Utah lawmakers are putting the final touches on new election district maps in advance of an Oct. 3 special redistricting session. Redistricting is always controversial with plenty of political intrigue to discuss.
Have state legislators conducted the redistricting process fairly and with adequate public input?
Pignanelli: "Can a democratic assembly who annually revolve in the mass of the people be supposed steadily to pursue the public good?" — Alexander Hamilton. This is the classic situation of "Darned if you do, darned if you don't." (Of course, outside of this column I utilize much more colorful language in utilizing this expression.) Had the Legislature not conducted such an extensive hearing process and schedule, the result would have been a legitimate hue and cry from the media, public interest groups and a good chunk of the population. Yet, once the special session concludes, there will be a similar uproar that the Legislature ignored the hearings, voted contrary to public sentiment, and that the process was flawed. (Admittedly jaded, I question the efficacy of any public hearing.) The Legislature correctly erred on the side of at least allowing people to vent their frustrations in a public matter.
This begs the question of potential fallout from whatever happens in early October. In response, I will remind readers of reality, now and in our post special session column. For months after the boundaries are finalized, emotions will be aroused and foster a fair amount of grumbling from Republicans, Democrats and independents. Even some Republicans will posture about leaving their party or demand significant changes to the entire process. Some pundits will predict a backlash against Republican lawmakers in the next election.
But the general election is more than a year away. That is approximately two political lifetimes. The emotions that will percolate over redistricting in October 2011 will not be around in November 2012. Candidates and campaign managers are advised to look for more fertile issues.
Webb: This redistricting process has been the most open and participatory in Utah history. Interested citizens have been able to immerse themselves in the process, suggest maps and enjoy ready access to lawmakers. Legislators have held hearings all over the state, have taken public input seriously, and have adopted many citizen suggestions, even some from critics. The process has been transparent, and Redistricting Committee members have done their homework and have been diligent in executing their responsibilities. I've been watching the redistricting process in a number of other states and, by comparison, Utah's process has been far less rancorous, partisan and nasty.
Who will be winners and losers in legislative districts?
Webb: In redistricting, it is simply impossible to keep every neighborhood, community, city and county intact. The raw numbers don't allow it. So some communities of interest will be divided. Certainly, Democrats are going to lose a few seats, a result of population shifts, not partisanship. The practical reality is that Democrats mostly represent districts in older, built-out areas that haven't grown much in population, while southwestern Salt Lake County, northern/western Utah County, and Washington County have ballooned in growth. Truth is, Republicans have gone out of their way to treat Democrats fairly. Certainly, incumbent protection, both Republicans and Democrats, has been a priority in redistricting, as it always is. Even so, a number of lawmakers will end up in districts with another incumbent.
Pignanelli: Salt Lake County (Republicans and Democrats) and rural Utah will be negatively impacted by boundary changes — regardless of who draws the lines. Families in Davis, Utah and Washington counties are simply having more children. The new districts will likely produce additional members to the Conservative Caucus — the real winner in reapportionment.
What are the ramifications for congressional races?
Pignanelli: Approximately three nanoseconds after the special session adjourns, congressional wannabes and incumbents will decide the two big questions: am I a candidate and in which district? They may not announce their intentions immediately after the session, but the lines will be the factor for contenders.
Webb: Republicans and Democrats are no different in their desire for political gain in congressional redistricting. Democrats want a safe, urban, Democratic district. Republicans want safe Republican districts. But the best public policy would emerge from districts that are politically balanced as proportionately as possible. Safe districts, highly dominated by one party, where politicians only have to play to their base, result in more partisanship, more extremism, more congressional gridlock and dysfunction. In better-balanced districts, candidates must appeal to independents and mainstream voters, as well as their base, and the result is good compromise, more progress, and better public policy. Proportionally balanced districts in Utah would all lean Republican, but a mainstream Democrat would have a shot at winning. That would be the best congressional redistricting outcome.
Republican LaVarr Webb is a political consultant and lobbyist. Previously he was policy deputy to Gov. Mike Leavitt and Deseret News managing editor. Email: lwebb@exoro.com. Democrat Frank Pignanelli is a Salt Lake attorney, lobbyist and political adviser. Pignanelli served 10 years in the Utah House of Representatives, six years as minority leader. His spouse, D'Arcy Dixon Pignanelli, is a state tax commissioner. Email: frankp@xmission.com.