Reapportionment plan will likely disenfranchise some voters

At least some Pennsylvania voters will end up voting for a state representative or senator in November who will cease to represent them sometime after the election.

The fate of a second stab at a 2011 Legislative Reapportionment Plan will hang in the balance next week, but the boundary lines eventually drawn and approved will have virtually no impact on the November election. When a plan is eventually approved, however, the winners of the seats up for grabs will represent voters who live within the redrawn lines.

After the state Supreme Court voted 4-3 in January to reject the 2011 state House and Senate reapportionment maps approved by the Legislative Reapportionment Commission, a federal court ruled in February that the November 2012 election would proceed under the 2001 apportionment plan — the current boundaries.

A revised 2011 plan approved by the Legislative Reapportionment Commission has also been challenged, with oral arguments scheduled for Sept. 13 before the Supreme Court. Appeals by 13 separate groups have been consolidated and the redistricting plan will be one of two issues, the other being a challenge to the state’s voter ID law, the court will hear that day. The session will be televised on PCN, the Pennsylvania Cable Network, beginning at 9:30 a.m.

“Federal law says once a final map has the force of law, any future election will have to use it,” Dave Thomas, counsel to the speaker of the Pennsylvania House, said Tuesday. “Any Supreme Court decision will be after the election.”

A final map will “create gray areas,” Thomas said. “Technically, [a legislator] will represent people under their district’s new map.” Legislators weigh in While opinions on the overall state maps and the challenge tended to fall along party lines, with Republicans for and Democrats against the new maps, local legislators polled reacted to their own district changes on more personal terms.

“I liked all versions of the map,” said state Rep. Kate Harper, R-61, whose district would maintain Upper Gwynedd, parts of Lower Gwynedd and North Wales, add some Whitpain divisions, get all of Towamencin and drop the parts of Montgomery and Plymouth townships it now covers.

“Running under the old district is a little weird,” she added. “I would be elected by people in Plymouth and not represent them,” if the map being appealed is approved.

The only part of Whitpain not included would be the Broad Axe section, where state Rep. Mike Gerber, D-148, resides, Harper said, noting an effort is always made in redrawing lines to not disqualify a sitting office holder. Gerber, however, has dropped out of the race, and neither of the two candidates for the 148th live in that part of Whitpain, which could provide an opportunity, if a third plan is drawn up, to have all of Whitpain in the 61st, she said.

“The uncertainty [of a final reapportionment plan] is difficult for people running for office and the voters,” she said.

State Rep. Todd Stephens, R-151, similarly expressed support for the new revised map, noting both the initial draft of the map and one going before the court create a more compact 151st District.

“I think it’s an improvement,” Stephens said. “It reduces the number of municipal splits and makes my district more compact.”

The 151st District currently includes six municipalities — Ambler Borough and parts of Abington, Horsham, Lower Gwynedd, Montgomery and Upper Dublin townships — while the new map reduces that to four. The parts of Abington currently in the 151st would go to the 153rd, while Ambler Borough would switch to the 148th District.

“The people challenging the maps wanted districts that were more compact,” Stephens said. “In both proposals, my district is more compact. I’ve thought from the beginning that my district is an improvement over the current districts that are in place.”

While primarily happy with the proposed changes, Stephens did say he would be disappointed to no longer represent Ambler.

“I really enjoy the small town feel of Ambler,” he said. “It was really the only small town in my district. That’s the disappointing aspect of the proposal.”

State Rep. Tom Murt, R-152, though “not happy” with the latest plan, also said it does reduce the number of municipal splits. The 152nd, which includes parts of Philadelphia, Lower Moreland, Upper Moreland, and parts of Horsham and Upper Dublin and the boroughs of Bryn Athyn and Hatboro, would lose the piece of Horsham to the 151st District and gain the Willow Grove section of Upper Dublin under the plan before the court.

“I would have preferred to expand my district into Bucks County,” to perhaps include part of Warminster or Upper Southampton and make it “more compact geographically,” said Murt, adding, however, he will be “anxious to meet my new constituents. I didn’t get the district I would have hoped for, but for me, personally, it’s an honor and a privilege to hold elected office.”

With only minor changes to the 153rd District — it would have all of Abington with some minor changes to the parts of Upper Dublin it covers — state Rep. Madeleine Dean, a Democrat who won the seat in a special election this year, was “happy” with the plan “because it [the district] is contiguous and moving in the right direction.”

Upper Dublin, on the other hand, remains split, which “doesn’t go in line with the com- pactness of interest,” she said. The point of having contiguous districts “is so people have a clearer voice.”

“I wish political partisanship didn’t take any role in redistricting,” she added.

State Sen. Daylin Leach, D-17, whose district, which includes parts of Delaware and Montgomery counties, would drop Conshohocken and add Whitpain. He said the latest plan would “not have a huge impact on me.”

“I’ll be sorry to lose Conshohocken, but will enjoy Whitpain as well.

“My district was not an object of gerrymandering,” Leach said, but “statewide [the plan] is obscene. There are still largely unrelated splits around the state made for no reason other than to make sure Republican candidates win.”

State Sen. Stewart Greenleaf, R-12, who represents Upper Southampton, Warminster and Warrington in Bucks County and the Montgomery County townships of Franconia, Hatfield, Horsham, Lower Gwynedd, Lower Moreland, Montgomery, Upper Dublin, Upper Gwynedd and Upper Moreland, along with the boroughs of Ambler, Bryn Athyn, Hatboro, Hatfield and North Wales, would lose Upper Dublin and pick up the boroughs of Souderton and Telford under the plan.

“I would have preferred to have my district stay the way it is,” Greenleaf said, but his district has gained population and is over the number being targeted. Greenleaf said he did not know why Upper Dublin had been taken, as in the initial plan Ambler was moved and Upper Dublin, which he has always represented in his 30-some years in the Senate, remained with his seat. Though a Republican, Greenleaf said, he “did pretty well in Upper Dublin,” in terms of garnering votes.

According to county election data, Greenleaf won in Upper Dublin in the last election.

Montgomery County Democratic Chairman Marcel Groen suggested Upper Dublin was dropped from Greenleaf’s seat “because it’s the most Democratic voting municipality [in the 12th]. It has nothing to do with good government; it’s raw politics.”

Under the plan, Upper Dublin and Conshohocken move to the 7th Senate District, currently held by Democrat Vincent Hughes, which includes Whitemarsh and part of Philadelphia, while dropping Springfield Township. The latter goes to the 4th District, which includes Cheltenham, Jenkintown, Rockledge and parts of Philadelphia.

Groen, who with Montgomery County Commissioners Chairman Josh Shapiro and six others filed an appeal in the Supreme Court opposing the revised 2011 plan, claiming it is unconstitutional because it splits too many municipalities and counties, said the plan would “marginalize” voters on all levels. We would “not have competitive races,” and no Senate district would be totally in Montgomery County, which is the third largest county in the state and could comprise 3.2 state Senate districts, he said.

Upper Dublin has three different state representatives under the plan, and Lower Merion has four, though it’s “big enough for one,” Groen said. “There is no need for any of this.”

The plan “is a punishment by the Legislature to Republican voters for having voted with Democrats on occasion,” he said, noting Montgomery County “is considered a swing area in the state.”

I think the changes are as bad as the original plan for our county,” Groen said. “You can tell ahead of time who will be elected,” under the plan being appealed. “It’s a farce.”

Groen said the appeal asks the Supreme Court to reject the new plan and appoint a special master under the court’s supervision to come up with a plan.

“We would gain some and lose some … it’s not [supposed] to strengthen or weaken political parties.”