Time for independent redistricting panel

Editorial by Wilmington Star-News, July 7, 2015.

The U.S. Supreme Court just completed one of its more important terms in recent memory. The justices, just as divided ideologically as the Americans they represent, issued a flurry of controversial decisions in the days leading up to the court's annual break until October. Many of those were close calls, 5-4 decisions featuring minority dissents expressed in sharp language.

And so it was with one of its final decisions as well. Once again by a 5-4 margin with Justice Anthony Kennedy casting the swing vote, the Supreme Court upheld Arizona's use of an independent commission to draw congressional districts. We believe this is a welcome decision that reaffirms the importance of voters, not politicians.

It is vital that we take the power to create voting districts out of the hands of politicians and political parties who stand to benefit from their shaky and squiggly renderings. In recent years we have endorsed this idea of a non-partisan outside organization using computer technology to blindly create voting districts for state House and Senate races or congressional districts.

North Carolina should once again take note, particularly leaders of the N.C. Senate. The decision by the Supreme Court gives them one less reason to resist a bipartisan initiative to create a redistricting commission here.

The latest redrawing of North Carolina's congressional districts has brought several lawsuits. In fact, nearly every redistricting by state politicians over the years has had the same result. Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered one such case back to the N.C. Supreme Court for further consideration. The order was based on a finding that Alabama relied too heavily on race in drawing its districts, which the North Carolina suit alleged as well.

That court decision sparked another federal suit in May. That suit also claims unconstitutional gerrymandering based on race.

Shortly after the high court upheld Arizona's redistricting commission, it also agreed to hear charges next fall that the commission wrongly used race and party membership in drawing state legislative districts. The decision in that case may well influence the North Carolina suits.

Lawsuits against redistricting are a North Carolina tradition, and they won't end with these cases. Redistricting has always been done for political advantage, no matter which party was in charge.

That's why 63 members of the N.C. House have endorsed an initiative to move redistricting out of the General Assembly and give it to a nonpartisan commission. The supporters are bipartisan, joined by former Govs. Jim Hunt, a Democrat, and Jim Martin, a Republican. Rep. Paul Stam, the Republican House speaker pro tem, has led efforts for the commission in the House. But Senate leaders won't hear of it. In January, Senate Rules Committee chair Tom Apodaca said no redistricting bill will have any chance in the Senate. “It's dead. It's not going anywhere,” he said. Senate leader Phil Berger appears to agree.

That's unfortunate. We believe North Carolina's voters are ready for a change. We certainly are.

It's also clear that the nation's highest court is paying attention to excesses in redistricting zeal, especially when they involve race — which happened in this state's last redrawing of electoral maps.

A redistricting commission could make that problem go away, and create some sensible district lines for the first time in generations.

http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20150707/ARTICLES/150709809/1108/editorial?template=printart