to end unresponsive
ny state government, redistricting authority
must be removed from legislature:
city bar proposes constitutional
amendment for decennial redistricting
A comprehensive amendment
to the reapportionment and redistricting provisions
of the New York State Constitution is long overdue,
states the NY City Bar Association in a report
and proposed amendment by its Election Law Committee
that was released today. Laurence Laufer, Chair
of the Committee, explains, “Under the
current system of redistricting, individual legislators
find themselves more beholden to their leaders
for re-election than to their constituents. This
form of incumbency protection produces non- competitive
elections, permanent legislative deadlock, and
a Legislature with little need to be responsive
to the wills and interests of the voters.”
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT
The City Bar’s report offers a proposed
constitutional amendment to remove redistricting
authority from the Legislature, whose members
have an inescapable personal interest in redrawing
districts for their own elections, and create
a permanent redistricting commission. The City
Bar proposal offers a detailed blueprint for
the formation and workings of a redistricting
commission and recommends:
- A permanent districting commission whose
members would be appointed to a ten-year term,
beginning one year prior to the decennial census
- A permanent staff with technical expertise
- Each of the four legislative leaders would
appoint two commission members, who may not
be sitting legislators or judges
- Six commissioners, including at least one
from each appointing authority, would have
to agree on a chairperson as the ninth member.
The choice of chairperson would also require
the assent of the Governor.
- The redistricting authority of the Legislature
and Governor would end with the appointment
of the commission
- Plans for legislative and congressional redistricting
could be adopted by a majority of the commission,
but only if the plans receive the affirmative
vote of the chair.
THE ARBITRATION MODEL
“We have chosen the bi-partisan approach,
seeking not to suppress, but to channel the energy
of opposing political passions into a fair, even
handed redistricting framework,” explains
Richard Emery, a member of the subcommittee that
drafted the report. “Under our proposal
the four legislative leaders would have equal
authority to appoint two commissioners each,
their best advocates to the commission. This
configuration would force a last-best-offer arbitration.” The
report explains how the commission members would
have to curb their partisan designs to satisfy
the chairperson, who would be selected by a supermajority
representing both political parties.
Under this proposal, majority and minority parties
would have equal representation, in direct contrast
to the present system. According to subcommittee
member Arthur Schiff, “With the power to
appoint two commission members each, the legislative
minorities would no longer be compelled to accept
the self-serving plans of the majorities. And
the representation of both the majority and minority
in selecting a chair is a procedure designed
to ensure the appointment of a person of unquestioned
integrity and non partisanship.”
MANDATE OF THE COMMISSION
Under the City Bar’s proposal, the commission
would be vested with the authority to draw both
state and congressional districts. The commission’s
redistricting plan must be based on a rigorous
set of standards, to be applied in a designated
order. The highest priority would be given to
population equality and fair representation of
minority groups, as required by the U.S. Constitution
and federal law. Other criteria, including requiring
districts to be composed of contiguous territory,
minimizing the division of political subdivisions,
and requiring that districts be compact, among
others, are designed to provide strong guidance
to the commission and replace the current obsolete
redistricting provisions in the State constitution.
The plans for both legislative and congressional
districts would be subject to judicial review
but would be wholly insulated from legislative
review.
The Report includes proposed language for a
constitutional amendment, and contains an extensive
examination of the reasoning behind the recommendations
and an analysis of a number of redistricting
issues that must be addressed in the establishment
of this new approach to redistricting in New
York.
According to Laufer, “After much discussion
and debate we offer this proposed constitutional
amendment in the hopes of bringing New Yorkers
the competitive elections and legislative accountability
we all have a right to expect.”
A link to the report is here: http://www.nycbar.org/pdf/report/redistricting_report03071.pdf
