Feb 19, 2018 3 min read

Throughout the partisan bickering over Pennsylvania’s gerrymandered congressional districts, one question hasn’t been asked enough: Why are politicians permitted to draw political maps in the first place?

Gerrymandering is nothing new to politics. It dates to our country’s infancy when one Massachusetts district in a redrawn map from 1812 looked like a salamander. The redistricted map was signed into law by Gov. Elbridge Gerry to help his party win more seats, hence the name “Gerry-mander.”

It’s a ploy used for generations to protect incumbent legislators and help one particular party hold power. It’s also a danger to democracy.

That has been clearly evident in Pennsylvania.

There has been much fighting and political posturing in the month since Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court nullified the 2011 map – approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed into law by then Republican Gov. Tom Corbett – that gave Republicans an undeniable advantage in congressional races.

Despite Democrats and Republicans evenly splitting the state’s congressional vote in recent election cycles, Republicans have held a 13-to-5 advantage for Pennsylvania’s 18 House seats. By “cracking” populations in half in some areas, and “packing” votes in Democratic strongholds, the maps practically predetermined which candidates would win or lose before campaigns even got started.

Republicans leaders are claiming the court overstepped the state Constitution’s boundaries when it threw out the map and demanded the Legislature approve a new plan that Gov. Tom Wolf could sign by Feb. 15. It’s clear why Republicans aren’t happy since they likely will lose seats with any new map.

So it was no surprise when Senate President Pro Tempore and House Speaker Mike Turzai flippantly provided the governor at the last minute with a map they alone had drawn with no bipartisan support. Wolf promptly and justifiably rejected it.

With that decision, the state Supreme Court allowed for any interested parties to submit suggested maps. The justices will take these into consideration as they attempt to draw their own map, which will be revealed this week. But a map from House Democrats basically mirrored the previously rejected Republican plan, only this time with the intent of helping progressives win more seats.

Using a mathematician and independent experts, Wolf submitted his own plan, which he said “takes features from Republican and Democratic submissions, while still meeting the court’s orders and opinion, to provide Pennsylvanians with a fair map.” Some districts are still a little wonky, and the overall map isn’t as compact as the court has demanded in its opinion. But it’s a good start for the court.

All of this wrangling between Republicans and Democrats over maps and borders makes one point abundantly clear: Politicians should be removed from the process. No longer should they be allowed to have the power to protect their colleagues or punish their opponents.

There should be a nonpartisan commission installed to represent the interests of voters, not politicians. The only way to change this process, however, is to amend the state Constitution, and there currently are proposals floating around in the House and Senate to create an independent commission to draw the maps every 10 years following the census. But just like everything else with the state Legislature, it’s moving at glacial speed.

That mindset must change immediately. This should be a priority for our legislators.

Without serious and immediate redistricting reform in Pennsylvania, our democracy will remain imperiled. The voters are supposed to pick their representatives, not the other way around.