Gerrymandering devalues votes; that should concern us all

Wow, I always knew columnist George F. Will was conservative, but his use of the “it’s always been done this way” defense to criticize the lawsuit against Wisconsin’s gerrymandering of voting districts amazed me (“Tangling With Redistricting: Will the Supreme Court Fall Into This Political Thicket?” Oct. 2 Perspectives).

At no point does he express any concern about the threat posed to democracy by this deliberate vote devaluation. He initiates his argument by stating that “‘partisan gerrymandering’ ... is a redundancy.” To the contrary, gerrymandering is motivated by more than partisan gain. The courts have already made judgments against racial gerrymandering, for example. Some gerrymandering is drawn for the purpose of keeping incumbents (of both parties) in power. In addition, legislative leaders will gerrymander an unorthodox legislator out of his or her district as a form of discipline

Mr. Will makes the point that this issue is complicated, and on that much we can agree. The best solution is to eliminate the conflict of interest inherent in the current redistricting system and to substitute an independent citizens commission.

Fair Districts PA supports legislation (HB 722 and SB 22) to create such a system modeled after the successful California example. Not surprisingly the current committee chairs of the State Government committees (House: Daryl Metcalfe and Senate: Mike Folmer) refuse even to give these bills a hearing.

The rest of the Republican leadership (Speaker Mike Turzai, House Majority Leader Dave Reed and Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman) could step up and respond to widespread citizen demand for action on this reform, but they have not. Is this what representative democracy looks like? KITSY McNULTY Shadyside