Redistricting
Revisited
By Richard A. Lee
The
immediate impact of New Jersey’s new legislative map has been to produce a
flurry of activity among members of the State Senate and Assembly.
Legislators
are retiring, moving out of their hometowns, shifting their election campaigns from
the Assembly to the Senate (and vice versa), and trying to win a game of
political musical chairs that is being played in districts that now have more
incumbents than open seats.
For
the most part, the dust will settle by April 11, the filing deadline for this
fall’s elections. But maybe we should not be so quick to relegate the
contentious issue of redistricting to the backburner for another decade. Why
not take some time now – while redistricting and all its flaws and shortcomings
are still fresh in our minds – to see how the process can be improved for the
next round of legislative map-making?
Just
think about the current system, and it will not take long to reach the
conclusion that there has to a better way.
For
example, every 10 years, once new Census figures are available, the process
begins with each of the chairs of the two major political parties appointing
five members to the State Apportionment Commission, which is charged with
drawing 40 new legislative districts to reflect the new Census numbers. That
means five Democrats and five Republicans are expected to agree on a map that
will shape New Jersey’s political landscape for the next 10 years. It is a bit
like asking the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox to reach a gentlemanly
agreement on which team should win the American League East.
When the inevitable occurs and
the commission finds itself deadlocked, the process calls for the Chief Justice
of the New Jersey Supreme Court to appoint an eleventh member as a tie-breaker.
As a result, the vote of one person ultimately determines whether the new map
will be more favorable to Democrats or Republicans. Continuing with the
baseball analogy, this is akin to two teams playing to a tie after nine innings
and then allowing an umpire to decide which one should be declared the winner
of the game.
In addition, under the existing
system, each of the 10 original members of the commission has a vested interest
– either directly or indirectly – in the outcome of its work. This is not a
recipe for producing a map in the best interests of New Jersey’s 8.7 million
residents. Instead, it creates the potential for gerrymandering, political
paybacks, and districts that all but guarantee incumbents will be re-elected.
And let’s not forget that, at a
time when citizens are demanding more transparency in government, state law
exempts the Apportionment Commission from New Jersey’s Open Public Meetings
Act.
Finding flaws in the current
system is easy; identifying a better way to tackle redistricting is a much
greater challenge, but here are a few suggestions to get the ball rolling on improving
the process:
·
The
State Apportionment Commission should be restructured and made as non-political
as is reasonably possible. Take the two major political parties and their
chairs out of the process. Give a role to some of New Jersey’s ordinary
citizens – the folks the politicians always refer to when they talk about families
sitting at the kitchen table and making decisions on how to make ends
meet. We rely on citizens for juries
that decide if people are guilty or innocent and whether they should be sent to
jail. Surely, we can entrust them with drawing a map.
·
Tap
the expertise within our academic community. New Jersey colleges and universities
have hundreds of brilliant scholars. State government should make better use of
the experts who work in our higher education institutions. Certainly, there are
professors with the Socratic ability to determine how 40 sets of boundaries can
be fairly drawn.
·
Put
some young people on the commission. The map will be in place for a decade, and
it should reflect the input of those who are New Jersey’s newest voters and may
have fresh ideas on politics and government.
·
Make
better use of computers. Machines are not perfect, as anyone who has ever been
misdirected by a GPS device knows. Nevertheless, technology can do amazing
things today. Redistricting needs a human element, but computers can help build
a strong foundation for the work involved in producing a quality legislative
map.
Improving
the redistricting process will not be an easy task, but we have a decade to
work at it. But first we must decide whether we truly want to make the process
better, or if we simply want to put the existing system back into its box and
not open it again for another 10 years.
# # #
No comments:
Post a Comment