BY KIRSTEN ISBELL
Clarkston News Intern Writer
When voters hit the polls on Nov. 6, they’ll have a chance to take on the political gerrymander.
Proposal 2 would amend Michigan’s Constitution to create an independent citizens’ redistricting commission, in charge of redrawing Michigan Senate, Michigan House, and U.S. Congressional districts every 10 years.
“Other states have already developed this concept,” said Henry Woloson of Independence Township, who supports the “Voters Not Politicians” proposal.
Gerrymandering results in oddly shaped districts where people have no strong demographic relationships to one another, Woloson said.
“We are supposed to be geographically together because if you make a district out of a square, we will be sharing similar occupations, similar values, and similar geographical area,” he said. “At the end of the day, why should it favor anyone?”
Under the current system, the majority party in the state house draws the district boundaries.
Seeking to link their voters together as much as possible, resulting districts become stretched and salamander-like, a process labeled “gerrymandering” since the 1920s.
If approved, voters, not politicians or lobbyists, would draw maps not favoring one party or candidate, maps would be drawn through compromise by Republicans, Democrats, and independents following strict criteria, and the process would happen in public meetings, with everything used to draw the maps published publicly, Woloson said.
According to the proposal, the 13-member commission would be made up of registered voters randomly selected by the Secretary of State. Four would be Democrats, four Republicans, and five unaffiliated.
Opponents say Proposal 2 includes poorly defined concepts such as “geographic and demographic makeup” and “communities of interest.”
“By including these poorly defined concepts and others, Proposal 2 may inadvertently grant the secretary of state a significant amount of power over the redistricting process,” said Michael Van Beek of Mackinac Center for Public Policy in a policy briefing. “Further, ill-defined concepts are fertile ground for litigation, and the proposed commission’s maps may be continually challenged in court.”
It also would not decrease partisanship, as the political party members would likely vote as a bloc – no plan could be approved without support from one or the other, VanBeek said.
“Taking this step may be unnecessary, and a simpler alternative might be fix the Michigan Constitution to make the original redistricting rules established in 1963 valid and functional again,” he said.
The 1963 concept included an eight-member committee, four Democrats and four Republicans. It was ruled unconstitutional in 1982 and the state legislature took over.
The original redistricting rules were found unconstitutional because they required redistricting officials to considere population and land area when determining district boundaries, he said.
“Removing land area from the redistricting formula would likely render these rules constitutional,” he said.
The proposal would prohibit partisan officeholders and candidates, their employees, certain relatives, and lobbyists from serving as commissioners; establish new redistricting criteria including geographically compact and contiguous districts of equal population, reflecting Michigan’s diverse population and communities of interest; districts shall not provide disproportionate advantage to political parties or candidates; and require an appropriation of funds for commission operations and commissioner compensation.
Visit votersnotpoliticians.com or Mackinaw.org for more information before the Nov. 6 vote.