Two issues are guaranteed to make political parties call each other out: redistricting and reapportionment. Both happen after the 2010 census. Representative Paul Weissmann, D-Louisville, drew the first weapon with HB10-1408, a bill to cross out criteria the Republicans set in 2003 for redistricting.

Guardrails or handcuffs
Republicans call criteria "guardrails" that should guide these very political processes. Democrats see guardrails as "handcuffs." The criteria, in listed order, say that legislators and the courts, if necessary, should:

+  Not use "non neutral" factors such as distribution of political parties and vote performance.
+  Use only "neutral" factors, in the following order:

1. Apply mathematical population equality between districts, justifying variances according to the US constitution.
2. Comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
3. Respect political subdivisions, such as counties and municipalities.
4. Maintain communities of interest, such as ethnic, cultural, economic trade area, geographic, and demographic factors.
5. Ensure compactness, with the aggregate linear distance of all district boundaries as tight and short as possible.

Democrats see redistricting criteria as tools for Republicans
Democrats believe that these "handcuffs" favor Republicans, which they probably do since Republicans drew up the "guardrails." For example, Democrats generally live in urban areas, so they're more concentrated in political subdivisions such as counties and municipalities. Republicans tend to be more distributed, so tight boundaries favor them. Democrats will win elections by 80 percent, Republicans by 60 percent, but there will be more 60 percent districts than 80 percent.

Republicans see Colorado Supreme Court as Dem stooge
Republicans believe that taking away "guardrails" means that liberal, activist courts, which they believe describes the Colorado Supreme Court, will run roughshod over their interests. They believe this occurred when the court threw out Republican redistricting in 2003 and put together its own plan. Republicans believe that CD7 was redrawn to give Democrats a better chance of winning the district, which they did when Congressman Ed Perlmutter (D) took the seat.

Reapportionment v. redistricting
The Republican fallback position is to turn to reapportionment rules for redistricting. Reapportionment occurs when state Senate and House seats are redrawn, and the main factors for reapportionment include population and compactness.

Scott Martinez, an attorney with Hart and Hart who worked on the 2003 redistricting, says that redistricting and reapportionment are apples and oranges. Reapportionment involves smaller populations that can be contained within counties or municipalities. Congressional seats spread across much wider territory, so compactness and boundary line contiguity is much more difficult.

Surprise: parties don't trust each other
Bottom line is that both parties seek some advantage in redistricting and reapportionment. Republicans don't trust the current Colorado Supreme Court, and Democrats don't trust Republican criteria. At last sighting, Rep. Weissmann was huddled with Rep. Mike May, R-Douglas County, to cut a deal. A steady in and out of legislators in the committee room indicates that lots of maneuvering is still going on. More later.

 

This post was published on April 28, 2010. Permalink »