In the waning hours of last week’s special legislative session on redistricting, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle declared this should be the last time elected representatives are responsible for drawing these maps.

The session was defined by partisan controversy: House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, changed the makeup of a redistricting committee to favor Democrats, sparking a House Republican boycott, and the congressional map itself skewed Democratic, according to independent analyses.

The top alternative is an independent redistricting commission, where members of the public are selected to draw new congressional and legislative district maps once per decade after the new census.

Experts and political analysts warn such commissions aren’t guaranteed to result in fairer maps and could be difficult to establish in Oregon.

Those who oppose a redistricting commission say commissioners would not be accountable to the people, nor would they be as representative of the state as the 90-member legislative body.

But those who support a commission say this past session just further demonstrated why the state needs to have a new system.

Sen. Jeff Golden, D-Ashland, said redistricting fights and the perceived or actual partisan bias of the maps damage the public’s trust in the state’s political systems.

“The events of the last week add to a mounting pile of evidence that we should not be creating the districts in which we and our allies and friends might be running in the future,” he said.

House Republican Leader Christine Drazan, R-Canby, called on Oregonians to vote in support of the creation of an independent redistricting commission should the measure make it to the ballot.

“Oregonians will only get the fair maps they deserve, free of partisan influence, by supporting an independent redistricting commission in the next election,” Drazan said. “Politicians should not be drawing their own political lines.”

Independent analyses of the newly drawn congressional districts indicate two are safe Democrat seats, one is a safe Republican seat, two lean Democrat and one is a relative toss-up.

However, that toss-up (Congressional District 5) contains the city of Bend, which has shifted left in recent decades and is growing rapidly, meaning the district could soon turn into a safe Democratic seat.

Oregon political analyst Jim Moore said that based on voter registration and trends, Democrats “should win four of the six seats” for the state to have a fair congressional delegation, but not five.

Even so, that doesn’t mean a court challenge will prove successful.

“Showing that it’s intentional and violates Oregon law is going to be really tough to do,” Moore said.

Oregon has tended to find itself on the cutting edge of elections innovations — from vote-by-mail to automatic voter registration. Moore said lawmakers have not been as eager on this issue.

Fourteen other states have taken the responsibility of redistricting out of the hands of lawmakers and given it to a commission.

So while Moore said there is “zero chance” of a bill passing the Legislature to create an independent redistricting commission, getting it on the ballot via an initiative petition could also prove difficult.

“We’ve seen it time and time again: the voters have a very short attention span on this,” Moore said.

Coalition trying to get issue on ballot

The current effort to bring an independent redistricting commission to the state is being led by People Not Politicians, a coalition which includes the Oregon Farm Bureau, League of Women Voters, Eugene-Springfield NAACP and Independent Party of Oregon.

Initiative Petition 34 would create a Citizens Redistricting Commission with 12 members, six selected at random from an applicant pool and those selecting an additional six. Membership would be split evenly between Democrats, Republicans and nonaffiliated voters.

People Not Politicians Chair Norman Turrill said the most important thing the commission would do is take redistricting out of the partisan arena.

“Every legislator has a conflict of interest in the outcome, whether they admit it or not,” he said, noting the commission would be made up of “normal citizens instead of people who would have an interest in the outcome.”

He said the commission would also better represent nonaffiliated voters, who make up the second largest block of registered voters in the state.

As of August, Republicans made up 25% of registered voters, while Democrats constituted 35%. Nonaffiliated voters were 33%.

People Not Politicians undertook a similar initiative effort in 2020 with IP 57, but the coronavirus pandemic made signature-gathering difficult.

Petitioners were not able to gather the required number of signatures to get a constitutional amendment on the ballot and were conclusively kept off the ballot when the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the State of Oregon and did not allow a reduction in the number of needed signatures.

“There was lots of support,” Turrill said. “The whole political spectrum is supportive of it, outside of the people who are directly involved in the process.

Independent group wouldn’t be ‘totally objective’

Those opposed to the idea of an independent redistricting commission include Senate President Peter Courtney, D-Salem, who pushed back against the very notion of an independent commission.

“I don’t see these commissions as being totally objective, totally fair, no politics. That’s a myth,” Courtney said. “Politics is involved in everything in life.”

He said redistricting commissions are not accountable to the public is the same way the legislative body is, since a lawmaker could face a recall or primary challenge for decisions they make.

Nor, Courtney said, could a 12-member commission be as representative of all corners of the state as the Legislature’s 90 members.

Moreover, if this year’s maps are not changed by the courts, it would be the second straight redistricting cycle the Legislature has passed maps, which Courtney said shows the system works.

Opponents point out that, if they do avoid a successful court challenge, it would only be the third time in the past century maps came out of the Legislature unchanged.

Courtney acknowledged the process this year wasn’t as efficient or drama-free as it could have been, but the Legislature still achieved its goal in drawing and passing maps that, he said, abide by the laws that guide redistricting.

“The product we came up with, I don’t think you can fault it,” he said. “I don’t think (a commission) could do any better a job or a fairer job than we could.”

Benjamin Schneer, assistant professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, has presented research that concludes there are many factors which influence maps that independent commissions might not be able to overcome.

These include the inherent characteristics of a population, such as likeminded people clustering in certain geographic areas. But these commissions could also increase competitiveness of various races.

“Independent commissions are, generally speaking, likely to produce fairer maps overall compared to a partisan process through the state legislature,” Schneer said, “but, of course, an independent commission does not guarantee a fair map, nor remove partisan politics from the redistricting process.”

The post Calls grow for citizen commission to redraw congressional maps, not perfect solution some warn appeared first on People Not Politicians.

Oregon lawmakers went down to the wire Monday when they approved majority Democrats’ new congressional and legislative district maps with party-line votes just hours ahead of deadline.

Their actions, made possible when House Republicans ended a boycott that stalled redistricting action on Saturday, made Oregon the first state in the nation to pass both congressional and legislative maps.

Only time will tell if it turns out to be the last time lawmakers redraw Oregon’s electoral lines: On Tuesday, a coalition of good government groups, business associations and the Independent and Progressive parties announced they will try to get a ballot measure before voters in 2022 to create an independent redistricting commission. It would draw new lines in 2023 as well as after future censuses.

“The promise of fair representation should not be a pawn in a partisan political game,” said Norman Turrill, chair of the People Not Politicians campaign and former president of the League of Women Voters of Oregon.

Oregon’s redistricting process held importance nationally as it is one of just six states to gain at least one congressional seat in this redistricting cycle, as a result of higher-than-average population growth in recent decades. It’s the only state of those six in which Democrats control both chambers of the Legislature and the governorship.

Oregon’s Democrats and Republicans both faced the decision whether to prioritize getting a favorable congressional map or favorable state House and Senate maps, due to the mechanics of Oregon’s redistricting system. If lawmakers had failed to agree or Republicans had continued their boycott, a five-judge panel would have drafted new congressional districts and Democratic Secretary of State Shemia Fagan would have redone the state’s 90 legislative districts. There was the potential the judicial panel would draw a congressional plan less tilted toward Democrats than the highly party-favoring maps the Democrats drew. Meanwhile, both some Democrats and some Republicans acknowledged Fagan would likely have issued state House and Senate maps more to Democrats’ liking than the not-very-partisan ones Democratic lawmakers drew with Republican input.

In the end, Democrats passed a congressional plan with three super safe Democratic seats, one super safe Republican seat, one seat that tilts in Democrats’ favor and one seat that is a virtual 50-50 tie in terms of how its voters have sided in key Republican-Democratic match-ups since 2015, according to an analysis by The Oregonian/OregonLive. The district that will have nearly even Democratic-Republican match-ups includes fast-growing Bend, where expected Democratic growth could make the district bluer over the next decade.

It was a compromise Democrats offered Republicans late last week, after insisting throughout September that the original map they drafted — which would almost certainly have led to five Democrats and just one Republican winning seats in the U.S. House — should pass without even technical tweaks in spite of testimony from hundreds of Oregonians, much of it critical of aspects of the plan. That would have given Democrats 83% of the seats, while President Joe Biden collected just 56% of Oregonian’s votes in his winning 2020 race. Public critiques ranged from the maps splitting up Black voters and cultural institutions in Multnomah County to their including Portland-area neighborhoods in districts with broad swaths of rural Oregon.

The Democrats’ revised congressional maps didn’t extend the Portland-heavy 3rd District held by Rep. Earl Blumenauer across the Cascades to rural Madras, and it kept the historically Black Albina neighborhood in Portland in the same district with neighborhoods further east where many Black families now live. Still, Republicans objected to Democrats’ compromise map, pointing out it could lead to the same outcome as Democrats’ original one: a 5-1 power split.

On Tuesday evening, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, a Democrat who now promotes independent redistricting commissions and other reforms through the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, wrote on Twitter that “Oregon’s compromise map is just that—a compromise from both parties. Importantly, the map reflects the state’s diverse communities, preserves a competitive seat, and shows that public input was considered.”

As for Oregon’s new legislative districts, they will likely allow Democrats to maintain their supermajorities in the state House and Senate and even expand their power, particularly in the Senate, according to an analysis by The Oregonian/OregonLive. However, the districts on balance are fairly representative of Oregonians’ voting patterns. They also manage to put nearly all 90 state representatives and senators in districts where they have a good chance at reelection, although state law admonishes lawmakers not to draw political lines to benefit “any political party, incumbent legislator or other person.”

Still, some lawmakers who ended up doubled up in districts with other incumbents will face tough decisions about whether to run in a primary against another incumbent from the same party or a general election against a fellow lawmaker from the opposing party.

Rep. Raquel Moore-Green, R-Salem and the only lawmaker of Latina heritage in her caucus, will be in a blue leaning district with Democratic Rep. Brian Clem of Salem. Clem, one of two House Democrats who voted against the plan Monday, announced during his floor speech that he will retire at the end of his term next year due to personal and family health issues. Clem lavished praise on Moore-Green, who he said saved the Salem City Club and “cast many courageous votes that some of you wouldn’t even notice …”

Clem said while the House and Senate plans overall are good, he disagreed with the difficult and partisan process of drafting them, which he alleged involved “people trying to draw people out of districts that are legitimate …”

Democrats’ plan also puts two Democratic incumbents, both Portland area physicians, in the same House district: Reps. Maxine Dexter and Lisa Reynolds. And Rep. Cedric Hayden, R-Fall Creek, will be in a competitive district with a potentially 4.4-percentage point Republican advantage along with Rep. Marty Wilde, D-Eugene, according to the newsroom’s analysis.

Earlier this year, Wilde cited his current House District as a blatant example of past gerrymandering. He continued to raise similar concerns about this year’s redistricting proposals, noting in an email to House Democrats last week that the Eugene precinct he lives in was the only one in Oregon’s second-largest city included in the new district that is largely rural and Republican.

Throughout the weeklong special session, Democrats reiterated that their plans complied with Oregon law and the state constitution. Senate redistricting committee chair Sen. Kathleen Taylor, D-Portland, said of Democrats’ initial congressional plan that several analyses found was clearly tilted to her party, “It is a fair and balanced map.” Rep. Wlnsvey Campos, D-Aloha, a member of the House congressional redistricting committee, said in a speech on the House floor Monday that Democrats’ congressional districts plan meets “the highest legal standards…”

They may be correct, given past high court rulings that set a very high bar for showing that a map has been drawn unfairly. The Oregon Supreme Court, in a 2001 redistricting case, pointed out state law simply says lawmakers or the secretary of state must “consider” eight district-drawing criteria including existing geographic or political boundaries, transportation links and that no district shall be drawn to favor an incumbent or political party.

“Consequently, this court will void a reapportionment plan only if we can say from the record that the secretary of state either did not consider one or more criteria or, having considered them all, made a choice or choices that no reasonable secretary of state would have made,” the court ruled in the case, which pertained to legislative districts drawn by then-Democratic Secretary of State Bill Bradbury. “A party challenging a reapportionment plan has the burden to show that one of those circumstances is present.”

The court could soon hear a fresh test of Oregon’s redistricting laws. In a press release issued after lawmakers finished work Monday with the headline “Rigged redistricting process fails Oregon,” House Republican Leader Christine Drazan of Canby predicted someone will soon file such a challenge. “The illegal congressional map adopted (Monday), clearly drawn for partisan benefit, will not survive legal challenge,” Drazan said.

The post Oregon’s new political maps, which would cement Democrats’ dominance, may come under challenge from voters, courts appeared first on People Not Politicians.

MEDIA CONTACT
Norman Turrill (503) 807-4863

People Not Politicians Files New Initiative for 2022 Ballot to Create Independent Citizens’ Redistricting Commission

SALEM, Ore. — Today, People Not Politicians, a broad and diverse coalition of Oregon voters and organizations concerned about good government, filed Initiative Petition 16 for the November 2022 General Election ballot to reform Oregon’s redistricting process through the creation of an independent citizens’ redistricting commission.

“An overwhelming majority of Oregonians support the creation of an Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw Oregon’s state and congressional maps and put people, not politicians, in charge of this process,” said Norman Turrill, chair of People Not Politicians and Chief Petitioner of the new initiative petition. “If the legislature fails to act this session, we are prepared with an initiative petition to bring forth the fair and transparent reform Oregonians want for our state.”

Oregonians support creating an independent citizens redistricting commission. In late 2019, People Not Politicians enlisted Lake Research Partners to run a statewide poll. Results showed an average 76% of Democrats, 67% of Independents, and 60% of Republicans favor an independent citizens’ commission.

At its simplest, IP16 would introduce mid-decade redistricting reform to change the way Oregon’s voting districts are drawn by creating an independent citizen’s redistricting commission comprised of Oregon voters, rather than politicians. The commission process would begin immediately following the 2022 general election for a complete redistricting of the state legislative and congressional districts in time for elections in 2024.

The new initiative petition is similar to IP 57 filed by People Not Politicians for the November 2020 ballot. That effort was nearly successful after a federal judge last year found the coalition exercised “reasonable diligence” in attempting to qualify for the ballot with over 64,000 signatures in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum appealed, and the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the district court decision. This court case is continuing in the federal district court.

The People Not Politicians coalition includes a full spectrum of Oregon’s voices for an Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission: Common Cause Oregon, the League of Women Voters, the Independent Party of Oregon, the NAACP, the Taxpayers Association of Oregon, the Oregon Farm Bureau and others.

###

The post People Not Politicians Files New Initiative for 2022 Ballot appeared first on People Not Politicians.