Redistricting must be objective and make sense

Let’s try to ignore the foulness of this year’s election for a while, and think of something else:  like, the next election – 2012. 

Kyle Gillis, new investigative reporter at the Nevada Policy Research Institute, published an excellent article this week “What happened to One Person, One Vote? Nevada’s legislative district lines are constitutionally dubious.”  He tells the ugly history of Reapportionment-Past and shows that thoughtful folks of various political persuasions agree that something more rational should be done.  However, no specific proposals for Reapportionment-Future were presented.  In, 7 Steps to Reinventing Nevada, though, I have offered what seems to me to be a practical solution.

During the next two years, the redrawing of the lines of all the election districts in Nevada will take place.  For decades, we have had to live with incredibly gerrymandered maps drawn with one basic, overriding consideration:  preserving the status quo – keeping incumbents in office and making the overwhelming number of seats “safe” for one party or the other.  This removes the slightest possibility that an uprising of Nevada voters might actually have the power to affect or influence the results of major elections.  This process has resulted in many very oddly shaped districts that split neighborhoods and cities and diminish the voting power of many communities with shared interests.  Additionally, it leads to unnecessary confusion among voters.

Unfortunately, most people are unaware of the vast effect which redistricting has upon the political process, so they leave it up to the politicians to do themselves.  That must change – districts must be drawn objectively using principles of compactness, contiguity, competitiveness, and preserving communities.

I propose creating an independent, five-person commission to perform redistricting – with the Legislature then only having the option of a “yea” or “nay” vote on adopting a plan – no self-serving amendments allowed.  The four legislative leaders would each appoint a member and the Governor would appoint the fifth.  There would be a condition that districts be compact and, when possible, utilize existing city, county and geographical boundaries.  And, they must not be drawn to favor or disfavor incumbents or political parties.

          Note: I’m confident Kyle Gillis will continue to offer thoughtful analysis of Nevada’s political environment. While I’m also sure I won’t always be in agreement, he’ll make us think.  And, for a Michigan native & Albion College grad, I would expect no less.

Nevada still projected to gain new congressional seat for 2012

 This morning, Politico reported that the most up-to-date projections of the 2010 census data, reconfirm the likelihood that Nevada will gain a 4^th Congressional seat by next election.  Many locals have been concerned that, with the tide of population leaving Nevada the last two years, we wouldn’t have grown enough during the past decade to qualify.  However, it appears that Nevada, along with Utah, Arizona and Washington, will gain one additional seat.  Meanwhile, Michigan and a bunch of Midwest states lose a seat; New York and Ohio, lose 2.  While these estimates likely will be close to the official outcome, there are no guarantees until the Census Bureau’s scheduled announcement in late December of the final Census population totals for the 50 states.