1 / 28

Rockport, IN house districts

Problem 1: Communities split. Rockport, IN house districts. Problem 1: Communities split. Morristown, IN Congressional districts. Problem 2: Lack of compactness. Congressional District 8. Congressional District 4. Problem 2: Lack of compactness. Monticello. Milwaukee 203 mi.

loretta
Télécharger la présentation

Rockport, IN house districts

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Problem 1: Communities split Rockport, IN house districts

  2. Problem 1: Communities split Morristown, IN Congressional districts

  3. Problem 2: Lack of compactness Congressional District 8 Congressional District 4

  4. Problem 2: Lack of compactness Monticello Milwaukee 203 mi Congressional District 8 Congressional District 4 Mt. Vernon 218 mi Bedford

  5. Problem 3: Lack of competition • 40% of all legislative races lack major party opposition • Half of House districts favor a party by more than 30% • Since 2001, Senate leaders opposed 5 out of 16 opportunities.  House leaders 19 out of 32 times

  6. Problem 4: Voter confusion 9 Hamilton County House Districts (Also has 5 Senate districts)

  7. Problem 5: Complicated election administration • In Indiana, elections take 30,000 people to run 5500 precincts.  County clerks and poll workers must deal with multiple ballot variations. • "In Tippecanoe County,  the Town of Battleground,  population 1,323, is split between two house districts.  District 26 represents some residents of Battleground;  District 41 represents the rest.This leads to phone calls from residents who are bewildered when the neighbor across the street got a different ballot than they did." - Linda Phillips, Clerk of the Tippecanoe County Circuit Court.

  8. The solution: Maps drawn based on…. • Keeping communities of interest together (21 states) • Compactness (36 states) • Following known community boundaries (44 states) • No political data for partisanship (12 states do this)

  9. What Could Have Been What Is (Congressional) What Could Have Been (One of many possibilities)

  10. What Could Have Been What Is (Congressional) What Could Have Been (One of many possibilities) Before: 12 counties and 20 townships split After: 2 counties and two townships split

  11. What Could Have Been What Is (Indiana House) What Could Have Been (One of many possibilities)

  12. What Could Have Been What Is (Indiana House) What Could Have Been (One of many possibilities) Before: 71 counties split After: Only 46 counties split

  13. What Could Have Been What Could Have Been (One of many possibilities) What Is (Indiana Senate)

  14. What Could Have Been What Could Have Been (One of many possibilities) What Is (Indiana Senate) Before: 48 counties split After: Only 29 counties split. 63 have single Senator

  15. Added Benefit: Nesting • Each senate district could be split into two house districts • More accountability • Less confusion

  16. Nesting Example Nesting Example: Fayette, Union, Franklin, Dearborn, Ohio, Switzerland and part of Ripley

  17. The Solution 1: Keep communities of interest together Morristown – one member of Congress Rockport – a single house member

  18. The Solution 2: Compact districts Would this be better? Congressional District 8 Today

  19. The Solution 2: Compact districts Would this be better? Congressional District 4

  20. The Solution 3: Respect known community boundaries Hamilton County House Districts Current (9) Would this be better? (4)

  21. The Solution 4: Prohibit use of partisan information • No incumbent addresses • No voting history • Applies to the map drawing process

  22. Why consider maps like this? • More competition • More accountability for lawmakers • Easier access to lawmakers • Easier/less costly election administration

  23. Redistricting Timeline: January 2006 The Indiana House passed HB 1009, which contained several reforms including a felony for using political data; never heard in the Senate January 2009 Bills introduced in House and Senate; Resolution passes Senate calling for interim study committee September 8, 2009 Rethinking Redistricting is launched and Senator Long, publicly outlines his thoughts on redistricting Fall 2009 Interim study committee meets to hear testimony on the subject of redistricting

  24. Redistricting Timeline: Moving Forward April 1, 2010 Census is taken Feb-April 1, 2011    Census data is certified and delivered to the General Assembly April 29, 2011        Deadline for General Assembly to pass bills adopting plans May 2011               Deadline for Governor to sign, veto, or allow bills to become law without signature “Districts should make geographic, social, and economic sense, period, and Todd’s model maps serve as examples.  I look forward to signing a bill supported by leaders in both the Indiana House and Senate based on these principles that will create far more fair and responsible districts than today’s.” Governor Mitch Daniels

  25. Next steps -  They think you don’t care -  This is how you prove them wrong www.RethinkingRedistricting.com • Sign up for e-mail alerts • Contact your legislator • Submit your own ideas • Start commenting

More Related