GOP lawmakers in a hearing knocked Dems for not supporting a redistricting plan they say closely mirrors past Dem bills to create a new commission to draw Wisconsin’s political boundaries.
But Dems countered the GOP bill omits important provisions to ensure the maps are fair.
Co-author Sen. Dan Knodl in Thursday’s hearing before the Senate Committee on Shared Revenue, Elections and Consumer Protection noted Dems’ past support for similar bills, arguing the current bill would avoid the Legislature getting tangled up in litigation over new maps.
Knodl said he came into the Legislature when Democrats were in the majority.
“I’m very aware of how political winds can change,” the Germantown Republican said. “I think this is the moment that we, Democrats and Republicans, can come together, should come together, to take this divisive issue off the table and prove to the people of Wisconsin that we can govern effectively together.”
Sen. Mark Spreitzer, D-Beloit, asked why the bill didn’t require three-fourths votes in the Legislature, which he called a “critical safeguard.” The current bill requires a bipartisan vote.
“It seems to me that something that has three-quarters support in both houses of the Legislature is a lot more likely to be something that has broad buy-in,” Spreitzer said. “A bipartisan requirement means one person liked their district and decided to vote for it.”
He also pointed out the supermajority in the Senate and near-supermajority in the Assembly.
“One or two people, you know, even just being absent could mean that this is essentially a partisan map,” Spreitzer said.
Co-author Rep. Joel Kitchens called the three-fourths threshold “ridiculously high.”
“Unfortunately, the Republicans won’t always hold the Legislature, you guys are going be in charge at some point, too,” he said. “And we need to look at how that’s going to play out. Three quarters is just not a realistic threshold … in this Legislature.”
Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, introduced the bill last month, arguing it was a way to avoid a lawsuit before the state Supreme Court seeking to draw new lines and the possible impeachment of liberal Justice Janet Protasiewicz. The court has since agreed to hear the case, and Protasiewicz has rejected calls to recuse herself.
The bill would charge the Legislative Reference Bureau with drawing new lines that meet a variety of standards, including compactness, dividing as few political subdivisions as possible and having districts composed of “convenient contiguous territory.”
Spreitzer also said past Iowa-style redistricting bills he supported included a process for drawing congressional maps, and questioned why the proposal didn’t include that provision. Six of the state’s eight congressional districts are currently represented by Republicans.
Kitchens said lawmakers didn’t discuss the possibility because they have a “golden opportunity” right now to address legislative redistricting, which he said is the immediate concern.
The proposal would allow the Legislature to vote on a map with the opportunity to make “corrective” changes after receiving public input. If it failed, the LRB would draft a second map that again could only see corrective amendments. The same procedure would be allowed for subsequent bills, as long as the maps are voted on before January 31 of the even-numbered year following the census.
While the Iowa approach has a deadline for the state Supreme Court to step in if no agreement is reached, the GOP plan includes no such deadline.
The Assembly didn’t put the legislation through the committee process before taking it up on the floor. Thursday’s hearing was the first opportunity for the public to weigh in.
