Top Banner
RETHINKING REDISTRICTING Re-drawing legislative districts to better represent people, not politics.

Rethinking Redistricting

May 17, 2015



Indiana\'s Plan to End Gerrymandering.
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Page 1: Rethinking Redistricting


Re-drawing legislative districts tobetter represent people, not politics.

Page 2: Rethinking Redistricting


lWhYis redistricting important?

Few things are more important to our democratic system than the way we elect our state's and our nation's leaders.That's why as Indiana's Chief Elections Officer, I'm starting an important discussion to shed light on the way Hoosiersselect officials to represent us today and tomorrow.

Many people aren't aware of redistricting - the process of dividing the state into sections of voting populations. Evenworse, national polling data from Pew Research shows that most voters don't care: 70 percent of those asked had no

opinion about how redistricting is conducted in their state. But reforming this process is critical to fair and accountable representation andmore competitive elections.

Without fairly drawn districts, incumbents or political parties can manipulate voters through gerrymandering - shaping political boundariesfor electoral advantage. In Indiana, this process has resulted in many oddly shaped districts that split counties and cities and ultimatelydiminish the voting power of many communities with shared interests. In addition, it leads to unnecessary confusion among voters.

Today, this is how you are represented in our state government. And I believe there is a better way.

To help advance discussion about redistricting in Indiana and ways we can make the system better, I'm asking all Hoosiers to startRethinking Redistricting by visiting www.rethinkingredistricting.comandjoiningtheconversation.This online resource provides aforum for constituents who want to have an active role in shaping their voting community and a voice in the decisions that will helpensure more competitive elections, united communities and a process influenced not by politics, but by people.

Regards, /7 /7~U~ ~ Todd Rokita IN D IA N A SEe R ETA RY 0 F STAT E

segments groups of constituents that are otherwise

united through county, city and school district lines.

This criterion seeks to avoid unnecessary division of

voters who share the same community and often the

same priorities, views and motivations.

People, not pol itics

In 2011, each state will redraw its boundaries for

state and congressional districts based on the new

2010 census data. It's our hope that new criteria for

redrawing district lines can help create a system that

is fair, sensible, easy to understand and that, most

importantly, serves the voters and not the legislators.

A fair and effective redistricting plan will use

community-focused criteria to represent Indiana'S

constituents. By concentrating on community, such a plan

would redraw lines through a new system designed to:

• Include no political data

Maps created without considering how particular voters

voted in previous elections will be inherently more fair

and less likely to contribute to gerrymandering and

other voter manipulation.

, Keep communities of interest together

Some district lines are drawn in a way that

• Create districts that are more compact and

geographically uniform

A more logical system to redraw Indiana's maps

would create more uniform districts. More than an

aesthetic preference, this action would improve

government accessibility and raise constituents'

awareness of their district and its distinct, local

issues of concern.

• Maintain population balance

Redrawingof district lines should be accomplished in

a manner that continues to balance population, but not

be so stringent that the other criteria listed are devalued.

Re-drawing legislative districts to better represent people, not politics. 2

Page 3: Rethinking Redistricting

.1'1 How we got here

Ln Indiana and most other states, the state legislature is

responsible for redistricting every 10 years, after U.S.

census data is collected. Under our current law, the

officials responsible for redrawing district lines are the

very legislators already elected to represent the voters in

those districts. To many, that sounds like a conflict of

interest. But it's a system that Indiana has maintained

as the status quo for more than half a century.

Legislators have a constitutional duty to draw the maps,

and they should keep that duty. But for redistricting to

work for Indiana voters, our lawmakers need new, better

criteria for the upcoming round of redistricting in 201l.

The district maps in use today were drawn in 2001, and

are based on 2000 census data. Since those maps were

.rawn, Indiana's competitive field of candidates has

become more and more shallow, with candidates in two

out of every five legislative races running without major

party candidate opposition.

Maps That Make Sense _

We believe the proposed criteria will help us map a

sound solution to Indiana's redistricting challenges.

The maps in this brochure are a prototype of what our

district maps could have looked like today if these

criteria were used with 2000 census data. Beyond

merely being easier to understand, a 2011 map based

on the proposed criteria would result in voters choosing

their legislators (not the other way around), a widened

.andidate field, more competitive races and less

confusion for voters about who represents them.

What do these look -like to you?

While they may look like many different things

to many different people, Indiana's oddly shaped

legislative districts look like anything but fair

for Hoosier voters.

A OWings


o Two partially eaten pieces of pizza

o A spaceship

o A choo-choo train

o A dog with a club foot

o A mountain range

o A tractor

o A squirrel

o A llama

o A staircase

o A caterpillar

o A Pac Man maze



Re-drawing legislative districts to better represent people, not politics. 3

Page 4: Rethinking Redistricting

Ind iana Senate Legislative Districts

In this map, the districts follow already

existing political boundaries that better

represent communities of interest.

Re-drawing legislative districts to better represent people, not politics. 4

Page 5: Rethinking Redistricting

lC:===--=::I_ Indiana House Legislative Districts _1I::::__ E1_

In addition to following county and

township lines, in this map, every two

house districts compose one senate

district, greatly reducing voter confusion.

Re-drawing legislative districts to better represent people, not politics. 5

Page 6: Rethinking Redistricting

Indiana Congressional Districts

Re-drawing legislative districts to better represent people, not politics. I 6

Page 7: Rethinking Redistricting

Re-drawing legislative districts to better represent people, not politics. 7

Page 8: Rethinking Redistricting



I'I~_ ~ F"foItII/lltofllC4l.'

" ~" ladilo SeuetlfJ of Slatelodd lolita

.•."i'"l FtMINocr.e..,

~ __ lililo Seuetlry.f Sial! Toddlolita

~R E T H I N K~I:-::-N::-::G:--=R-=E'="D':"':I S=-=T=-=R::":"I'="C T=-:-::-IN-=-=G

lfiJE Problem 1: Communities split

Rockport, IN house districts


Page 9: Rethinking Redistricting

~R E T H JN K~JN~G~R~E~D~I~S~T~R""'I"""C-:::T"""IN~G

liffJ2 Problem 1: Communities split

Morristown, IN Congressional districts


District 8


District 4

.••••_-\ fi'6tn1"'~"

r; ._ r I"au Stcretary 'f Slitl Todd loki1i


Page 10: Rethinking Redistricting


2: Lack of compactness

Milwaukee 203 mi


District 8


District 4

.••••• "HHi m. eMc..'

"" 11lli1i1 StuIUry of $iJ1Ifodd lotlta

~•••: Fi'OInIfi*_"c'u'il •.Inllm Secrlury of Sutllodd Rotlta


liJ2Problem 3: Lack of competition

• 40% of all legislative races lack major partyopposition

• Half of House districts favor a party by morethan 30%

• Since 2001, Senate leaders opposed 5 out of16 opportunities. House leaders 19 out of 32times


Page 11: Rethinking Redistricting

9 Hamilton County House Districts

•.••_ ,11'oInl'-fIotiIC..'

f _/ l!dilu Seu!lllJafSblelodd lokltl

(Also has 5Senate districts)

~--------------~-------RETHINKING REDISTRICTINGli9-Problem 5: Complicated election administration

• In Indiana, elections take 30,000 people to run 5500precincts - all with multiple ballot variations.

• The concept maps show that the number of ballotstyles can be greatly reduced.

- Johnson County could have 1/3 of the currentnumber of ballot styles.

- Elkhart County could have 1/2 of the currentnumber of ballot styles.


Page 12: Rethinking Redistricting

~R E T H I N K=IN-G~R--E--D""I~S--T--R-I--C--T-IN~GEJ.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)


lJJ. What Could Have BeenWhat Could Have Been

One of many possibilities)


Page 13: Rethinking Redistricting

..1§;R E TH J N K=lN=cr-R=E"'O-1~S"'T"'R"":'I"'C"'T~I--N~'G

lJ!). What Could Have Been

",••_ '\ """;'fWofIIIOtotf

I' " 114m Secreliry af SlltelOOllIo~ta

~R E T H J N K-r N-G-R-E-O-'--S .••.T ••.R-'--C••.T-'-,N-G

What Could Have BeenWhat Is What Could Have Been

(Indiana House) (One of !l1any possibilities)


Page 14: Rethinking Redistricting


What Could Have BeenWhat Is What Could Have Been

(Indiana House) (One of many possibilities)•.. -•


What Could Have BeenWhat Could Have Been

(One of many possibilities)What Is



Page 15: Rethinking Redistricting

~~=---=~Ri2KI;h:~D~~:;~T~:ve BeenWhat Could Have Been

(One of many possibilities)


Added Benefit: Nesting

- Each senate district could be split into twohouse districts

- More accountability- Less confusion

.•.;,.~"", AoooIn,/Moff\c • .,

~ ~,' lallm Ster!tarylrSuteTodd lokita


Page 16: Rethinking Redistricting

~R E T H I N K~I N~G~R:-:E:"":D~IS:"":T=R-:-I~C~T~J""'N~G

lffiJ. Nesting Example

Nesting Example: Fayette, Union, Franklin, Dearborn, Ohio, Switzerland and part of Ripley.~ ~ ,"'N'dM eMc..,p..•,' IAdm SeuetJryofSilIITOOd Rollia


l5J1!. The Solution 1: Keep communities of interest together

Rockport - a single 1house member



Page 17: Rethinking Redistricting

~R E T H J N K~I N:-::-::G:--::R:-:E::-:O~'S::":T=R":"'~C~T~'-:-N~G

.liJ!. The Solution 2: Compact districts


District 8


.- ••• i\. f'«tfIilMomo..,~j IAdiIiSeaeliryofSlilefoddRotitl

Would this be better?

~R E T H J N K~l N:-::-::G:-::R:-:E::-:O~'S::":T=R":"'~C-=T:-:"-:-N~G

lJi). The Solution 2: Compact districts


District 4

Would this be better?


Page 18: Rethinking Redistricting

Current (9) Would this be better? (4)

rI,'I , ,, ,

/ -

,~ /.-J'~ 1~:'"""'~~\

~ Hamilton County House Districts••..••• "Ffoon,.of'IkotI.r

~ ,_, IAdilll Setrelil)' 81 SIII!lodd Rollta


liJZMaps that pass legal musterThese maps are constitutional and legal.Created by an experienced mapping company.

- Follow the four criteria, including not using incumbentaddresses or voting history

- Incorporate nesting- Comply with the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act

Many other states have established criteria.We can't let this effort get bogged down byconfused legal premises or selected application ofthe law.


Page 19: Rethinking Redistricting

Why consider maps like this?

~R E T H I N K~l::-:"N=-=G:-=:-R =e D=-I:-::S:-=T~R-:-:I C:::"':::T::-::'I':'":'N-=GW 'n

",.••_ • R'M'tIMotf\ca6f

f ..,' Indllll Secret.irJ If SIlIe Todd Roklta

More competitionMore accountability for lawmakersEasier access to lawmakersEasier/less costly election administration

~.- ~1,..orlIeeef

~_ ' Ildlu SeamIJ.f Slitl TOOdlDiiti


•. -.--~-- --