[LWVNM Action] ABQ Journal: Voter groups pushing for permanent independent body to redraw maps

[Elisa Sánchez]

Terrific!!

Elisa Sánchez
"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral. Why? Because anger looks to the good of justice. And if you can live amid injustice without anger, you are immoral as well as unjust."
Thomas Aquinas  (1225-1274)

-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Mason via Action <action at mailman.swcp.com>
To: LWVNM Action <action at mailman.swcp.com>
Cc: Richard Mason <dickmasonnm at gmail.com>
Sent: Sat, Jan 8, 2022 12:15 pm
Subject: [LWVNM Action] ABQ Journal: Voter groups pushing for permanent independent body to redraw maps

Thorny redistricting issue may resurface this legislativesession Voter groups pushing for permanentindependent body to redraw mapsCopyright © 2022 Albuquerque JournalBY DAN MCKAYJOURNAL CAPITOL BUREAUSANTA FE — Just last month, NewMexico legislators concluded a fierce debate over redrawing their ownboundaries and establishing a new congressional map.Next, they may decide whether thatdebate should be the last of its kind.Fair Districts New Mexico, acoalition backed by the League of Women Voters, is pushing legislators tosupport a constitutional amendment in the upcoming session that would take themap-making out of lawmakers’ hands.Instead, an independent body —perhaps something similar to this year’s Citizen Redistricting Committee, whichmade nonbinding recommendations — would draw the boundaries.But lawmakers, even those whosupport the concept, are divided over whether now is the right time to returnto such a contentious subject.State Rep. Natalie Figueroa,D-Albuquerque, said she plans to introduce a constitutional amendment thissession to capitalize on the desire to ensure a fair, transparent process whenboundaries are redrawn in 10 years.“I just hope we do it before we losesight of the lessons we’ve learned,” Figueroa said in an interview this week.If a proposal is introduced, a mixof Republicans and Democrats is expected to sign on, signaling a debate thatcuts across party lines. Democrats hold large majorities in both chambers, butlast year’s legislation creating the Citizen Redistricting Committee wonbipartisan support.Republican Rep. Kelly Fajardo of LosLunas said she would co-sponsor a constitutional amendment if it’s introduced.“I don’t think politicians should bein charge of the lines,” she said. “I think we have an interest in protectingourselves more than we have an interest in the public.”But Sen. Bill O’Neill, an AlbuquerqueDemocrat who has long supported independent redistricting, said he doesn’tthink there’s “much of an appetite” for action on a constitutional change thisyear.“I think a lot of us are a bit wornout and bruised from this last redistricting session,” he said.No constitutional amendment has beenprefiled yet ahead of the 30-day session that starts Jan. 18, so the scope ofwhat might be proposed isn’t clear.Figueroa said she wants to ensurethe independent redistricting panel reflects New Mexico’s geographic andpolitical diversity.Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto, anAlbuquerque Democrat and chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, which vetsconstitutional amendments, said New Mexico should create an independentcommission that handles redistricting not just for state office but also theoffices of local governments.Introduction of a constitutionalamendment doesn’t require Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s approval, and if passedby the Legislature, it would go directly to voters, not to the governor.Citizen committee deployedFor the first time, New Mexico in2021 deployed a Citizen Redistricting Committee to accept public testimony inhearings throughout the state and issue three options to legislators for eachredistricting task — Congress, state House, state Senate and the PublicEducation Commission.The seven-person panel — appointedby legislative leaders and the State Ethics Commission — was barred fromconsidering political data in its work, and it was directed to place lessemphasis on where incumbents live.The committee recommendationsweren’t binding.In last month’s special session, theDemocratic majorities in the Legislature revised the recommended maps —sometimes substantially — and adopted them over the opposition of Republicans,whose objections varied, depending on the map at hand.In the congressional plan, forexample, Republicans contend the new layout discards New Mexico’s long-standingorientation of three seats — one in Albuquerque, a second in southern NewMexico and a third in the north.The new map breaks the conservativesoutheast part of the state into multiple districts and gives Democrats an edgein every district, based on voting trends over the last 10 years. It moves muchof Albuquerque’s West Side into the southern- based congressional district nowheld by the only Republican in the delegation, Yvette Herrell of Alamogordo.Democrats, in turn, said thelegislation creates more competitive seats by giving each district a mix ofurban and rural communities. ‘Behind closed doors’Fair Districts New Mexico hasn’tweighed in on the congressional map.But for the legislative districts,the organization said the state House map generally matches a proposal by theCitizen Redistricting Committee, with some changes made to reflect the wishesof Native American communities.The Senate map, by contrast, wascrafted largely in private, and it isn’t clear to what extent the senatorsconsidered the committee recommendations, according to Fair Districts NewMexico.“They chose to design their own map,which was done behind closed doors,” said Kathleen Burke, project coordinatorfor Fair Districts.She said the coalition believes it’stime to grant the map-making power to an independent body.“When that power rests in the handsof the legislators,” Burke said, “there is always the temptation to draw linesthat serve the personal or political interests of the individual legislators.It’s essentially a conflict of interest.”The deadline to introducelegislation in the 30-day session is the halfway point, Feb. 2. _______________________________________________
Action mailing list
Action at mailman.swcp.com
https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/action
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/action/attachments/20220108/38152156/attachment-0001.htm>