I mentioned in an earlier post that I was going to roll out my legislative agenda. This is the first in the series.
It is no secret that I am in favor of a change to the process by which the lines are drawn for the voter pool for candidates. (Type redistricting in the search box to the right.) The current process, where by electeds choose their voters, is horribly broken. Drawing of the lines by the party in charge has resulted in fewer competitive races with the resulting decline in voter turnout.
Nonpartisan redistricting is the answer, but at the minimum, bipartisan redistricting. An independent commission should draw the lines, taking into consideration the usual principles of redistricting (compactness, continguity, political subdivisions, communities of interest, and cores of prior districts) save one: incumbency protection.
Redistricting remains a hot topic across the country. So hot, in fact, that it has inspired a game. Here is a short (5 minute) video about the game.
(If you are so inclined, you can play the game here.)
This coming session, there will be a few of bills introduced which will tackle the topic. (SJ5 has already been pre-filed as has HJ28. At least one other bill, for which The Virginia Redistricting Coalition has obtained bipartisan House and Senate sponsors, is in the works.) It would seem that having the Republicans in control of the House and the Democrats in control of the Senate would be the perfect situation for passage of redistricting reform. As I’ve said before, if such legislation does not pass, it can only mean one thing: that those in power are more concerned about keeping that power and not about doing the people’s business.
I’ll be watching.
(For a background in the issue of redistricting, see the work done by the LWV.)
Technorati Tags: Redistricting
The problem with “bipartisan redistricting” is that it inevitably focuses on the shared interest – incumbency protection. I’m not sure I find that any better than partisan gerrymandering. I think it’s nonpartisan or bust, for me.
(I like the idea of a legislative agenda series. I look forward to the rest.)
Posted by MB | Monday, December 17, 2007, 12:21 pm“As I’ve said before, if such legislation does not pass, it can only mean one thing: that those in power are more concerned about keeping that power and not about doing the people’s business.”
Care to wager on the outcome, Vivian? I’ll take “keeping that power.”
Posted by Brian | Monday, December 17, 2007, 1:57 pmMB – if they remove incumbency protection as a part of the criteria, even bipartisan redistricting will work. Take a look at the Iowa model, which I believe has been around longer than any other.
Brian – at this point, it’s a hard call. But we’ve got two sessions of the GA to get it done before the next election. I’d like to think that our legislators will do the right thing. But if they don’t, it behooves all of us to hold them accountable for not doing so.
Posted by vjp | Monday, December 17, 2007, 2:30 pmWhat will you do, Vivian, vote for Republicans?
Posted by Anon E. Mouse | Monday, December 17, 2007, 9:00 pmtake a good look at norfolk city districts, need i say more.
Posted by JACK STILES | Tuesday, December 18, 2007, 8:23 pmVivian — Thanks for the note on our group. We’re working hard and hope to have a great website up and running soon!
thanks
dave
Posted by Dave S | Friday, December 21, 2007, 12:21 am