Connect with us

Activism

Black Leaders: Redistricting Process Is “Rushed, Inconsistent, Incomplete”

According to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission, because the proposed maps chop up and split districts where African Americans live, Black political power will be diluted in Los Angeles County, San Diego County, the Central Valley, the Bay Area and the Inland Empire. To address the problem, they have submitted proposed maps to the redistricting commission that will protect Black political power and representation.

Published

on

Starting November 17 there will be a series of meetings during which the public will be able to provide their input to commissioners. Another round of map drawing sessions will commence November 30.
Starting November 17 there will be a series of meetings during which the public will be able to provide their input to commissioners. Another round of map drawing sessions will commence November 30.

By Tanu Henry | California Black Media

African American leaders in California are keeping a close eye on the commission drafting congressional, state Senate, state Assembly and Board of Equalization voting maps. They are concerned about the outcome of the redistricting process.

On November 10, the California Citizens Redistricting Commission released the first draft maps of the redrawn lines for the state’s voting districts. By state law, the finalized versions of the new political districts have to be completed by December 27.

But advocates like James Woodson, the policy director of the California Black Census and Redistricting Hub (CBCRH), are asking the commission to press pause and re-evaluate the maps they have come up with so far.

The CBCRH, also called “the Black Hub” is a statewide coalition focused on “racial equity” and “fairness” in the redistricting process.

“The Black Hub appreciates the commission’s hard work and its early release of the maps for public input. At the same time, the Black Hub is deeply concerned that the process for developing the maps has been rushed, inconsistent, and incomplete,” said Woodson. “It has resulted in maps that have ignored the interests of many Black communities and millions of residents in the state’s most populated areas.”

For example, draft maps released by the commission last month collapsed the only two congressional districts in Los Angeles County represented by Black U.S. Congressmembers, Maxine Waters (D-CA-43) and Karen Bass (D-CA-37), into one district. After advocates and activists complained about African Americans losing political power, the commission separated the single district it was proposing into two constituencies again.

But because California lost one seat in the U.S. Congress due to an overall drop in the state’s population, according to the U.S. 2020 Census numbers, advocates worry that it will cause a ripple effect, which will change the racial and political composition of districts across the state.

The “Black Hub” leaders and other advocates in the state are urging Black Californians to speak up and provide input to ensure their communities do not lose representation or resources.

“It’s not just about us losing political power. It’s also about us losing assets,” said Kellie Todd Griffin, a resident of the Los Angeles County city of Carson, where the number of Black residents accounts for more than 25% of the city’s total population. Los Angeles County, where California is expected to lose one congressional seat, is home to about 40% of African Americans in the state.

Griffin, who is an organizer and entrepreneur, is known in California’s political circles for her outspoken advocacy on behalf of Black Californians. She says with the Olympics coming to Los Angeles in 2028, there will be a lot of development and an increase in revenue for government and businesses in Carson. Redrawn political districts, she fears, could hurt her city and others nearby economically.

“When you look at the maps, you see that our congressional district in Carson has been attached more to Redondo Beach and Rancho Palos Verdes instead of being connected to cities like Long Beach and Compton and places like that,” Griffin said. “There is also an assumption that Blacks and other minorities in the area vote the same on issues. As we know, that is not always true. We have specific issues that affect us Blacks differently. So, we vote differently on them – from some criminal justice reforms to the Crown Act.”

One of the realities driving the leaders’ concern is the possibility that the Black vote in five different regions of California will be diluted.

“Rather than adhere to map priorities from BIPOC communities, we are concerned that, in an effort to prioritize all voices, some commissioners have mistakenly and unknowingly elevated voices from less diverse, affluent communities in the process, and at the expense of BIPOC communities,” said Woodson.

According to CBCRH, because the proposed maps chop up and split districts where African Americans live, Black political power will be diluted in Los Angeles County, San Diego County, the Central Valley, the Bay Area and the Inland Empire. To address the problem, they have submitted proposed maps to the redistricting commission that will protect Black political power and representation.

Another major concern is the compressed timeline on which the commission is working, which limits the time for citizens to influence the line-drawing process. This year, due to pandemic-related federal delays, census data the commission relies on to redraw maps was delayed. Instead of its usual release in March, the U.S. Census Bureau did not provide that information until September 21.

“The Black Hub is deeply concerned that the process for developing the maps has been rushed, inconsistent, and incomplete. It has resulted in maps that have ignored the interests of many Black communities and millions of residents in the state’s most populated areas,” said a statement released by CBCRH last week.

Every 10 years, California appoints a new redistricting commission after the U.S. Census. It is tasked with mapping or re-drawing the state’s electoral lines based on population shifts in the state population over the decade between census counts.

According to Census 2020 numbers, California’s Black population decreased from about 2.5 to nearly 2.2 million over the last decade. However, there was a dramatic increase in the number of Californians who identify as more than one race — from 4.9% in 2010 to 14.6% in 2020.

In 2008, California voters approved the Citizens Redistricting Commission through a constitutional amendment called The Voters First Act or Proposition 11. It handed the function of drawing electoral maps to citizens. The policy was set up to avoid the political influence of government officials or special interest groups on the redistricting process.

Before the passage of Prop 11, the state Legislature was responsible for drawing its own electoral districts. There are five Democrats, five Republicans, and four members who are not affiliated with any political party on the committee.

When redrawing maps, the number of voters in all districts across the state has to be equal. That is roughly 761,000 people in each congressional district. For all state Senate districts that number is 988,000, and 494,000 people in Assembly districts.

In California, Blacks make up a little over 5% of the state’s population of about 40 million people. There are 52 congressional districts; 80 Assembly districts; and 40 Senate districts. For the state Board of Equalization, the body responsible for representing taxpayer interests and “equalizing” county-by-county tax assessments across California, there are four districts.

The commission has to comply with a number of constitutional mandates, including Voting Rights Act provisions that all minority groups must be able to elect a representative of their choice; a district must be whole or contiguous (connected geographically); among other rules.

Starting November 17 there will be a series of meetings during which the public will be able to provide their input to commissioners. Another round of map drawing sessions will commence November 30.

“We need to lift our voices and make sure we have said something. That we didn’t just sit by and let these lines be redrawn without us fighting for our interests. We have to define what community means to us,” said Griffin. “We have to make sure we are submitting written comments and letting people know the things that work for us and the things that don’t.”

To make a public comment to the commission, email votersfirstact@crc.ca.gov or complete the Community Feedback Form.

____________________________________________________________

Excerpt:

Photo Caption:

Website Tags and Keywords:

Twitter Tags/Handles:
@Tanu_Henry @CaliforniaBlack2 @RepMaxineWaters @RepKarenBass @CACalls @jdublu44 @BlackPressUSA @NNPA_BlackPress

 

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of May 21 – 27, 2025

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of May 21 – 27, 2025

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Activism

OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care

One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare. 

Published

on

Rhonda M. Smith.
Rhonda M. Smith.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners

Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”

That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.

That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.

One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.

The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.

These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.

I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.

About the Author

Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.

Continue Reading

Activism

OPINION: Supreme Court Case Highlights Clash Between Parental Rights and Progressive Indoctrination

At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes — often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity.

Published

on

Craig J. DeLuz. Courtesy of Craig J. DeLuz.
Craig J. DeLuz. Courtesy of Craig J. DeLuz.

By Craig J. DeLuz, Special to California Black Media Partners

In America’s schools, the tension between parental rights and learning curricula has created a contentious battlefield.

In this debate, it is essential to recognize that parents are, first and foremost, their children’s primary educators. When they send their children to school — public or private — they do not surrender their rights or responsibilities. Yet, the education establishment has been increasingly encroaching on this vital paradigm.

A case recently argued before the Supreme Court regarding Maryland parents’ rights to opt out of lessons that infringe upon their religious beliefs epitomizes this growing conflict. This case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is not simply about retreating from progressive educational mandates. It is fundamentally a defense of First Amendment rights, a defense of parents’ rights to be parents.

At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes, often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity. The parents argue that the subject matter is age-inappropriate, and the school board does not give parents the option to withdraw their children when those lessons are taught.

This case raises profound questions about the role of public education in a democratic society. In their fervent quest for inclusivity, some educators seem to have overlooked an essential truth: that the promotion of inclusivity should never infringe upon parental rights and the deeply held convictions that guide families of different faith backgrounds.

This matter goes well beyond mere exposure. It veers into indoctrination when children are repeatedly confronted with concepts that clash with their family values. 

“I don’t think anybody can read that and say: well, this is just telling children that there are occasions when men marry other men,” noted Justice Samuel Alito. “It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised a crucial point, noting that it is one thing to merely expose students to diverse ideas; it is quite another to present certain viewpoints as indisputable truths. By framing an ideology with the certainty of “this is the right view of the world,” educators risk indoctrination rather than enlightenment. This distinction is not merely academic; it speaks to the very essence of cultivating a truly informed citizenry.

Even Justice Elena Kagan expressed concern regarding the exposure of young children to certain materials in Montgomery County.

“I, too, was struck by these young kids’ picture books and, on matters concerning sexuality, I suspect there are a lot of non-religious parents who weren’t all that thrilled about this,” she said.

Justice John Roberts aptly questioned the practicality of expecting young children to compartmentalize their beliefs in the classroom.

“It is unreasonable to expect five-year-olds, still forming their worldviews, to reconcile lessons that conflict fundamentally with the teachings they receive at home,” he said.

As was noted in my previous commentary, “The Hidden Truth In The Battle Over Books In American Schools”, what lies at the heart of these debates is a moral disconnect between the values held by the majority of Americans and those promoted by the educational establishment. While the majority rightly argue that material containing controversial content of a sexual nature should have no place in our children’s classrooms, the education establishment continues to tout the necessity of exposing children to such content under the guise of inclusivity. This disregards the legitimate values held by the wider community.

Highlighted in this case that is before the Supreme Court is a crucial truth: parents must resolutely maintain their right to direct their children’s education, according to their values. This struggle is not simply a skirmish; it reflects a broader movement aimed at reshaping education by privileging a state-sanctioned narrative while marginalizing dissenting voices.

It is imperative that we assert, without hesitation, that parents are — and must remain — the primary educators of their children.

When parents enroll a child in a school, it should in no way be interpreted as a relinquishment of parental authority or the moral guidance essential to their upbringing. We must stand firm in defending parental rights against the encroaching ideologies of the education establishment.

About the Author

Craig J. DeLuz has almost 30 years of experience in public policy and advocacy. He has served as a member of The Robla School District Board of Trustees for over 20 years. He also currently hosts a daily news and commentary show called “The RUNDOWN.” You can follow him on X at @CraigDeLuz.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.