construction, information, manufacturing (durables), and private education. Job losses are also beginning to appear in the government sector. There may be some initial good news in some low wage industries, such as retail trade and tourism, but again, one-month changes should be viewed skeptically.