logo
Taken apart at a political chop shop: Proposed map would split Lodi into three Congressional districts

Taken apart at a political chop shop: Proposed map would split Lodi into three Congressional districts

Yahoo2 days ago
Aug. 19—California voters will be going to the polls in November to approve new Congressional districts that favor Democrats, and maps released Friday reveal that Lodi could be split into three districts.
Currently, the entirety of Lodi is part of the 9th Congressional District held by Tracy-based Democrat Josh Harder.
If voters approve new district boundaries this fall, Harder's district would include the southeastern portion of the city west of Hutchins Street, south of Kettleman Lane and east of Cherokee Lane, with a chunk east of Stockton Street and south of Mission Street.
The new 9th District would include the cities of Manteca, Tracy, Pittsburg, Antioch and Oakley, and a portion of north Stockton north of Mormon Slough and west of Wilson Way.
A chunk of north and central Lodi bordered by Kettleman Lane in the south, Cherokee Lane in the east and Lower Sacramento Road in the west would be in a new 7th District, along with Galt, Elk Grove, Wilton, Sloughouse, Clements, Linden, Farmington and West Sacramento.
The remainder of Lodi would be in a new District 8 with Isleton, Rio Vista, Dixon, Vacaville, Fairfeild, Vallejo, Richmond and Hercules.
"Slicing up our city for political ends benefits none of our residents, particularly as we're a state where redistricting is decided by citizen panels, not elected officials," Lodi City Councilwoman Lisa Craig-Hensley said. "Understanding the unique values and needs of Lodi residents is the job of elected officials. Only in that way can we make fair decisions that benefit the whole community. Lodi needs to be kept whole to benefit the residents who deserve representation that reflects our shared needs and values."
Lodi Mayor Cameron Bregman said the proposal was simply a power grab that ignores the will of California voters, who have determined district boundaries twice in the last 17 years.
"Above all, having elected officials is about representation," he said. "This state, county, and now city must deal with the grim fact that this redistricting is not about representation, but partisanship. We can kiss any federal help goodbye if the redistricting is approved."
The redistricting effort is part of Gov. Gavin Newsom's battle with President Donald Trump, who has pushed for redistricting Congressional districts in Texas to favor Republicans.
The map released Friday by the Legislature adds five more Democratic-leaning seats, and make four even more left-leaning.
District 1, the northeastern corner of the state represented by Republican Rep. Doug LaMalfa, would change from "safe" to "safe" Democratic, as would District 3, which runs along California's eastern border represented by GOP Rep. Kevin Kiley.
District 41, a battleground seat held by GOP Rep. Ken Calvert, transforms from safe Republican to safe Democratic, while District 48, which spans Riverside and San Diego counties and is held by GOP Rep. Darrell Issa, changes from safe Republican to lean Democratic.
Harder's District 9 would move from "lean" Democratic to safe Democratic, as would District 27, a northern Los Angeles County seat held by Democratic Rep. George Whitesides. District 47, an Orange County district represented by Democratic Rep. Dave Min, also moves from lean Democratic to safe Democratic, as does District 45 which Democratic Rep. Derek Tran won last year in the most expensive race in the country. District 13, narrowly won by Democrat Rep. Adam Gray, changes from lean Republican to safe Democratic.
"There are many cases where I've been supportive of the Legislature sending a bill to the voters for approval," Assemblyman Heath Flora, R-Ripon said. "This is not one of those cases, and the only reason is that so much of this process has been in secret and against the will of the voters from the beginning."
David Cushman, chair of the San Joaquin County Republican Party, said the organization would fight Newsom's attempt to undermine the fair representation of residents.
"Our citizens wanted to make sure we had representation that reflected our needs and values, not those of cities that have nothing in common with our county," he said. "The maps released yesterday are a direct affront to the hard work and countless hours spent just four years ago ensuring our county remained unified in one district. Gavin Newsom and the Sacramento politicians are attempting to split up our county and our communities for partisan political gain, not for the benefit of our residents."
State Sen. Jerry McNerney, D-Pleasanton, said in a social media post last week that the redistricting effort is "fighting fire with fire" as Trump and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott attempt to add five Republican seats to the House of Representatives.
He suggested other states that lean Democrat should do the same.
"I've been through Congressional redistricting twice," he said. "It's a difficult experience for House members who spend most of the preceding decade developing relationships and understanding the challenges in their districts only to lose many of the people and regions they have worked for.
"I would not advocate for mid-decade redistricting or for overturning California's independent redistricting commission except in extreme circumstances," he added. "The current situation is an emergency."
McNerney said Trump thrives on division and retribution and his attempt to tilt the scales toward himself and the GOP in 2026 would democracy and election integrity.
"If California and other blue states fail to respond to mid-decade gerrymandering by Texas and other red states, we'll face three-and-a-half more years of an unchecked Trump, further wrecking our economy and our democratic institutions thanks to a compliant House, Senate, and Supreme Court," he said. "If it flips to a Democratic majority in the 2026 election, as expected, the House will be able to put brakes on Trump's dash to autocracy."
Manuel Zapata, chair of the San Joaquin County Democratic Party, told ABC10 over the weekend that while the redistricting would be "unfortunate" for Lodi, he defended Newsom's reasoning.
"What happens in Texas will directly affect California because of the way that the House of Representatives works," he said. "So, it is a very local issue when we have one party completely rigging the system on a national level that is going to affect every single state."
Solve the daily Crossword
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Appeals court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Donald Trump
Appeals court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Donald Trump

American Press

time26 minutes ago

  • American Press

Appeals court throws out massive civil fraud penalty against President Donald Trump

A New York appeals court on Thursday threw out the massive financial penalty a state judge imposed on President Donald Trump, while narrowly upholding a finding he engaged in fraud by exaggerating his wealth for decades. The ruling spares Trump from a potential half-billion-dollar fine but bans him and his two eldest sons from serving in corporate leadership for a few years. Trump, in a social media post, claimed 'total victory.' 'I greatly respect the fact that the Court had the Courage to throw out this unlawful and disgraceful Decision that was hurting Business all throughout New York State,' he wrote. The decision came seven months after the Republican returned to the White House. A sharply divided panel of five judges in New York's mid-level Appellate Division couldn't agree on many issues raised in Trump's appeal, but a majority said the monetary penalty was 'excessive.' After finding Trump flagrantly padded financial statements that went to lenders and insurers, Judge Arthur Engoron ordered him last year to pay $355 million in penalties. With interest, the sum has topped $515 million. Additional penalties levied on some other Trump Organization executives, including Trump's sons Eric and Donald Jr. — bring the total to $527 million, with interest. An 'excessive' fine 'While the injunctive relief ordered by the court is well crafted to curb defendants' business culture, the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution,' Judges Dianne T. Renwick and Peter H. Moulton wrote in one of three opinions shaping the appeals court's ruling. Engoron's other punishments, upheld by the appeals court, have been on pause during Trump's appeal, and the president was able to hold off collection of the money by posting a $175 million bond. The court, which split on the merits of the lawsuit and Engoron's fraud finding, dismissed the penalty in its entirety while also leaving a pathway for an appeal to the state's highest court, the Court of Appeals. Trump and his co-defendants, the judges wrote, can seek to extend the pause on any punishments taking effect. The panel was sharply divided, issuing 323 pages of concurring and dissenting opinions with no majority. Rather, some judges endorsed parts of their colleagues' findings while denouncing others, enabling the court to rule. Two judges wrote that they felt New York Attorney General Letitia James' lawsuit against Trump and his companies was justifiable and that she had proven her case but the penalty was too severe. One wrote that James exceeded her legal authority in bringing the suit, saying that if any of Trump's lenders felt cheated, they could have sued him themselves, and none did. One judge wrote that Engoron erred by ruling before the trial began that the attorney general had proved Trump engaged in fraud. In his portion of the ruling, Judge David Friedman, who was appointed to the court by Republican Gov. George Pataki, was scathing in his criticism of James for bringing the lawsuit. 'Plainly, her ultimate goal was not 'market hygiene' … but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business,' Friedman wrote. 'The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business.' In a statement, James focused on the part of the case that went her way, saying the court had 'affirmed the well-supported finding of the trial court: Donald Trump, his company, and two of his children are liable for fraud.' 'It should not be lost to history: yet another court has ruled that the president violated the law, and that our case has merit,' James said. The appeals court, the Appellate Division of the state's trial court, took an unusually long time to rule, weighing Trump's appeal for nearly 11 months after oral arguments last fall. Normally, appeals are decided in a matter of weeks or a few months. Claims of politics at play Trump and his co-defendants denied wrongdoing. At the conclusion of the civil trial in January 2024, Trump said he was 'an innocent man' and the case was a 'fraud on me.' The Republican has repeatedly maintained the case and the verdict were political moves by James and Engoron, both Democrats. Trump's Justice Department has subpoenaed James for records related to the lawsuit, among other documents, as part of an investigation into whether she violated the president's civil rights. James' personal attorney Abbe D. Lowell has said investigating the fraud case is 'the most blatant and desperate example of this administration carrying out the president's political retribution campaign.' Trump and his lawyers said his financial statements weren't deceptive, since they came with disclaimers noting they weren't audited. The defense also noted bankers and insurers independently evaluated the numbers, and the loans were repaid. Despite such discrepancies as tripling the size of his Trump Tower penthouse, he said the financial statements were, if anything, lowball estimates of his fortune. During an appellate court hearing last September, Trump's lawyers argued that many of the case's allegations were too old and that James had misused a consumer protection law to sue Trump over private business transactions that were satisfactory to those involved. State attorneys said that while Trump insists no one was harmed by the financial statements, his exaggerations led lenders to make riskier loans and that honest borrowers lose out when others game their net worth numbers. Legal obstacles The civil fraud case was just one of several legal obstacles for Trump as he campaigned, won and segued to a second term as president. On Jan. 10, he was sentenced in his criminal hush money case to what's known as an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction on the books but sparing him jail, probation, a fine or other punishment. He is appealing the conviction. And in December, a federal appeals court upheld a jury's finding that Trump sexually abused writer E. Jean Carroll in the mid-1990s and later defamed her, affirming a $5 million judgment against him. The appeals court declined in June to reconsider. Trump still can try to get the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. Trump also is appealing a subsequent verdict that requires him to pay Carroll $83.3 million for additional defamation claims.

Senate Democrat predicts ‘day of reckoning' for private prison employees
Senate Democrat predicts ‘day of reckoning' for private prison employees

The Hill

time26 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Senate Democrat predicts ‘day of reckoning' for private prison employees

Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) on Wednesday said private prison employees would have to answer to their treatment of inmates amid the Trump administration's crackdown on illegal immigration and as more detention facilities may pop up around the U.S. 'There, at some point, is going to be a reckoning for all of this,' Ossoff told MSNBC during an appearance on 'The Weeknight.' 'These folks who are working at these private prison companies, who are on Kristi Noem's staff right now, they are at some point going to have to testify under oath about what is happening in the facilities that they're currently running,' he added. Democrats have slammed Republicans for rejecting their attempts to conduct oversight at facilities where U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) hold detained migrants awaiting deportation. Some state lawmakers were also denied entry to 'Alligator Alcatraz' last month, the detention center in the Florida Everglades. They have also been critical of President Trump's robust immigration agenda, with turmoil rising after lawmakers joined with protestors outside of an ICE center in New York earlier this year and anti-ICE protests sprung up in Southern California and beyond in opposition to an uptick in deportation raids after the administration sent National Guard soldiers to Los Angeles to quell demonstrations. Families of those detained and human rights groups have said their loved ones are suffering from abuse while in ICE custody, such as a lack of clean water and electricity. 'We're talking about pregnant women. We're talking about children,' Ossoff told MSNBC's Alicia Menendez. 'We're talking about people who have no business being in one of these horrible detention centers.' 'And, you know, I believe that the American people have rejected this draconian and inhumane approach to interior enforcement,' the lawmaker continued. 'But in terms of my Republican colleagues, no spine is yet visible in the Senate.' The Georgia Democrat also noted that the treatment is 'indefensible' citing what he said is over 500 credible reports of abuses. House and Senate Democrats joined forces to send a Wednesday letter to Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem hoping to address the alleged injustices. 'Brushing aside concerns from human rights watchdogs, environmentalist groups, and Tribal nations, [DHS] has greenlit the construction of this expansive detention facility that may violate detained individuals' human rights, jeopardize public and environmental health and violate federal law,' Democrats wrote in a letter to Noem inquiring about operations at 'Alligator Alcatraz.' It's unclear if they've received a response.

Most say partisan redistricting threatens democracy: Survey
Most say partisan redistricting threatens democracy: Survey

The Hill

time26 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Most say partisan redistricting threatens democracy: Survey

Most Americans said partisan redistricting in the House threatens democracy, according to a new Reuters/Ipsos poll. Fifty-five percent in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said there is a negative effect on democracy from changing House district maps to secure seats, with 46 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Democrats saying the same. California and Texas are going head-to-head in a redistricting fight, with other states evaluating a similar process. On Wednesday, the Texas state House passed a new set of GOP-leaning congressional lines, placing Republicans another step closer toward adopting a new map that kicked off a redistricting arms race. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D), who is pushing for redistricting in his own state, appeared to issue a threat to the Lone Star State in a vague post on the social platform X. 'It's on, Texas,' the Golden State governor said in his evening post. Twenty-seven percent in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said they were unsure if there is a negative effect on democracy from changing House district maps to secure seats, and 18 percent said there was a positive effect from doing so. The same Reuters/Ipsos poll also found President Trump's approval rating stuck at the lowest level of his second term, 40 percent. The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which was conducted from Aug. 13-18, included 4,446 participants and has a margin of error of about 2 percentage points.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store