General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHoo's on first?
As of July 15, 2025, the new President of the League of Women Voters is Gloria Chun Hoo.
"The League of Women Voters (LWV) is a nonpartisan American nonprofit political organization." (Wikipedia)
(From Merriam-Webster Dictionary)
"The meaning of NONPARTISAN is not partisan; especially: free from party affiliation, bias, or designation."
Synonyms for nonpartisan include: independent, neutral, nonaligned, unbiased, and uninvolved.
So, if the League of Women Voters is truly a "nonpartisan" organization, why did LWV President Gloria Chun Hoo's viewpoint:
"Don't upend fairness: Say no to mid-cycle redistricting in California/Opinion" appear in the July 30, 2025 issue of The Sacramento Bee?
She, of course, was referring to Governor Gavin Newsom's "Election Rigging Response Act" which will appear on the November ballot.
"Don't upend fairness"?
"Say no to mid-cycle redistricting in California"?
That doesn't sound "nonpartisan" to me.
In fact, it sounds very partisan. "Say no to redistricting in California" isn't "independent," or "neutral", or "nonaligned", or "unbiased or "uninvolved."
In fact, it isn't any of those things.
Gloria Chun Hoo's Sacramento Bee's "viewpoint" was as far from "nonpartisan" as one could get!
It certainly was not a "neutral" position to take, nor was it "unbiased."
And Ms. Hoo DID get "involved" by having her political viewpoint "Say No to redistricting in California" published in the Sacramento Bee.
I agree with what lostincalifornia posted last Thursday regarding this so-called "nonpartisan" opinion by LWV President Gloria Chun Hoo:
"The League of Women Voters say they are 'nonpartisan', and pride themselves on that.
Well, they can take that nonpartisan bullshit, and put it where the sun don't shine."
https://democraticunderground.com/100220577051
(Ignore 2nd sentence: "and they are sending mailers out & advertisements throughout the state pushing that"]

cbabe
(5,471 posts)The League of Women Voters of California
https://lwvc.org lwvc-not-affiliated-redistricting-mailer
League of Women Voters of California Not Affiliated with Redistricting ...
4 days agoYou may have received a mailer from "Protect Voters First" about the redistricting ballot initiative this November. The League of Women
ers of California did not authorize this action.
MyLO
https://my.lwv.org california diablo-valley article lwvc-statement-misleading-ca-redistricting-mailer
LWVC Statement on Misleading CA Redistricting Mailer
The League of Women Voters of California (LWVC) released a statement about the misleading mailer sent about the California Redistricting Ballot Initiative.
abc10.com
https://www.abc10.com article news politics california-redistricting-mailer-draws-criticism-for-misleading-endorsements 103-c87a8d60-6d4e-48ef-8387-ef5a07fc0c70
California redistricting mailer sparks controversy | abc10.com
2 days agoA campaign mailer in California urging a "no" vote on redistricting draws criticism for implying League of Women Voters' endorsement, which the group denies.
Democratic Underground
https://upload.democraticunderground.com 100220578272
League Of Women Voters Opposes Redistricting Mailer is a FAKE ...
3 days agoIMPORTANT NOTICE You may have received a mailer from "Protect Voters First" about the redistricting ballot initiative this November. By naming
Apples and Oranges.
That phony GOP mailer sent from "Protect Voters First" has absolutely nothing to do with Gloria Chun Hoo's editorial opinion in the Sacramento Bee, which is the topic of this OP.
cbabe
(5,471 posts)as their source? Or is there a source with her actually making those statements?
red dog 1
(31,762 posts)red dog 1
(31,762 posts)lostincalifornia's post was from 4 days ago, right after the phony mailers went out, so he didn't know that the mailers were not from the LWV.
cbabe
(5,471 posts)the story and printed an apology/explanation. Hard to trust it going forward.