Log In


Reset Password
Opinion Editorial Cartoons Op-Ed Editorials Letters to the Editor

Redistricting

Minority stakeholders wrongly overlooked, but group can correct the oversight

A bipartisan group with abundant experience navigating the painful process of redrawing Colorado’s congressional districts every 10 years deserves congratulations for its proposal to create an independent commission that determines the boundary lines. These proponents also have drawn warranted criticism for their failure to cast a wide net to include stakeholders – particularly from black and Latino communities – when crafting the proposal they hope to put before voters in 2016. The exclusion, and eroded trust that followed, is problematic for what could be a semi-elegant solution to the decennial debacle that, in Colorado and most other states, too often ends in the courtroom. Those who raised the concerns, and the redistricting proposal’s proponents, would best serve the state to find compromise.

In broad strokes, the proposed ballot measure would create a 12-member independent commission with equal numbers of Democratic, Republican and unaffiliated members. Advancing a redistricting proposal would require a supermajority of eight commission members. The notion is sound: Any redistricting map that the commission approves would have at least bipartisan buy-in. This would circumvent the inherently political – and too often litigious – process wrought when the Legislature attempts to divide the state into districts containing roughly equal numbers of residents. Each party would, of course, prefer an edge in its congressional representation and, given that the maps are good for 10 years following their approval, there is incentive to push hard. The proposed independent commission could neutralize much of that rancor.

At issue among minority leaders, though, is language in the proposal that would restrict the commission from drawing district lines to either strengthen or weaken minority voting blocs. While the wording appears intended to be neutral on the issue of race, the absence of minority voices at the drafting table raises questions among some black and Latino leaders in the state – as well it should. “There were, I’m sorry, a bunch of white guys sitting around the table deciding our politics on redistricting moving forward,” said state Rep. Angela Williams, D-Denver, chairwoman of the Colorado Black Caucus.

The message is duly noted among the drafting group, and its members are asking those concerned with the proposal to discuss options for remedies. That was an important step that, for Williams and others, might be too little, too late; it would be a shame, though, if the redistricting reform effort were wholly jettisoned. There is much to work with in the proposed language.

The question how to ensure both adequate representation for Coloradans of all political, racial and ethnic stripes is an enduringly complex one. Answering it – to the degree it is even possible – demands that a diversity of representatives are present in the conversation. Proponents of the independent commission proposal, it appears, intended to shape the panel to avoid issues of race and ethnicity altogether. Whether that is an appropriate decision is debatable, and certainly must include voices from those whose communities will be affected it.

It is understandable that some minority group leaders have lost faith in the redistricting commission proposal, but there is opportunity to rectify the situation – provided that the proposal’s proponents do more than note the concerns and proceed without heeding them. It will take significant work to rebuild the lost trust, but it is worth the effort to attempt it.



Reader Comments