Congressman Tanner's Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act (H.R. 2642)
The Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act, introduced by Representative John Tanner, would make important improvements to our congressional elections. The Act would require state legislatures to appoint independent commissions that would be responsible for redrawing district boundaries. These commissions would draw district boundaries in accordance with the provisions of the Voting Rights Act, and could not draw lines based on partisanship alone. As a result, the redistricting process would become independent of partisan manipulation. In addition, the Act would only allow redistricting to occur once every ten years.

The United States Constitution requires congressional seats to be reapportioned among the states after each decennial census in order to ensure compliance with the one-person one-vote criteria, the federal Voting Rights Act, and traditional redistricting principles such as compact and contiguous districts. Redistricting, however, has often turned into a means to further political goals as boundaries have consistently been drawn that tend to protect incumbents and reduce competition. 

Generally, state legislators and governors re-draw the boundaries of the US House districts, but the process varies among states. In twelve states, the legislature does not have final authority to redistrict. Alaska, Idaho and Arizona recently became part of these twelve states as they used a redistricting commission for the first time in 2000. Only six states – Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, New Jersey, and Washington – give authority for congressional line drawing to a commission. Iowa uses an independent commission to develop plans which are later approved by the legislature. The Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act would bring uniformity to the way in which districts are redrawn. Clearly some states have implemented fairer processes, while other states continue to use redistricting to solidify the governing party's grasp on power.  The way in which legislative lines are drawn has a major impact on who wins and who loses. As a result, it is only logical that such authority by delegated to independent commissions.
   
In 2001-2002, nearly every political jurisdiction in the nation adjusted its legislative district lines based on new information provided by the U.S. Census. In addition, Texas re-adjusted its districts in 2003. The Tanner bill could end such blatant partisan manipulation of the redistricting process by prohibiting mid-decade redistricting.

Read the bill summary and status of H.R. 2642 on Thomas
.

 
November 3rd 2002
Politics, Incumbency Style
Newsday

Columnist Rosanna Perotti discusses proportional representation as a solution to monopoly politics.

November 3rd 2002
Get your election results here: 99.8% accurate
Houston Chronicle

FairVote's Steven Hill and Rob Richie describe that the election results can be predicted in US, because most districts tilt strongly toward one party.

November 2nd 2002
Why state has few real races for House
San Jose Mercury News

FairVote's Larry Sabato comments on the lack of competitive House seats in the 2002 election, noting that San Jose residents have a better chance of affecting the race by donating money to a candidate in another part of the country than voting.

October 30th 2002
More than ever, incumbents in driver's seat
USA Today

Despite the fact redistricting is suppose to boost competition, this article explores how drawing congressional district lines has rendered 90% of elections nearly uncontested, drawing examples from Illinois.

October 28th 2002
GOP House members snug in incumbency
Cincinnati Enquirer

Money, incumbency advantage, and redistricting have transformed the American political system into a non-competitive arena.

[ Previous ] [ Next ]