Why redistricting reform advocates oppose this redistricting reform bill

Yahoo

27-03-2025

The Minnesota Capitol. Photo by Max Nesterak/Minnesota Reformer.
Legislation at the Minnesota Capitol aims to end 140 years of squabbling over legislative district boundaries by removing lawmakers from the redistricting process and putting it under the control of a bipartisan commission instead.
Bills in both chambers (HF550/SF824) would create an eight-member panel to oversee the redistricting process, with an equal number of panel members selected by each of the two major political parties.
The bill's supporters say the panel would ensure that the state's districts are drawn in the spirit of compromise, rather than the ferocious partisan brinkmanship that characterizes the redistricting process in some other states, including Wisconsin.
'It creates a transparent framework where political biases are exposed, rather than hidden, giving Minnesotans meaningful insight into how district lines are drawn,' Brian Cook of the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce said last month in support of the bill.
But the bill has run into opposition from a seemingly unusual quarter: good governance groups that have been pushing for redistricting reform for years.
'This legislative session started with unacceptable levels of partisanship and gridlock and this bill will accelerate it,' said Annastacia Belladonna-Carrera, executive director of Common Cause Minnesota. 'If Minnesota wants true redistricting reform that puts the people first, HF550 is not getting us there.'
The opponents fear that a bipartisan commission will fall prey to the same partisan disagreements that have derailed the existing legislative redistricting process over the years.
Consider what happened in New York.
In 2014, voters there approved the creation of a bipartisan commission almost identical to the one under consideration in Minnesota. Then-Governor Andrew Cuomo boasted at the time that the bill would 'permanently reform the redistricting process in New York to once and for all end self-interested partisan gerrymandering.'
The committee faceplanted right out of the gate by failing to agree on a plan. Instead, each party's representatives on the commission presented their own competing proposals to the state legislature.
The legislature rejected both proposals and told the commission to draw up a new one. It deadlocked again. The legislature went ahead and drew up its own plan, which was signed into law by the governor.
Less than a month later, state courts invalidated the entire process and struck down the congressional maps as an illegal partisan gerrymander.
The state Supreme Court ordered a special master to draw up temporary maps in time for the 2022 midterms, and then in 2023 it ordered the original redistricting commission to go back to the drawing board and give the whole thing another go.
That second independent redistricting attempt went marginally better: The proposed maps for state legislative districts were approved by April 2023. But legislators didn't like the congressional district maps. The Democratic supermajority threw them out and eventually drew their own, which were signed into law a little over a year ago.
The whole process took twice as long as the previous round of redistricting under the old rules.
HF550 is different from New York's setup in one critical respect: The Minnesota bill does not require state legislators to sign off on the new maps created by the commission.
And while the bill provides for judicial review of any legal challenges to a commission plan, it is silent regarding what might happen if the commission members can't agree on one to begin with.
Common Cause Minnesota and allied groups like the League of Women Voters want to see a bill more along the lines of one proposed last year. That bill would allow members of the public to apply to serve on the redistricting commission, with the state Legislative Coordinating Commission ultimately selecting a 15-member panel: Five Democrats, five Republicans, and five people who are politically independent or affiliated with a third party.
'Our goal is to advance grassroots, people-centered reforms by establishing a citizen-led independent redistricting commission,' Belladonna-Carrera said. 'This commission will focus on the needs and voices of the people, rather than political parties, incumbents or candidates.'
It's unclear whether anything will pass this legislative term, and the clock is ticking. Ongoing chaos at the federal level will inject even more uncertainty into the next round of redistricting: In February, the Trump administration abruptly halted the work of the committee planning the 2030 Census.