SJR 13
Background and Procedural Information

On January 8, 2008 Indiana Democratic Senator Vi Simpson introduced Indiana Senate Joint Resolution 13 (IN S.J.R. 13).  As of June 5, 2008 the resolution has not moved to a committee.  

Under the proposed legislation, are single-member districts a requirement or otherwise implied?

No.  Single-member districts are neither required not otherwise implied.   

Does the proposed legislation provide for Voting Rights Act compliance (e.g. can the commission use voter history information)?

The proposed legislation would forbid Party registration and voting history data in map drawing but would allow it to be used to test maps for compliance with federal and constitutional laws including the Voting Rights Act.

Under the proposed legislation, how is the commission formed?

The Indiana Judicial Council will call for nominations from interested citizens of Indiana.  The court will select ten nominees from the largest party, ten nominees from the second largest party and five from neither of those parties.  The Indiana legislative leadership including the Speaker of the House, House Minority Leader, President Pro Tem of the Senate, Senate Majority Leader will each select one member to serve on the commission.  These four commissioners will then select the fifth member of the commission who will also serve as chairman.  They will choose this commissioner from the pool of five nominees who are not members of the two largest political parties in the state.  The Commissioners will approve plans for Congressional and General Assembly districts.
Under the proposed legislation, are competitive districts favored?

Yes.  The commission is required to use eight factors to create the districts.  Fostering competition is one of these eight priorities.    

Under the proposed legislation, can members of the public submit plans?

No.  The public may give comment for a thirty-day period after the initial plan is proposed.   

Does the proposed legislation allow for mid-decade redistricting?

No.  Redistricting may only be performed in years ending in one unless a court order demands redistricting or the number of Congressional or legislative districts is changed.  
October 23rd 2005
Who Should Redistrict?

The New York Times Magazine explains the dilemmas many states, including California, face as they attempt to create competitive and fair congressional districts. Dean Murphy cites FairVote's statistics.

October 15th 2005
Wamp fresh leadership for sagging Republicans
The Tennessean

According to FairVote's Ryan O'Donnell, the Republican party should seize the opportunity to embrace electoral reforms, and take the lead on ending gerrymandering.

October 5th 2005
Mapping the way to a better system
Boston Herald

Why Massachusetts should turn a critical eye towards gerrymandering. This article mentions Fairvote.

October 2nd 2005
Several states may change redistricting process
L.A. Times

Discussion of redistricting practices in California, Massachusetts and Florida. Mentions Tanner's bill.

September 25th 2005
Local GOP breaks with governor to oppose redistricting
Auburn Journal

An article about the debate over a proposal that would give a panel of judges the responsibility of redistricting

[ Previous ] [ Next ]