True or False: A Voters Guide to Redistricting

August 28, 2015 – By #South Dakota Farmer UnionWhile traveling the state collecting signatures for redistricting reform, I shared an interesting conversation with a certain state legislator that highlighted a number of myths surrounding our campaign. These appear to be common assertions of opponents to our amendment. So I felt it would be appropriate to go ahead and debunk these myths for you. 

Myth #1 An independent redistricting commission would hurt rural South Dakota. Opponents argue that this commission would harm rural South Dakota because the commission is required to draw districts based on population and rural population is declining. Truth #1 Currently state legislators are required by the South Dakota Constitution to draw districts so that they “consist of compact, contiguous territory and shall have population as nearly equal as is practicable, based on the last preceding federal census.” What this means is that legislators are currently directed to draw districts based on population, keeping the districts as compact and contiguous as possible. This includes taking into account the decline in population in certain geographical areas. So either: a.) State legislators are not doing that now and violating the state constitution. Which is all the more reason to support our amendment or; b.) State legislators are currently drawing districts based on geographical population and the myth is just that, a myth. Keep in mind that our independent redistricting commission is instructed to follow nearly identical compact and contiguous language. We have simply added more provisions that prevent the commission from considering political party, incumbency, and other non-essential factors. 

Myth #2 The districts are fine as they are. There is no evidence of gerrymandering. Truth #2 I am not one to point fingers. However, what I will do is point out some facts and let you be the judge. Currently, in state statute it states that a district should be roughly 23,262 people. Taking that into account, let’s look at Brown County. In total population, Brown County has approximately 37,000 people. Per state statute, that county should be a part of no more than two legislative districts. Yet it is divided into three separate districts. Also keep in mind there are three districts that cross the Missouri River. So in districts 24, 26B, and 21 the interests of both West River and East River South Dakotans are being represented by the same legislators. I will refrain from making any further conclusions and allow you to do that on your own.   

Myth #3 The system is fine the way it is. We shouldn’t fix what isn’t broken. Truth #3 Unfortunately, the system is broken. 3 out of the last 4 times the district maps were drawn they have been legally challenged. Most recently the maps were found to be in violation of the Voting Rights Act, diluting the voting strength of the Native American population. In fact, the maps had to be redrawn in order to fix the problem. I can’t speak for anyone else, but when I was in school 1 out of 4, a.k.a. 25%, was a failing grade. The system we propose offers a 30 day public comment period that would be able to proactively address those concerns before the maps are final, rather than the current system of wasting tax payer dollars to fight them in court.

Ultimately, despite all the myths surrounding this issue, it comes down to who you believe should be drawing the district lines. Farmers Union members believe that the voters of South Dakota should have that authority. We believe they deserve more control over THEIR elections process. Does an employee set their own job description, schedule, or even salary? No, that authority belongs to the employer, the boss. What seems to be forgotten is that these legislators work for the PEOPLE of South Dakota. In a democratic republic the power flows from the people, not from the legislature. It’s time for voters to choose their legislators, not the other way around.

---

Last Modified: 08/28/2015 4:35:58 pm MDT