Redistricting reform essential
Changes would ensure fairer representation
The dictionary tells us that a representative is “a person chosen or appointed to act or speak for others.” Living in a representative government, it is therefore expected that elected officials such as myself and my peers are a representation of those for whom we speak. However, that ideal is far too rarely realized today.
The truth is that the accuracy of a state’s representation hinges upon the quality of its district map. These maps set the playing field for every state’s General Assembly and drawing them can control the balance of power on a state and federal level. As such, the hand that draws the map is bestowed with the responsibility of upholding our goal of representative government. But anyone who has spent time looking at these maps will quickly discover that something is deeply wrong.
Instead of a fair division of a state’s population, we find complicated district lines that tend to twist around desired population centers, fragmenting demographics to the benefit of the party in power. When creating a district map is left to a partisan state legislature, as is the case in a majority of states, this convoluted system is inevitable.
For too long, our democratic principles have come second to the goal of partisan self-promotion, disenfranchising voters after every census as they find new lines crossing through their backyard, slicing up and bundling together communities into ideal playing fields for the dominant party.
Instead of the people choosing their representative, the representatives are choosing their people.
Such gerrymandering holds a crushing grip around the democratic process. The result is frequently noncompetitive districts designed to maintain the power of those who drew the lines. Voters caught within such a map may find their interests overlooked and ignored, even if they align with the winning party, as a noncompetitive district is easily taken for granted. Noncompetitive districts also increase political polarization and ultimately drive down voter participation. In the 2020 election, Indiana saw the ninth lowest turnout in the country.
This does not have to be the case. As of the end of this past census year, 25 states had established some form of nonpartisan or bipartisan redistricting committee. Fourteen of those states have entrusted their boards with primary influence over drawing these maps. Unfortunately, while our neighbors Michigan and Ohio have both chosen this route, Indiana has not.
In the past, attempts have been made to introduce an independent redistricting committee in our state. Such bills have seen bipartisan support but have ultimately never been successful. As we once again find ourselves called upon to draw new lines, I, along with my fellow House Democrats and many others, as polls show, feel strongly that an independent redistricting commission is the best way to depoliticize the redistricting process. It is imperative that we finally come together to ensure all Hoosiers are fairly represented by their government for decades to come.