Draw districts without politics? Talks under way

Published February 3, 2015

by Benjamin Brown, The Insider, February 2, 2015

Republicans in 2011 carved North Carolina into new districts from which public officials are elected, creating 170 areas for state lawmakers and 13 for members of Congress in a required effort to maintain balanced populations.

Democrats and left-leaning groups complained that the new maps intentionally deflated their candidates' chances in the state and federal elections, but courts have upheld the redistricting effort – which is necessary after every Census – as fair, legal and based on sound methodologies.

But there's a reinvigorated movement among officials and policy groups with ties to both political parties who say they're sick of gerrymandering, or at least of the public skepticism that comes when politicians handle how the voting areas are drawn.

Many of the legislative districts are not competitive, and instead virtually assure a candidate from one party or the other will win. At the Congressional level, the state has been closely split among Republican and Democratic voters, but the new districts helped Republicans to a 10-3 advantage. Democrats were in power in North Carolina for years, and often also came under similar criticism for the hard-to-understand district shapes and results of their redistricting plans. They also were accused of limiting or cutting certain voting groups' collective power by packing them into just a few districts or thinning them out among many.

Changing the system will be the focus of a bipartisan effort to be announced Tuesday in Raleigh, according to Rep. Rick Glazier, a Fayetteville Democrat. He has previously sponsored past bills, with Republicans, to establish a nonpartisan redistricting process. While those efforts weren't successful, Glazier thinks this time may be different.

"You've got a broader coalition this year than in any years past," he said. Glazier and fellow Democrat Rep. Grier Martin of Raleigh plan to file legislation with "several Republican House members" cosponsoring. A statement counted House Speaker Pro Tem Paul Stam of Apex – a longtime supporter of independent redistricting – along with Reps. Jon Hardister of Greensboro and Chuck McGrady of Hendersonville among them. The next redistricting will follow the 2020 Census. Currently, the N.C. General Assembly assigns its own members to draw the state legislative and congressional district lines. Lawmakers do it with the help of census data that show how different population groups have grown or shifted over time. It's something of a rule, historically, that the majority party won't back a change that might affect its plurality, said Becki Gray, vice president for outreach at the conservative John Locke Foundation. Whichever party is in power – the GOP presently – typically faces questions that its leaders gerrymandered to protect their seats.

"This isn't a new thing," said Gray. "By some of the reports in the press, you would come to believe that redistricting and gerrymandering have only been an issue to be discussed in the last four years, since Republicans have taken over the General Assembly. The fact of the matter is, this has been going on for years and it was just as bad, if not worse, when the other party was in control." She said Democrats had balked when Republicans suggested a different system for drawing district lines. Her group is among supporters for nonpartisan drawing of districts. "If the rules are written in such a tight way that partisan influence is equally distributed or there isn't any, then you've got a good system," she said. Thirteen states now have independent redistricting commissions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Another three have commissions that advise their legislatures and five more have a designated backup group to handle redistricting if lawmakers can't agree. NCSL elections program manager Wendy Underhill said that "independent" is the eye of the beholder. "Each (state's) commission is designed different, and partisan interests are hard to keep separate," she said.

Bills filed in North Carolina in recent years were similar to what Iowa enacted in 1980 – a system unlike in any other state. Under the Iowa system, nonpartisan legislative staffers take the lead and draw districts as square and compact as census data will allow. Then, a commission of five members – two picked by majority leaders, two picked by minority leaders and the last by the commission itself – gives the legislative staff direction as needed, holds public hearings on the draft plan and delivers it to the legislature for an up or down vote. It might not be a perfect system, "but it's better than what we have," said Martin. His Raleigh district resembles a blot of spilled ink, spreading northward from downtown Raleigh to the northeast and northwest. "It puts a layer of insulation between the legislative foxes and those who are drawing the hen-house boundaries," Martin said. Any proposal must win over Republicans, who hold large majorities in the House and Senate.

While a 2011 nonpartisan redistricting bill passed the House (the final vote was 88-27), it died in the Senate. Asked about the chances of a nonpartisan redistricting bill this year, a spokeswoman for Senate leader Phil Berger, an Eden Republican, said he typically doesn't comment on bills that haven't reached his chamber. In a recent interview with the Associated Press, he expressed little interest in changing the current system. "I have yet to see a so-called independent redistricting commission that is truly independent," he said. "I'm still out there looking for that nonpartisan soul that really has no opinion about politics one way or the other that has an informational background in politics. ... I don't see an independent redistricting commission or any of the proposals that have been floated as improving on the system that we have now." Computers have become one possible option, with political scientists and others creating almost perfectly balanced districts that are much more compact than the current system produces.

Proponents say computers are blind to politics and, if fed appropriate census data, wouldn't consider population factors that influence gerrymandering. "Which (voters) are Liberal, Conservative, Republican, Democrat, Black, White, Christian, Jewish, polka-dotted, or whatever has absolutely zero effect on the district shapes that come out," says the Center for Range Voting, a group founded in 2005 that touts algorithm-based redistricting. "So you know the maps are going to be completely unbiased." A programmer from Boston named Brian Olson created software that, using 2010 census data, made compact, non-spidery districts with balanced racial populations for state legislative districts and Congress in all 50 states. He acknowledged that his system could break up some minority populations. His computer versions of the House and the Senate districts look more even and compact than the current, legislatively drawn House and Senate versions. His computer-generated Congressional districts also look much different than the currently drawn districts do. While computers may put out a clean product, there's a catch, said Jane Pinsky, director of the N.C. Coalition for Lobbying and Government Reform. "You cannot do a computer program without a person behind it," she said. "Somebody has to program the criteria into the computer, and there are decisions that are going to have to be made by human beings."

It's to the benefit of the political parties and voters to strip politics from the process, Pinsky said. "Both parties now have the experience of being out of power, and neither one of them wants to be put of power again," she said. She said more evenly drawn districts would require elected officials to work harder to reach their constituents and would give voters a better feeling about democracy. Sen. Bob Rucho, a Matthews Republican who played a leading role in the last round of redistricting, doesn't see the need to change. Neither does the court system, he added. "The (N.C.) Supreme Court just made a decision," Rucho said. "If you haven't read it, you need to read it." The state NAACP chapter and other plaintiffs wanted the Republican-drawn maps thrown out on the basis they gerrymandered to weaken the black vote. Their lawsuit, which named Rucho and other legislators as defendants, failed. The court found the maps "represent an equally legitimate understanding of legislative districts that will function for the good of the whole." Rucho said redistricting is a complicated numbers game – "it's like a cookbook; if you put the wrong remedy in, the food doesn't come out right" –that also must stand review by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Maps drawn by the Democratic-led General Assembly after the 2000 census were found to be unconstitutional and had to be redrawn. The most recent maps "have been affirmed by a Democratic administration at the federal level," said Rep. Nelson Dollar, a Cary Republican who also led the last redistricting. He has been the primary sponsor of past bills to set up an independent redistricting commission. A major challenge for proponents of the change is that it might require a constitutional amendment, which voters would have to approve. The North Carolina Constitution puts redistricting power in the General Assembly alone. Even if that weren't the case, there wouldn't be much to stop a future legislature from undoing the nonpartisan system, unless constitutional language protected it. Glazier said he is generally "loathe" to support constitutional amendments and thinks they're pushed too often. "But I think when you're talking about something as substantial as how you're going to elect your legislature, that is a constitutional-worthy question," he said.

February 3, 2015 at 9:07 am
Richard Bunce says:

Without politics would require without people. Computer algorithm with only inputs being number of districts, land area to be divided, distribution of population within the land area, and possible County boundaries. No other demographic data allowed to be input. Algorithms creates districts of equal populations and compactness.

February 3, 2015 at 10:11 am
Frank Burns says:

They weren't sick of gerrymandering when the Democrats were in charge. They made an art form out of it. The shoe is now on the other foot, deal with it.

February 3, 2015 at 10:19 am
Norm Kelly says:

There are a few interesting tidbits in this post.

For instance, when discussing using a computer program to create districts: ' "Which (voters) are Liberal, Conservative, Republican, Democrat, Black, White, Christian, Jewish, polka-dotted, or whatever has absolutely zero effect on the district shapes that come out,"'. This would be completely illegal, and would be rejected by both the State Supreme Court and the central planners. The central planners, and people like the buffet slayer, have made it ILLEGAL to not consider Black v White when drawing districts. The central planners have dictated, and racists like Alsharpton & the buffet slayer agree, that districts must be drawn in such a fashion that mostly black districts exist so that blacks are represented by a black. These people believe that it's not proper for blacks to be represented by a white pol, so districts MUST take skin color into account. And even when skin color is taken into account, non-thinking racists like the buffet slayer will claim that the districts are illegal. Cuz they don't segregate enough?

Second, we can always count on representatives of the Locke foundation expressing useful thoughts and accurate information. Many refer to this accurate information as 'facts'. Libs refer to this accurate information as 'hate speech' and 'words to be ignored'. Let me quote so everyone knows I got it right, and to put some salt on the wounds of libs. It's always fun to rub salt in lib wounds! '"This isn't a new thing," said Gray. "By some of the reports in the press, you would come to believe that redistricting and gerrymandering have only been an issue to be discussed in the last four years, since Republicans have taken over the General Assembly. The fact of the matter is, this has been going on for years and it was just as bad, if not worse, when the other party was in control"'. Media outlets such as the N&D ignore the facts because facts do NOT fit their agenda. Fact: coal ash ponds have been leaking for decades; years when libs ruled Raleigh. Myth perpetrated by libs & N&D: McCrory has coal ash on his hands. Fact: gerry has visited redistricting for decades, years when libs ruled Raleigh. Myth perpetrated by libs & N&D editorial writers as pointed out quite well by Ms. Gray: it was at least as bad under lib rule if not worse. Remember, it was the last time libs gerry'd around that the districts were thrown out! When Republicans took care of gerry this time, somehow the rule of law was ignored, the racism of conservatives/Republicans was ignored, and the courts were bought off by Pope & Kochs to determine that the districts were legal! Oops. Mixed up my truth with liberal rants. Sorry. Trying to catch libs there by throwing in some of their religion along with truth. The districts were deemed legal by the courts even without pay offs to the judges by billionaire conservatives!

Need some more relevant information provided by Ms. Gray that libs will ignore? Try this: 'Democrats had balked when Republicans suggested a different system for drawing district lines'. When libs ruled Raleigh, it was their way or no way. Now that libs are in the minority, they suddenly are interested in changing the process. Wonder why? Probably because they are expecting the 'non-partisan' group can be influenced by libs to do things 'their' way. Libs will propose changes in the law that must be taken into account by the computer program to take certain factors, like skin color, into account in order to create districts approved by libs. Libs will find a way, they believe, to create laws that will force the computer to account for things like income, family size, house square footage, and other factors so that districts are gerry'd by the program according to the dictates of the libs to favor lib districts. This is whining & complaining by those who lost, who now sit in the minority.

I say, lets find a 'non-partisan' way of redistricting. However, the law MUST be implemented AFTER the next redistricting takes place. Let the process as is run just one more time, then in 2022 after the next census & gerry process, the new 'non-partisan' process can take place. This way, we know the libs are serious instead of just whiners. If libs refuse to go along with this process, which is almost certain, then we know they are not serious about taking the gerry process out of redistricting completely, just out of the process while THEY are the minority. We should never make changes based on the rantings of whiners. It's like grocery shopping when hungry. Or deciding about divorce after a big argument with your spouse.