The deal would create a panel made up of eight members appointed by the legislative conferences: two appointees apiece from the majority and minority in each chamber. The eight would then independently select two additional members. Those eligible would have to be out of government service for three years before their appointment, and appointments would have to be made two years before map-drawing could actually begin.
A 10-member panel with equal representation from both parties, of course, creates a decent chance for impasse. In addition, there will be a complex set of votes required for the panel and the Legislature that changes depending on whether or not one party controls both chambers. (This sort of minority-protection mechanism is similar to the rules governing the new New York Joint Commission on Public Ethics, where a vote of just a few members is sufficient to block an enforcement action.)
After the panel had completed and approved its work, maps would be voted on by the Legislature. If lawmakers rejected them, the maps would go back to the panel for another pass.
But after a second rejection of the panel’s work, lawmakers would be able to directly amend the independent body’s maps, although numerous technical restrictions would apply to that surgery. That means the legislative majorities would have control at this final stage.
It puts some distance between the sitting legislators and the people drawing the lines.
The plan being discussed also makes improvements to many of the technical details of redistricting, such as eliminating “block-on-border” and “town-on-border” requirements, which prevent map-makers from breaking apart census blocks or towns unless they’re larger than a full Assembly district. This often results in cities and villages being split among legislators who have different sets of towns.
Does anyone think this will work?
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote!
Michael H. Drucker
Technorati Tag in Del.icio.us 
No comments:
Post a Comment