Indiana: Common Cause: let citizens draw political maps | Lafayette Journal Courier

Common Cause Indiana is recruiting residents to support a state plan that would remove politicians from the process of redrawing political districts after every U.S. Census, policy director Julia Vaughn said. She found nearly 50 willing partners at the Tippecanoe County Public Library who on Sunday viewed “Pay 2 Play,” a documentary that aims to change campaign laws which filmmaker John Ennis sees as a system that allows donors to influence policymakers. One way to level the field is to create an independent redistricting commission that includes a cross-section of citizens, Vaughn said.

Virginia: African-American lawmakers surprised by redistricting suit | Associated Press

A recently filed lawsuit seeking to redraw Virginia House district boundaries has surprised and sparked concern among some of the Democratic African-American lawmakers. Filed in December by a law firm with ties to both national and state Democrats, the suit argues that state Republicans illegally packed black voters into a dozen House districts when it drew new district lines in 2011. But many of the African-American lawmakers who represent those districts said they weren’t consulted about the lawsuit before it was filed. “We certainly weren’t told. It would have been good if someone had shared with us that they had this great concern,” said Del. Delores McQuinn, D-Chesterfield County. The lawmakers said they wanted to make sure any effort aimed at redrawing is comprehensive, not focused solely on areas with large minority populations. “We should take into consideration the entire state, not areas that’s just totally dominated by black populations,” said Del. Roslyn Tyler, D-Sussex County.

Virginia: Redistricting reform, two-term-governor bills advance in Virginia | Daily Press

Annual efforts to change the way Virginia draws election districts, and to do away the state’s unique prohibition against governor’s running for re-election, moved forward Tuesday at the Capitol. They won bipartisan support in lopsided Senate committee votes, but continue to face an uphill climb that has toppled similar measures for years. Legislative leaders from both chambers didn’t give any of these measures high chances for success. “I would be surprised if we would move too far along,” said Senate Majority Leader Thomas K. “Tommy” Norment, R-James City. Several redistricting bills moved forward, though. They differ in details, but each seeks to move Virginia away from the partisan process that allows the legislature to draw its own maps. Some rely on appointed commissions. At least one would have legislative staffers draw maps for General Assembly approval, similar to a method used in Iowa.

Texas: The state of voting in Texas | MSNBC

This country has a long and complicated history with voting rights. Though universal suffrage was granted in 1920, it took years of organizing to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and finally secure unencumbered access to polling places. Now, nearly five decades later, politicians in Texas have been systematically chipping away at those protections — through voter ID laws, overreaching registration regulations, and other hurdles designed to drive down the number of people who are able to make their voices heard at the ballot box. In fact, Texas is the next great battleground for voters’ rights. Texas’ voter ID law was one of the most publicized voting restrictions of 2014 — in part because of the drama surrounding a last-minute Supreme Court decision to keep the law in effect only days before voting started in the 2014 gubernatorial election. Ruled to be “intentionally discriminatory” and likened to a poll tax by Fifth Circuit Court Judge Nelva Ramos, the law does more than require identification in order to vote: it limits the acceptable forms of voter identification to a select few – a concealed handgun license is acceptable, for instance, while a Social Security card is not. As a result, last November, about 600,000 registered Texas voters – a group that was disproportionately African-American, Latino, young and elderly – were at risk of being kept from the polls by this restrictive law.

Editorials: Why the Supreme Court Should Reject the Arizona Legislature’s Challenge to the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission | Vikram David Amar/Justia

One of the important Supreme Court cases currently being briefed (with oral argument set for March), Arizona Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, involves the question whether the U.S. Constitution and congressional statutes permit the people of a state to implement an initiative creating an independent redistricting commission (IRC)—i.e., one that is not controllable by the elected state legislature—to devise congressional districts. Arizona voters passed just such an initiative in 2000, and the elected Arizona legislature (acting as a body) has now brought the case to the Supreme Court, arguing primarily that the so-called Elections Clause of Article I of the Constitution (Article I, section 4) prevents a state from divesting district-drawing power from the elected state legislature. The Arizona legislature (represented by former Solicitor General Paul Clement) has filed its brief in the Court, and the IRC (also represented by a former Solicitor General, Seth Waxman) will file its written argument very soon. In the space below, I analyze the merits portion of Mr. Clement’s brief on behalf of the Arizona legislature, and point out why I think it fails to demonstrate that the IRC’s creation and powers violate federal law. (Another part of Mr. Clement’s brief, addressing whether the Arizona legislature has “standing” in federal court to assert a challenge to the IRC at all, raises interesting questions of its own, but those will have to await another day.)

Indiana: Redistricting Bill Would Not Make Changes Until 2017 | Indiana Public Media

Changes to Indiana’s redistricting system likely won’t take place until at least 2017 under a new proposal from House legislative leaders, which would create a redistricting study committee. The committee would be charged with studying redistricting for the next two years, with a report due in December 2016. Under the bill, the committee would consider several issues, including state and federal redistricting laws, the cost of a reform effort and redistricting systems in other states.

Virginia: Arlington Delegate Takes Aim at Gerrymandering | ARLnow

Del. Rip Sullivan (D) has already filed 16 pieces of legislation, and his first session in the Virginia General Assembly is just hours old. One of his biggest priorities after being elected in August to replace Del. Bob Brink (D) will be reforming the process by which Virginia draws its districts for both state and federal legislatures. Sullivan’s legislation, HB1485, would follow through on recommendations made by a state government integrity panel last month. Although a long-shot in the Republican-controlled Virginia General Assembly, Sullivan’s bill calls for redistricting to become a nonpartisan process. Every 10 years, after a new U.S. Census, state legislatures redraw their district maps to align with the population changes. Often, these districts are drawn in a way to include certain blocks of voters with one another in order to gain seats in Congress or the General Assembly. The problems are not unique to Virginia, but they might be worse here.

Indiana: Lawmakers rethinking redistricting | Journal Gazette

Halfway through the decade, lawmakers are getting serious about changing how state and federal legislative districts are drawn. “We need to move on this discussion and I think this is the year to do that,” Senate President Pro Tem David Long, R-Fort Wayne, said. Under current law, the Indiana House and Senate draw new congressional and legislative maps every 10 years after the census. But a handful of states have moved to independent or bipartisan commissions to eliminate many of the political considerations in drawing maps that favor one party over another. Technology today allows maps to be easily manipulated to constantly gauge the political leanings of voters in specific areas. They also can be drawn specifically to avoid two incumbents facing off in the same new district.

Ohio: Lawsuit, Boehner delaying Ohio redistricting reforms | The Columbus Dispatch

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling anticipated this spring in an Arizona case probably will not provide Republicans a legal reason to delay efforts to overhaul Ohio’s heavily criticized system for designing congressional districts, legal analysts say. Although the Ohio House and Senate cleared the way last month for a November vote on changing the way state legislative districts are drawn, Republican lawmakers in Columbus deferred sending voters a similar reform plan that would have created a more bipartisan way to draw up Ohio’s 16 congressional districts. While critics have complained that GOP lawmakers dropped congressional redistricting because the current U.S. House districts are so favorable to their candidates and changes are opposed by U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, Michael Braden, a Washington attorney who has advised Republicans on the Arizona case, said “that’s just not true.”

New York: McCoy denies he meddled with redistricting | Times Union

County Executive Dan McCoy told a federal judge Wednesday that he kept his hands off the county’s controversial 2011 redistricting process after he created the commission charged with carrying it out. “When I put the commission together, I gave them no guidance after that,” said McCoy, who was at the time chairman of the Albany County Legislature and the county Democratic Party. His testimony, which last 35 minutes, came on day nine of the trial in a lawsuit challenging the political map. McCoy asserted he did not recall many of the details of the contentious political maneuvering that embroiled the legislature’s sharply divided Democratic majority during passage of the electoral map nearly four years ago. Democrats including McCoy split 16-14 in favor of the law creating the map, which ultimately passed 22-14 with Republican support.

Editorials: Ohio shows pathway to reform redistricting in North Carolina |Lee Mortimer/NewsObserver.com

The lopsided 2014 election results leave little reason to expect Republicans and Democrats to work together in the upcoming General Assembly session. Republicans are riding high after retaining veto-proof majorities in both legislative chambers. Democrats believe that the GOP’s super-majority control is undeserved and that gerrymandered elections unfairly pushed them to the sidelines. Ironically, agreement may be attainable on the very issue that has most divided the parties – redistricting. That is, if they can take a cue from what Republicans and Democrats recently achieved in Ohio.

Vermont: Burlington Officials Present Plan for Smoother Election in March | Seven Days

Elections in the Queen City have been plagued by several glitches of late, but city officials are hoping for smoother sailing this Town Meeting Day. In October, the clerk/treasurer’s office, which is charged with overseeing the city’s elections, temporarily stopped early voting after accidentally leaving five of 15 Republican candidates for justice of the peace off the ballot. It had to reprint ballots — a $10,000 mistake. Then, roughly two weeks before the election, the office discovered that 87 voters in a New North End housing development had been listed in the wrong district. In 2012, the office misprinted a tax rate on ballots. There have been other snafus, too. The upcoming election on March 3 is a big one — due to redistricting, all the city councilors and school commissioners, in addition to the mayor, are up for reelection. After the ballot misprints, Mayor Miro Weinberger declared, “These avoidable and costly errors must end,” and he asked his chief administrative officer, Bob Rusten, to draft a plan to make that happen. Rusten presented it to the city council on Tuesday.

Canada: Federal riding boundary changes add to 2015 election intrigue | CBC News

The redrawing of Canada’s electoral boundaries and the addition of 30 new ridings for 2015 through redistribution means the election map has changed a lot since the Conservatives won their majority in 2011. The changes add another layer of unpredictability for an election year. The purpose of redistribution is to try to ensure each riding represents roughly the same number of people, taking into account political and constitutional requirements. Prince Edward Island keeps its four seats, despite its small population, while Ontario adds 15 new ridings for 2015, B.C. and Alberta each get six more and Quebec gets three. But there is more to it than that. The boundaries in 70 per cent of the remaining ridings in the country have changed. Many of the riding names have changed, too. (You can find maps of all of them on Elections Canada’s website.)

Indiana: Lawmakers To Push For Independent Redistricting Commission | Indiana Public Media

Last session House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, coauthored legislation creating a redistricting commission, with members appointed by legislative leaders of both parties. While that bill passed the House, it never received a hearing in the Senate. Bosma says he will offer the bill again, but notes both chambers need to buy in this time. “We’ll check out the likelihood of passage in the Senate before we spend a lot of time on it in the House,” Bosma said. “But as you know we passed it last year or the year before and it’s worthy of discussion – and I still think it’s the right direction for the state to go.”

Editorials: Fairer approach: Take redistricting job off legislators’ hands | Journal Gazette

Partisan redistricting makes a mockery of the basic principles of democracy. In the session that begins today, the Indiana legislature has the opportunity – actually, the obligation – to take its thumb off the scales of voter equality. Changing demographics rapidly make congressional and legislative districts obsolete. Redistricting, which occurs at the beginning of each decade just after the national census is completed, is a necessity for democracy to function. But in Indiana, the legislature draws up its own legislative voting districts, as well as congressional districts. There are provisions for a redistricting commission, but they never come into play as long as both the House and Senate can agree on new maps within a set time. This has never been a good procedure, but it can be made to work when one party controls each of the two legislative chambers. Both parties, though, have used the system to create unfair advantages over the years. In the redistricting at the beginning of this decade, the GOP did a masterful job of controlling the process. Republicans held both houses, and they took the opportunity to move more Democrats into heavily Democratic districts and more Republicans into districts that had been fairly even.

National: Fighting red maps in purple states | Politico

Based on the big elections in Virginia in recent years, the Old Dominion is turning reliably blue: victories by Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, two Senate wins by Democrats in two years, and Terry McAuliffe’s triumph in between. So how is it that Republicans have a stranglehold on the state’s congressional delegation, holding eight seats to Democrats’ three? That question is at the heart of a legal battle over whether Republicans have improperly leveraged their power over the redistricting process. The outcome could have far-reaching implications because the contours of congressional districts drawn by Republican-controlled legislatures are seen as a driving reason why Democrats may be locked in the House minority until at least after the next census in 2020. In Virginia, Democrats are hoping to redraw the lines to make some GOP districts more competitive after a panel of federal judges ruled recently that the Republican-led Legislature’s decision to pack African-American voters into the 3rd Congressional District, which is represented by Democratic Rep. Bobby Scott, was motivated purely by race — a violation of the 14th Amendment. Other battleground states such as North Carolina and Florida also have redistricting battles pending.

New York: Voting rights accord rejected | Times Union

County lawmakers on Monday forcefully rejected a proposed settlement to a three-year-old voting rights lawsuit, sending the case back to federal court with an emphatic rebuke of County Executive Dan McCoy. The settlement would have ended the complex and increasingly costly case alleging racial imbalances in the county’s political map by, among other things, establishing a fifth legislative district in which minority voters are a majority. And while several of the majority Democratic lawmakers said that they support that goal, they blasted McCoy for freezing the legislature out of the settlement process and accused him of overstepping his authority in trying to dictate how the new lines would be drawn. High on the list of grievances is that the settlement would have prescribed the makeup of the county’s redistricting commission, a task legislative leaders said is clearly lawmakers’ prerogative. The vote was 34-3, with even some of the Democratic executive’s Republican allies opposing it.

North Carolina: District Map Fracas Sputters | Courthouse News Service

Throwing out two lawsuits accusing North Carolina lawmakers of redrawing district lines based on race, the state’s highest court found no constitutional violation. Margaret Dickson and 45 other voters filed suit on Nov. 3, 2011, over redistricting plans that North Carolina lawmakers passed for the state House, state Senate and U.S. House. One day later, the North Carolina State Conference of Branches of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored Peopled, joined by three other organizations and 46 more individuals, filed a second lawsuit. Both alleged that the redistricting plans violate the equal-protection clause of the U.S. Constitution by classifying people according to their race.

Arizona: U.S. Supreme Court to hear redistricting case | Capitol Media Services

The U.S. Supreme Court will decide who exactly is the “Legislature” in Arizona, at least for purposes of drawing political lines. In a brief order Tuesday, the justices set March 2 to hear arguments by attorneys for the organized Legislature that only they — meaning the 90 members — can divide up the state into its nine congressional districts. They contend that’s what the U.S. Constitution requires. If the high court agrees, that would pave the way for the Republican-controlled Legislature to redraw the lines ahead of the 2016 election. And that would allow them to reconfigure the maps to give GOP candidates a better chance of winning — and of improving the 5-4 split in the congressional delegation this year’s election gave to Republicans. But first they have to convince the justices that the majority of a three-judge panel got it wrong when they concluded otherwise.

Virginia: Federal lawsuit seeks fix to ‘racial gerrymandering’ | Roanoke Times

Several Virginia voters have filed a federal lawsuit accusing the General Assembly of “racial gerrymandering” by packing black voters into 12 of the state’s House of Delegates districts. According to the complaint, filed with the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Richmond last week, the General Assembly in 2011 adopted a redistricting plan purposefully drawn to have “an African-American voting age population that met or exceeded a pre-determined 55 percent threshold,” diminishing the influence of black voters in the surrounding districts as a result. After each decennial census, Virginia redraws its congressional and legislative districts, taking into consideration population shifts in the previous 10 years. The procedure opens a door for state legislators to gerrymander the districts to their partisan advantage.

Virginia: Voters Sue Virginia Over Election Districting | Courthouse News Service

The Virginia Board of Elections is under fire for alleged racial gerrymandering during a 2011 voter redistricting plan for the House of Delegates. In a lawsuit filed in the Richmond, Va. Federal Court, a dozen voters say the committee violated electoral rights by packing black voters into fragmented and irregularly shaped district lines — targeting a 55 percent threshold and significantly decreasing compactness in these areas. “As a result, African-American voters were illegally packed into the Challenged Districts, thereby diminishing their influence in the surrounding districts,” the complaint says. “The General Assembly adopted the 55% racial threshold without justification, including any determination that the threshold was reasonably necessary to avoid retrogression in each of the Challenged Districts or otherwise comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.”

Arizona: Supreme Court to settle Arizona redistricting fight | The Verde Independent

The U.S. Supreme Court will decide who exactly is the “Legislature’ in Arizona, at least for purposes of drawing political lines. In a brief order Tuesday, the justices set March 2 to hear arguments by attorneys for the organized Legislature that only they — meaning the 90 members — can divide up the state into its nine congressional districts. They contend that’s what the U.S. Constitution requires. If the high court agrees, that would pave the way for the Republican-controlled Legislature to redraw the lines ahead of the 2016 election. And that would allow them to reconfigure the maps to give GOP candidates a better chance of winning — and of improving the 5-4 split in the congressional delegation this year’s election gave to Republicans. But first they have to convince the justices that the majority of a three-judge panel got it wrong when they concluded otherwise. The fight is over a provision in the federal Constitution which says the “times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the Legislature thereof.’

Editorials: Will fairer districts mean longer Ohio legislative terms? | Benjamin Lanka/Cincinnati Inquirer

Ohio lawmakers coalesced at the last minute to approve a deal that could make its legislative maps fairer and more competitive — and could open the way to examine letting those legislators serve longer in office. With redistricting reform headed to Ohio voters in 2015, many legislators believe now is the time to review the state’s term limit restrictions. Rep. Vernon Sykes, D-Akron, helped lead the redistricting effort, which he said had to happen to begin even examining term limits. “Without a fairer system, some legislators were more reluctant to deal with extending terms,” he said. The Ohio Constitutional Modernization Commission has begun discussions on the issue, Executive Director Steven Hollon said. He said a few presentations were given on term limits and that it was mentioned as a topic that could be tackled in 2015, but no definitive plans have yet been created.

Ohio: In a Break From Partisan Rancor, Ohio Moves to Make Elections More Competitive | New York Times

Of 435 House races in November, only a few dozen were considered competitive — a result of decades of drawing district lines for partisan advantage, generally by state legislatures. But in an era of hyperpartisan gerrymandering, which many blame for the polarization of state and national politics, Ohio took a step in the opposite direction last week. With the support of both parties, the Ohio House gave final approval Wednesday to a plan to draw voting districts for the General Assembly using a bipartisan process, intended to make elections more competitive. “I think it will be a new day in Ohio,” said Representative Matt Huffman, a Republican who shepherded the plan. While the proposal is aimed narrowly at state legislative districts, it could have an indirect impact on congressional districts because they are drawn by state lawmakers. President Obama carried Ohio, a quintessential swing state, by two percentage points in 2012. Yet Republicans have overwhelming majorities in Columbus, the capital, and a 12-to-4 advantage in congressional seats. “When you’re an outsider looking in, it’s almost shocking,” said Senator Joe Schiavoni, the Democratic leader in the State Senate.

North Carolina: Supreme Court: GOP-Redistricted Maps Are Constitutional | HNGN

The North Carolina state Supreme Court ruled on Friday that redistricted voting maps designed in 2011 by the state’s Republican-led legislature are constitutional. Critics denounce the maps as an attempt to marginalize black voters by weakening their influence through unlawful gerrymandering. A majority of justices disagreed, saying instead that the redistricting plans for the state’s congressional and legislative seats do not violate anyone’s rights, Reuters reported. The ruling comes 11 months after the justices first heard arguments in the case and supports a similar July 2013 ruling by a panel of three judges. In 2010, Republicans took the North Carolina legislature for the first time in more than a century, and after drawing new voting districts, increased their majority in subsequent elections, according to Reuters.

Virginia: Panel adopts ideas for changing Virginia’s redistricting process | The Washington Post

The government integrity panel created by Gov. Terry McAuliffe adopted recommendations on Monday for an overhaul of Virginia’s redistricting process, embracing an approach the Republican-dominated House of Delegates has consistently rejected. The panel wants to amend the Virginia Constitution to create an independent commission to redraw lawmakers’ districts, and pass a law prohibiting that commission from considering election results when setting district boundaries. Both suggestions would have to be approved by the legislature — an especially unlikely outcome in the House, where similar bills have died in committee. One proposal also would have to be approved by voters.

Florida: Legislature Tells Supreme Court That Fair District Amendment Is “Unenforceable” | News Service of Florida

Lawyers for the Legislature told the Florida Supreme Court in a brief filed late Friday that part of a state ban on political gerrymandering violates the U.S. Constitution. The filing is the latest chapter in a long-running battle over whether lawmakers rigged congressional districts during the 2012 redistricting process to benefit Republicans. Voting-rights organizations argue that the maps were influenced by politics, contrary to an amendment to the Florida Constitution approved by voters in 2010. Those voting-rights groups, including the League of Women Voters of Florida, are appealing a decision by Leon County Circuit Judge Terry Lewis to approve a revised map the Legislature passed over the summer to address two districts Lewis ruled were flawed. But in the Legislature’s brief filed Friday, attorneys for state lawmakers said the “Fair Districts” amendment dealing with congressional redistricting — another amendment dealt with state House and Senate maps — runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution because it was approved by voters.

North Carolina: High court backs voting maps as drawn | WRAL

The North Carolina Supreme Court on Friday upheld the constitutionality of state voting maps drawn by the Republican-majority legislature in 2011. Critics of the maps filed suit against them, arguing that they violated the constitutional rights of minority voters. A coalition of groups, including the League of Women Voters, the state chapter of the NAACP and the Southern Coalition for Social Justice, argued that Republican mapmakers had packed black voters into a small number of districts, thereby reducing their voting power in neighboring districts that were drawn to favor GOP candidates. Authors of the maps argued that they were following the requirements of the federal 1965 Voting Rights Act, which required mapmakers in states subject to the federal law to create majority-minority districts where possible to ensure the viability of minority candidates.

Virginia: Ethics panel calls for nonpartisan redistricting | The Virginian-Pilot

Gov. Terry McAuliffe’s ethics advisory panel today endorsed creation of an independent commission to redraw legislative districts without regard to partisan politics. The Virginia General Assembly currently draws districts, and convincing legislators there’s a better way won’t be easy. The ethics panel is “not naive enough to think that whatever we recommend is going to be enthusiastically received by members of the General Assembly,” said former Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, a co-chairman. “But it is an issue that we need to keep front and center.” The Commission on Integrity and Public Confidence in State Government was created in September after the conviction of former Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, on public corruption charges. Bolling, a Republican, is joined by former Democratic U.S. Rep. Rick Boucher in leading the 10-member panel.

Texas: Judge in Voting Rights Case Made ‘Winners Out of Clear Losers’ | Legal Times

Lawyers for the state of Texas have accused a federal district judge of wrongfully awarding “a consolation prize” of more than $1 million in attorney fees to groups that challenged the state’s redistricting plans. The challengers, which included Texas state legislators, voters and civil rights organizations, argued that they were entitled to the money because a court found that the redistricting plans ran afoul of the federal Voting Rights Act. Texas argued it was the winner because the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013 struck down a section of the voting rights law that required the state to go to the court for approval in the first place.
U.S. District Judge Rosemary Collyer sided with the challengers, entering an order in June awarding fees. Texas on Monday filed its opening brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. “Trial courts have discretion when it comes to fee awards, but they do not have discretion to make winners out of clear losers,” Texas Solicitor General Jonathan Mitchell wrote. “The fee award is unprecedented, unlawful, and should be vacated.”