Legislative Redistricting Could Use an Overhaul

Source: Park Rapids Enterprise
Date: January 22, 2008

Last week, a panel of state political superstars gathered in St. Paul to advocate a new plan for redrawing state legislative districts. The new plan doesn't completely prevent the fox-in-the-henhouse syndrome of legislators deciding their own districts, but the proposal at least erects a protective barrier.

By federal law, the state must redraw precinct lines after the US Census recalculates population once every decade. The system as it stands lets the state legislature decide precinct boundaries. Essentially, the process lets legislators have a say in who their constituents will be, instead of vice versa. The process is susceptible to the bias of the party in power. With clever redistricting (not difficult with advanced computer software capabilities), a political party could use the process to cement power by carefully dividing district lines.

For the last few redistrictings, legislators gridlocked on a suitable plan, forcing the courts to engage in the political process by adjudicating districts. The proposal in the state legislature this year would delegate the task of redistricting to a bipartisan panel of retired appellate court judges. The judges would be charged with drawing district lines in a competitive manner.

Competitive districts are a great benefit to the democratic process. Competitive districts hold legislators accountable for their votes in office, and would promote solutions with bipartisan support. Contestable districts prevent political parties from enacting brazen laws while protected by an advantage in the election process.

The new system would also protect current judges from the political backlash of redistricting. The US has a strong precedent for distance between judicial and public opinion, with the intent to let cooler heads prevail. The current process can inflame public opinion and make it harder to judge wisely, especially considering judges may now declare a political affiliation for elections.

The new system is not perfect. If the legislature rejected three panel attempts to redistrict, they would be allowed to try themselves. But feasibly, the successive rejections would build public pressure to support a fair redistricting map.

Those who spoke in favor of the measure included a who’s who of political representatives, such as Democratic elder statesman Walter Mondale, former Republican Gov. Arne Carlson and retired state Supreme Court Chief Justice Kathleen Blatz. Gov. Tim Pawlenty also indicated he supports less partisan redistricting.

If legislators wait too long to approve the reforms, the 2010 census will continue as a bitter partisan struggle. This year is the time for legislators to act to preserve the healthiness of the state’s democratic process by approving the new redistricting plan.