The last time we looked at the efforts to redraw legislative boundaries on maps, we wrote that the process proved that Democrats were trying to do what is best for Colorado, while Republicans were trying to do what is best for Republicans. At the time, a judge had ruled that the maps created by Democrats created more competitive districts. Subsequent to that blog the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that the lower court had not adequately considered the Constitutional requirements, and that competitiveness was not an appropriate consideration, especially when communities were split.

Fast forward to today: Democrats on the committee appointed to create the new boundaries have submitted a new map, that increases the number of competitive districts from 33 to 35, and the GOP is accusing the tie-breaking committee member of being a Democrat in sheep’s clothing. The intent was that the 11th committee member be unaffiliated, so that the process would be fair to Colorado, not the political parties. Mario Carrera, the committee chairman, and unaffiliated voter, is that 11th committee member. He was quoted in the Denver Post article as saying, "I think unaffiliateds have the prerogative of voting with one party or the other. I'm going to go with whatever my conscience dictates. I'm looking for the best possible map that meets the constitutional requirements."

Why is this important to Mesa County? The new map puts Ray Scott and Laura Bradford in the same district, and they would have to compete against each other in the next election. The committee votes today to accept or reject the new map, and it seems the Chairman is leaning toward voting for the map submitted by Democrats. The committee was ordered by the Supreme Court to submit a new map to the court by December 6.

Expect fireworks at about noon today.

Homework

Denver Post Story About Legislative Maps

Odd things tickle my funny bone. The thing that has me amused today is the argument that the Republicans put forth while standing before a judge who was trying to sort out redistricting maps.

The Democrats put forward maps that will have the impact of making races more competitive in Colorado. The Republicans put forward maps that would keep a couple of districts safe for Republicans. Then they argued before the judge that the legal parameters for setting borders do not have a requirement for “competitiveness.”  Evidently a free market , complete with competition is important, but free elections where people have a real choice is not important.

I get awfully tired of hearing that Republicans and Democrats are just the same. This one instance points out a huge difference. Republicans want to win at all costs, even if it means setting up bogus boundaries. Democrats want to win fare and square, by competing for the votes.

Secretary of State Scott Gessler is one more example of how Republicans are different from Democrats. He wants to limit the number of people voting, as evidenced by his order to disenfranchise people who missed voting in one off-year election. Democrats want all eligible voters to have access to the ballot box, even if it means that there are more registered Republicans than registered Democrats.

I swear, I’ll never understand how the Republican mind works—further evidence that there is a real difference between Republicans and Democrats.

Homework

Judge Rules in Favor of DEM Maps

Coordinated Efforts to Suppress Votes

Gessler Lost Bid to Supress Votes in Denver

Yesterday the redistricting hearing took four and one half hours, and ended up with no plan to submit to a vote and Democrats and Republicans angrily shaking their fingers at each other.

The Democrats claim that their maps represent competitive districts, where Republicans and Democrats are relatively equal demographics. The Republicans weren’t saying what the guiding principles in their maps were, which resulted in the accusation that GOP operatives, not the committee members, drafted the maps. The accusation would be amusing, if it were true, because the GOP is essentially arguing for status quo, which are maps that were drawn by a judge after the GOP tried to ram through a redistricting plan giving the GOP a majority of “safe seats” 10 years ago. The DEMs asked the courts for assistance in fighting the GOP actions, which are fondly known as the “midnight Gerrymander.”

What is really wrong with this whole process is that it turns political, and only two parties are at the table. Coloradans are pretty evenly divided among Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. Independents aren’t represented on the committee trying to define voting districts, nor are Libertarians, members of the Green Party, or any other organized political party. When you have two political enemies drawing the lines of the battle ground, an inability to agree on the map should be expected. What probably can’t be expected is a map that makes every politician everywhere actually work to get elected.

P.S. Campaign Finance reports were due from candidates on April 15. Since I’m no longer a candidate, my form was filed a long time ago. It was also a termination report. When I was a candidate, I reported on both my finances and my opponent’s finances in this space. If you want to compare the final reports, they can be found at the Secretary of State’s Office.  Another local blogger (linked below) reported on Steve King’s and Laura Bradford’s reports.

Homework

Denver Post Story About Redistricting

List (with links) to Political Parties in Colorado

Blog About Steve King Spending

I’ve been thinking way too small. I was thinking that the Third Congressional District in Colorado would get the 12,000 additional people needed to make the district meet the population requirements for a district from a mountain community. Leaving the existing borders essentially unchanged. Instead, it seems, a map produced by Colorado Democrats, lumps us into a district with Boulder.

I remember the first time that John Salazar won election in this district. I was watching the local election results. Early on, it appeared that Salazar would go down in defeat because the only election results available were from Mesa County. The celebration at the Republican victory party was dampened when results from Pueblo started being reported. Pueblo went overwhelmingly for Salazar, and he won.

Salazar, as a Blue Dog Democrat, and a farmer was a pretty good fit for the voters in this district. He understood the importance of water to the Western Slope. He was not a strong advocate for the most liberal Democratic policies supporting women’s reproductive health care or the GBLT community, because of his Catholic faith. Republicans didn’t like him because he was a Democrat, and liberal Democrats didn’t like him because he was too conservative.

I’ve been grousing about Scott Tipton almost since the day he took office. His vote for the Ryan Destroy Medicare Plan would probably cost him reelection, even in the mostly Western Slope Third Congressional District. But he may not be running for reelection in the district representing Mesa County. If the Democratic maps are approved by the legislature, Grand Junction would be thrown into the district currently represented by Jared Polis.

Hold on to your hats, Mesa County. You’ve never seen a candidate like Jared Polis. He’s openly Gay and independently wealthy. He helped to finance the campaign to get and keep Colorado’s Senate in Democratic hands. When I first signed up as a candidate at ActBlue, an organization that helps Democratic candidates raise money online, the leading fundraiser in the nation was Jared Polis. He has his own PAC that helps to fund other liberal Democratic candidates.

I was thinking way too small. I was thinking that I’d happily settle for a John-Salazar-like candidate to oust Scott Tipton. Instead I might be getting a Representative that actually thinks like I do.

Homework:

Charles Ashby Story on Redistricting

State's Website RE Redistricting

Polis Website

Census numbers were recently finalized. The purpose of a census is to ensure that all political districts have approximately equal numbers of voters. Colorado has seven legislative districts that elect representatives to the House in D.C.  Although the state grew since the last census, it did not grow enough to justify an additional seat.

The Colorado General Assembly is charged with making sure that each of the seven districts has approximately 718,457 citizens. This figure comes from a formula that makes sure each state has at least one representative and the balance of the population is evenly divided. Colorado has a total population of 5,029,196 as of the 2010 census count. Some districts, as currently drawn, have too many citizens, others have too few. Congressional District 3 is under by 12,271 people, so the boundary needs to be expanded to include a few more people.

The Joint Select Committee on Redistricting will prepare a plan to redistrict the state, and present it for approval of both houses during this legislative session. Their goal is to report to the General Assembly by April 14, 2011.

The committee has co-chairs, one from the Senate and one from the House. The co-chairs are Senator Heath and Representative Balmer. Senator Gail Schwartz  is a member of the committee, and has been a friend to Mesa County Democrats, even though she does not represent Mesa County. Senator Carroll is also on this committee. She knocked on doors in Mesa County on behalf of my candidacy.

The committee is traveling around the state to get input on the redistricting process. They will be in Grand Junction at Mesa State College on March 19 from 9 a.m. to noon.

There are rules in creating congressional districts. Citizens should be able to vote regardless of race, color or “status as a member of a language minority.” Generally the district should be compact, preserve the boundaries of cities and counties, and protect “communities” of interest.

When I saw Senator Schwartz in Denver recently, she indicated that she’d appreciate hearing from Mesa County about how we’d like to see our district lines redrawn. The data that will be used plus existing maps and proposed maps are (or will be)  at the website linked below (Redistricting in Colorado.) Committee members can be contacted by either dialing 303-866-3521, or by E-mailing CongRedist2011@State.co.us.

Homework

The Amazing Apportionment Tool

Redistricting in Colorado