Support a bipartisan plan for fair redistricting

Pennsylvania’s Constitution designates a Legislative Reapportionment Commission to draw district boundaries. The commission is made up of the majority leaders of the House and the Senate and the minority leaders of the House and the Senate. These four politicians then elect a fifth person as chair. These have traditionally been white, Protestant, male lawyers steeped in politics. The 2011 redistricting process was so Byzantine that our Supreme Court finally threw up its hands and adopted the least bad plan. Pennsylvania is the third-most gerrymandered state in the union. Its bizarre districts are held up to public derision. We voted 49 percent Democratic but have five Democratic and 13 Republican members of the U.S. House.

Our state legislators know that we can do better! Nine alternative redistricting bills were introduced this year, by both Republicans and Democrats. Each has merit. The force of wind appears to be behind the plan of Sen. Lisa Boscola/ Rep. Steve Samuelson (SB 22/ HB 722). These bills have bipartisan support, with 13 senators and 95 representatives supporting them. The plan uses an 11member commission. They are civilians. Politicians need not apply. The meetings are public. Public hearings are held on both an initial and the final plan. If the commission can’t agree, a master finishes the job. The final plan carries the full force of law, so the Legislature cannot alter it.

If we get hearings on this plan in 2017, it can be passed in 2018 and 2019, so the public can adopt it in 2020. Then the 2021 redistricting plan might make sense. REV. ROGER THOMAS Harmony, Beaver County God’s creation but wrong for environmentalists to try and stop them. That, to me, seems to be an exactly backward way of thinking.

I can think of no better way of expressing my own theological view of the matter than by quoting the close of President John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address: “[L]et us go forth ... asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.” MICHAEL PASTORKOVICH

Chair Sierra Club Allegheny Group

Oakland

As someone who is a strong believer in freedom of religion as well as freedom from religion, I try to make it a practice not to mock others’ religious beliefs. But some religious concepts are just too silly to ignore. An example would be those expressed in a July 11 letter (“God in Control”) in which the author argues, in supporting Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement, that “my view is the planet will exist as God intended and will be totally changed when God chooses.”

If the planet “exists as God intended,” why should we bother with such things as water purification plants and instead just drink directly from the Monongahela? While we’re at it, let’s get rid of all the dams and locks on our rivers because, in his view, man is not “in charge of our planet.” Why plow the roads in winter if God intended for the snow to fall? Why build

We welcome your opinion

breakwaters in harbors if God thinks the Great Lakes and the ocean shores are perfect just as they are?

We humans have reacted to our environment for as long as we have been on Earth, sometimes in positive ways and sometimes in not so positive ways. I recall from my Sunday school days that “stewardship” was an important Christian concept. So, if our actions have created a situation that severely endangers the quality of life of our global neighbors and ourselves, maybe it’s our Christian duty to do something about the mess we’ve made. JOEL PACE

North Side