Reading Between the Lines Congressional and State Legislative Redistricting

Transcription

1 Reading Between the Lines their Reform in Iowa, Arizona and California and Ideas for Change in New Jersey Reading Between the Lines Purposes of the Study 1. Prepared for the Eagleton Institute of Politics by Benjamin Brickner May EXAMINE New Jersey s redistricting process 4. Reading Between the Lines Summary of Findings 1. Redistricting by public and/or party officials is fraught with conflicts of interest 2. Redistricting by other means has been successful in Iowa and Arizona 3. New Jersey s redistricting process is insular and opaque 4. Partisan advantage is a primary motive of New Jersey s redistricting commissions 5. These areas of concern can be addressed with specific changes to New Jersey s redistricting process that have been implemented successfully in other states WHAT the adjustment of electoral district boundaries Boundaries must be shifted as underlying populations change Applies to congressional, state legislative, local and most special purpose districts WHEN typically after each federal census U.S. Constitution: the Enumeration shall be made [every] ten Years. Notable exceptions: Texas in 2003; other states after judicial action WHO in most states, the state legislature and governor HOW in most states, via the normal legislative process Congressional districts: 44 of 50 states State legislative districts: 37 of 50 states November 18, 2010 Page 1 of 6

2 DISTRICTING CRITERIA POPULATION EQUALITY Congressional districts: as nearly as is practicable State legislative districts: substantially equal VOTING RIGHTS ACT no voting qualifications or practices resulting in denial or abridgement of the right to vote on account of race, color or language minority COMPACTNESS Whether a district is geographically efficient New Jersey 11th Congressional District Illinois 4th Congressional District TRADITIONAL DISTRICTING PRINCIPLES Compactness Contiguity Preserving political subdivisions, cores of prior districts, and communities of interest CONTIGUITY Whether a district is in one or more pieces CONTIGUITY Whether a district is in one or more pieces Maine 2nd Congressional District Kentucky 1st Congressional District New Jersey 13th Congressional District November 18, 2010 Page 2 of 6

3 GERRYMANDERING Manipulation of district boundaries to enhance the electoral prospects of a particular political interest GERRYMANDERING Packing Neutral Districting Cracking GERRYMANDERING Packing Cracking IOWA Reform by legislative action (1980) Non-partisan agency draws maps, subject to approval by legislature ARIZONA Reform by ballot initiative (2000) Independent, bipartisan commission (2D, 2R, 2I) draws and adopts maps CALIFORNIA Reform by ballot initiatives (2008 and 2010) Independent, bipartisan commission (5D, 5R, 4I) draws and adopts maps November 18, 2010 Page 3 of 6

4 IOWA Reform by Legislative Action (1980) BEFORE: in 1970s, court struck down legislature s plan and imposed its own AFTER: in 1980s, 1990s and 2000s plans adopted without incident Congressional Districts ( ) Congressional Districts ( ) ARIZONA Reform by Ballot Initiative (2000) BEFORE: in 1990s, legislative deadlock, multiple court cases and court-imposed congressional map AFTER: in 2000s, congressional plan adopted without incident; legislative plan challenged, resulting in significant victory for redistricting commission State Legislative Districts ( ) CALIFORNIA Reform by Ballot Initiatives (2008 and 2010) BEFORE: 1970s gubernatorial veto and court-imposed districting plans 1980s popular referendum overturned districting plans 1990s legislative deadlock and court-imposed districting plans 2000s plans adopted without incident AFTER: to be determined?" RECURRING SUBJECTS OF REFORM Process Who draws the lines? Who chooses who draws the lines? What data must, may, or may not be considered? What public process is required? Substance What districting principles must, may, or may not be accommodated? What outcomes must be reached? November 18, 2010 Page 4 of 6

5 EXAMINE New Jersey s redistricting process EXAMINE New Jersey s redistricting process DUAL COMMISSIONS State Legislative Congressional Apportionment Commission Redistricting Commission Established members (5D, 5R) Plus 1I in event of deadlock Limited districting criteria required Compactness Contiguity Respecting political subdivisions No public process required Established members (6D, 6R, 1I) No districting criteria required Limited public process required Four public hearings 2000s Commission deadlock Multiple legal challenges Partisan gerrymander Significant swing in seats Overrepresentation DUAL COMMISSIONS State Legislative Congressional 2000s Incumbent gerrymander Low electoral competition Low seat turnover FRAMEWORK FOR CHANGE AREAS OF CONCERN TYPE OF CHANGE Process Substance EXTENT OF CHANGE Limited Extensive DURATION OF CHANGE. Temporary Permanent Autonomy of Decision-Making Is the redistricting process independent of inappropriate influence? Representative Outcomes. Does redistricting result in elected representation that accurately reflects the underlying population? Integrity of Decision-Making Are map-makers considering appropriate data and ignoring inappropriate data? Democratic Outcomes. Does redistricting result in elected representation that faithfully serves the underlying population? Is the redistricting process open and transparent? November 18, 2010 Page 5 of 6

6 IDEAS FOR CHANGE OBSTACLES TO CHANGE Autonomy of Decision-Making Limit the number of partisan commissioners by requiring selection of political independents Representative Outcomes. Encourage bipartisan cooperation by making deadlock a risky proposition for both parties Integrity of Decision-Making Establish criteria (e.g., the traditional districting principles) to guide decision-making Democratic Outcomes. Require a full and open deliberative process (e.g., public display of draft maps, publication of all data considered by the commissions) LEGAL Federal law State law POLITICAL Absence of initiative and referendum in New Jersey Lack of political will to alter a process that has served incumbents well CHRONOLOGICAL Congressional redistricting begins in early 2011 State legislative redistricting begins momentarily November 18, 2010 Page 6 of 6