HB 836
Background and Procedural Information

On January 8, 2008 Virginia Democratic House Delegate Brian Moran introduced Virginia House Bill 836 (VA H.B. 836).  As of June 6, 2008 it was left in the Committee on Privileges and Elections.  This bill would create a five-member independent redistricting committee composed of retired judges who would be responsible for creating redistricting plans for the Virginia legislative and congressional districts.   

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

No.  Single-member districts are neither required nor implied.  

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

Yes.  VA H.B. 836 states, “All districts shall be drawn to comply with the Virginia and United States Constitutions, federal law, the federal Voting Rights Act as amended, and relevant case law.” The commission may not use data regarding election outcomes, voting history, voting trends or patterns, the residences of candidates for relevant offices, or the partisan affiliation of voters except to test for legal compliance.

Under the proposed legislation, how is the commission formed?

The Chief Justice of the Virginia Supreme Court nominates twenty-four Virginia state and federal judges who have never held a partisan office.  The Speaker of the House of Delegates, the Minority Leader of the House of Delegates, the Majority Leader of the Senate, the Minority Leader of the Senate each select one of the nominees to serve as commissioners.  These four commissioners then select one of the remaining twenty nominees to serve as the chairman and final member of the commission.  The Commission will submit a plan to the legislature.  The legislature will make the final decision although the commission may comment on the proposed amendments or changes to the final district maps.
 
Under the proposed legislation, are competitive districts favored?

Yes.  Competitive districts are considered one of the eight standards that the commission is instructed to use in creating the district maps.  However, competitive districts may not “be made artificially competitive in violation of other standards.”

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

No.  Members of the public may attend and give comments at a minimum of five public hearings.  There is also a twelve-member citizens advisory board whose members may give advice to the commission at the commission’s request.  The same four legislative leaders who appointed the first four commissioners each appoint three members to serve on the advisory board.    

Does the proposed legislation allow for mid-decade redistricting?

No.  The Commission is dissolved after it presents its maps in years ending in one.

 
March 31st 2005
A Good Proposal that Won't do Much
San Jose Mercury News

Newspaper endorses full representation and IRV to solve California's redistricting woes

February 19th 2005
Schwarzenegger vs. Gerrymander
New York Times

Steven Hill explains why Governor Schwarzenegger should consider full representation if he is serious about the need for more competitive elections

January 10th 2005
Recent elections drive redistricting reform:
California Aggie

Discussion of the issues leading to redistricting reform in California, and the potential benefits of a full representation system.

January 9th 2005
Consider alternate systems of voting
Sacramento Bee

How a commission to examine full representation systems in California elections would be a step beyond Governor Schwarzenegger's plans for redistricting reform.

January 1st 2005
Democracy at a Crossroads
The California Journal

Steven Hill writes an in-depth account of the various democracy reforms proposed and needed in California. He shows how a move to full representation would have a far greater impact on politics than the mooted redistricting reforms.

[ Previous ] [ Next ]