Congressional do-over

Pa. Supreme Court offers hope for fair districts

Because of a state Supreme Court ruling Monday, Pennsylvania has an opportunity to redraw congressional district boundaries based on factors transcending naked politics. It’s an opportunity to redraw districts in a way that makes every seat competitive, meaning election cycles would favor moderate candidates empowered to break through Washington gridlock. It’s an opportunity not to be squandered.

The seven-member court, which includes five Democrats, ruled that the state’s gerrymandered congressional district map “clearly, plainly and palpably violates” the state constitution and may not be used in the spring primary. It ordered the GOP-controlled Legislature, which drew the districts after the last census, to redraw them by Feb. 9. If the Legislature doesn’t complete the task by then or if Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf chooses not to approve the new map, the court said it will redraw the districts itself.

Republican operatives assailed the ruling as judicial overreach and a power grab on behalf of the Democratic Party, which holds just five of the state’s 18 U.S. House seats. But the Republicans deserve as much sympathy for political victimization as the Menendez brothers get for being orphans. If they hadn’t gerrymandered the districts, the court wouldn’t have ruledthem unconstitutional.

Across the country, both parties have gerrymandered legislative and congressional seats when they had the opportunity to maintain or enhance their dominance in legislatures and Congress. The result has been oddly shaped districts with safe seats that discourage moderate politics and resist shifts in voter attitudes. Gerrymandering upends the political process, allowing politicians to choose their constituents, and it allows incumbents to cling to office no matter how undistinguished their service.

Now, gerrymandering is under legal attack in a number of states. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision follows a federal appeals court ruling earlier this month that ordered a redrawing of North Carolina’s congressional districts. That ruling was stayed by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is weighing cases involving Marylandand Wisconsin.

Pennsylvania’s Republican legislative leaders should not seek a stay of the state Supreme Court ruling. Instead, they should do as the state court ordered — redraw the districts so that they are “composed of compact and contiguous territory; as nearly equal in population as practicable; and which do not divide any county, city, incorporated town, borough, township or ward, except where necessary to ensure equality of population.”

Districts shouldn’t be drawn to favor any party, group or individual. Ideally, the lines would be drawn to make every district competitive in every election, with candidates staking out moderate positions to attract the greatest number of votes and shifts in voter sentiment resulting in immediate change. In the future, the Legislature should turn over redistricting responsibilities to an independent citizens commission one step removed from partisan politics.

But gerrymandering is just a sign of an ailing political system. Both parties need to put up quality candidates for every seat in each election, and voters should study the candidates and go to the polls to do their civic duty.

Democrats may hail the state Supreme Court ruling, but redrawn congressional seats won’t solve all of their problems. After all, the GOP’s victory in Pennsylvania in the 2016 presidentialand U.S. Senate races had nothingto do with gerrymandering.