Skip to content
Subscribe

End Gerrymandering, vote Yes on Proposition 11

By Indy
Published:

In the summary for this proposition, the author uses the verb “gerrymander,” a verb that came into usage because of the gross abuse of a politician’s power in deciding what constitutes a state office boundary. This problem continues today, and will continue to do so. Once elected, it becomes difficult to vote out legislators when they have the ability to choose their constituents by drawing odd-shaped districts favorable to them and their party.

It is an obvious conflict of interest to allow legislators to keep drawing boundary lines. Instead, this prop would allow for the creation of a bipartisan commission that also includes independent voters in the drawing process. Because districts are currently drawn by the politicians in office, and these consist typically of one of the two major parties, independent voters have had relatively little representation.

Upon passage, a commission would be selected from a pool of applicants. These applicants cannot be politicians, lobbyists, or big contributors to campaigns. This means that our districts would be drawn by the people who live in them, not by the people who want to continue to run them. Also, in the event that any commissioner is thought not to be fulfilling his or her duty fairly, they can be removed from the panel. Finally, all of the proceeding’s minutes would be readily available on the Internet, allowing for transparency of action and procedure. This allows for boundaries created by the people, for the people, and makes public all their proceedings so that the citizens of the state can monitor their actions.

This goals of this proposition, along with the procedure by which it would be affected and how the commission of non-politicians would be selected in clearly presented, cleared of complex legal jargon. And finally, this proposition will not place a financial burden on the state government. Money is already allocated for districting. In 2001, the legislature spent about $3 million from its budget to adjust boundaries; in 2010 (these boundary lines would only be changed every ten years, and on years that end in “0”), the attorney general estimates a total cost of about $4 million, which “is the  amount spent on redistricting  adjusted for inflation”. This proposition will not cost the state much, if anything, but will afford a bipartisan drawing of the districts we live in.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

End Gerrymandering, vote Yes on Proposition 11

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us