Court opens window for gerrymandering fix
Published July 6, 2015
Editorial by Asheville Citizen-Times, July 2, 2015.
By a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a voter-enacted Arizona constitutional amendment that puts districting in the hands of an independent commission, at least in regards to congressional elections. The challengers claimed that power rested with the legislature.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the “history and purpose” of the constitution’s elections clause suggests voters can take control of how their election maps are drawn, “as does the animating principle of our constitution that the people themselves are the originating source of all the powers of government.”
The decision did not touch on legislative districts, which will be considered in separate litigation.
Nevertheless, it should encourage those who want to reform the North Carolina system.
The Washington Post calls N.C. the “most gerrymandered state” because it has three of the nation’s most convoluted congressional districts. And that does not include the division of Buncombe County into two districts, which resulted in shifting the 11th District from Democratic to Republican control.
In the 2012 elections, the state’s congressional delegation shifted from a 7-6 Democratic edge to a 9-4 Republican margin. In 2014, it went to 10-3 for the GOP.
Republicans may argue that the Democrats had juggled the previous maps to favor their candidates, and we’re sure they did. But that doesn’t make such maneuvering right, no matter which party does it. Extreme gerrymandering divides communities of common interest, effectively denying them a voice in government.
Consider the confusion caused in 2012 Buncombe County Commission elections because Warren Wilson College was split between two districts.
One solution would be to adopt a system similar to the one Iowa has used since 1980. A nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency draws maps subject to an up-or-down vote by the legislature and signature or veto by the governor.
Critics of reform claim it won’t achieve its goals. The record suggests otherwise. In Arizona, the five-member commission can have no more than two members of the same party.
The Iowa agency is nonpartisan by law, and its work has met with approval by Democrats and Republicans alike.
Republicans may be happy with the present system now, but how will they feel if Democrats are in charge in 2021? A little statesmanship now would protect against more ill will in the future.
More importantly, it would mean no more maps that split neighborhoods and precincts in search of partisan advantage.
The people should pick their leaders, not the other way around.
July 6, 2015 at 10:29 am
Richard L Bunce says:
As long as humans are involved there will be gerrymandering. An open source computer algorithm with limited inputs and no demographic data other than number and distribution of residents within the area to be divided is the only non gerrymandering answer. Here is an example...
http://rangevoting.org/GerryExec.html
July 6, 2015 at 4:48 pm
Johnny Hiott says:
Gee wiz ! It sure would be nice if ginsburg and the rest of those nine selected legislators could have realized her statement "as does the animating principle of our constitution that the people themselves are
the originating source of all the powers of government" ! when they decided to violate that same constitution, God's law and all natural laws by legalizing homosexuals to marry ! Nothing like a full blown liar and hypocrite ! As far as gerrymandering goes it is an easy fix. No county should be divided in any way. Want equal rights for all voters ? Fine ! Everyone gets one vote without any specially drawn districts.
July 8, 2015 at 11:24 am
Richard L Bunce says:
We are a nation of laws not men... the majority may want to use the coercive power of government to limit the speech of others but the First Amendment says no... Congress shall make NO Law...
