I’ll be appearing tongight on Wisconsin Public Television’s Here and Now, discussing the Government Accountability Board’s new rule requiring groups and persons who spend more that $ 25 on something called “political communications” during a set period preceding an election to register, make certain filings and disclose the source of their funds. Joining me will be Mike McCabe of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.
Tom Barrett’s proposal for “nonpartisan” redistricting may reduce the degree of “incumbent protection” that takes place in the redrawing of legislative districts, but I think it is more interesting for what it does not do.
There is a movement in the country to have redistricting by commission according to what are generally though to be neutral redistricting principles, i.e., the creation of compact and contiguous districts that, to the extent possible, respect municipal and county boundaries and (perhaps) geographical barriers that seperate one community from another. See. e.g., California’s Voter First Act. These principles restrict discretion in redistricting and, or so the theory goes, minimize the opportunity for political maneuvering. This doesn’t eliminate contention but the establishment of physical requirements reduces the opportunity for gerrymandering to protect incumbents or to maximize the opportunities for the party in power.
That’s not what Barrett wants to do and that’s not surprising. As a general matter, Democratic voters are more concentrated that Republican voters. Contiguous and compact districts will tend to create a smaller number of heavily Democratic districts.
I’ve met Democratic Party Chair Mike Tate. Mike was nice enough to speak to my Election Law clase and was candid, informative and entertaining. I have to confess that I like the guy.
I appreciate that the boys and girls that do this kind of work (on my side as well) aren’t playing beanbag. As a consultant on my side told me, we can’t play nice when the other guys play nasty. I couldn’t argue with her. It’s a classic game of hawks and doves. To paraphrase Justice Scalia, if one side fights freestyle, the other cannot adhere to the Marquis of Queensbury Rules.