Five steps to tame the redistricting beast
Pennsylvania is not California, we know. But we may be able to learn some valuable lessons from a place that once was called “the most ungovernable state in the nation” because of gerrymandering.
According to three people who spent years working on California’s redistricting plan, the gerrymandering in their state was so bad there was complete government gridlock.
“We couldn’t pass a budget, and we had the lowest bond rating in the nation,” said Cynthia Dai, one of the commissioners elected to solve the problem.
“Pennsylvania is now where California was with the bond ratings,” Dai said. In fact, she said, Pennsylvania is widely considered to be the worst state in the nation for gerrymandered districts. The courts have redrawn Pennsylvania’s congressional map, but it’s past time for us to do something about the legislative one.
Common Cause and other civic organization are beginning a grassroots campaign to establish an independent legislative redistricting commission in Pennsylvania, much like the one that took charge in California. Common Cause in Pennsylvania recently invited three California redistricting commissioners to share their experiences as Pennsylvania steps into the same murky waters Californians tread only a few years ago.
In 2010, Californians put the burden of redrawing the state’s legislative and congressional districts into the hands of an independent commission composed of five Democrats that included Dai, five Republicans and four non-aligned voters determined to get the job done.
California’s commissioners had seven months to agree to new maps. According to Dai, as well as Peter Yao, Republican and independent Stanley Forbes, the process was far from easy. All of the commissioners were passionate and committed, frequently deliberating late into the night, holding many town halls throughout the state, and staying focused amid all the controversy and lawsuits one would expect when lines of power are being moved.
Dai, Yao and Forbes clearly were proud of what they accomplished in California, and they offered five tips Pennsylvanians would do well to contemplate as we consider righting the wrongs of gerrymandering:
Tip 1: Establish an independent, bipartisan commission to redraw the maps, and make sure commissioners have no conflicts of interest:
California’s commissioners were elected after a thorough vetting process that excluded candidates for even the appearance of a conflict of interest. Since the redistricting process is supposed to restore public trust in state government, it’s important to have commissioners who don’t stand to gain in any way from how the maps are redrawn. In California, all commissioners pledged to look beyond narrow party interests to work for the good of the entire state.
Tip 2: The commission must reflect the diversity of the state:
“It won’t work to have a commission made up of all white men from Harrisburg,” Dai warned. The commission should be composed of people from different regions of the state - urban and rural - as well as from diverse ethnic groups, professions, ages and economic strata. There even was a very busy mother with four young kids. Voters have to be able to see themselves reflected on the commission to instill the trust that will be needed to reshape power maps.
Tips 3: The process must be absolutely transparent:
No back room deals, no side bar meetings, no commissioners whispering outside of the public eye. Dai said the commissioners were not allowed to talk about their work except when they were officially meeting. When they got together over dinner or coffee, they talked about their families, their kids or TV shows, never about redistricting. The process has to be open and above board.
Tip 4: People must be involved in the process from day one:
California’s commissioners held lots of public meetings and regularly heard from different constituent groups. Their meetings were open to the public, and they met throughout the state to allow as many people as possible to participate. In the seven months they worked on the plan, they held more than 100 meetings.
Tip 5 : Make sure failure is not more attractive than success:
California’s commissioners had to agree on a plan of action in case they were unable to meet the deadline to agree on a redistricting map. But they had to make sure failure was not more attractive than success, allowing existing power brokers to maintain their stranglehold on government. If the commissioners had failed to have a supermajority - at least three Democrats, three Republicans and three independents-agree on the final map, the issue would have gone to a panel of judges to decide. No one wanted that, and no party would benefit. The backup plan was to be avoided at all costs, or as Dai said, “Over our dead bodies were we going to hand off the decision to anybody else.
We need people in Pennsylvania with the same passion and spunk, because the legislative redistricting battle is upon us. The California commissioners have offered a solid roadmap that just might save us some blood, sweat and tears in the months ahead.
We would do well to follow their advice.