ANOTHER PIECE OF ACTION THERE
THE STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS.
GOVERNOR EVERS SAYS HE WILL SIGN
AN EXECUTIVE ORDER TO CREATE A
NONPARTISAN REDISTRICTING
COMMISSION, WHICH WILL DRAW WHAT
HE CALLS THE PEOPLE'S MAPS.
>> A NONPARTISAN REDISTRICTING
COMMISSION WILL CONSISTS OF THE
PEOPLE OF OUR STATE, NOT THE
ELECTED OFFICIALS, NOT
LOBBYISTS, NOT HIGH-PAID
CONSULTANTS.
THEY WILL VISIT EVERY
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT, HEAR
DIRECTLY FROM FOLKS ACROSS OUR
STATE, AND DRAW FAIR, IMPARTIAL
MAPS FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO TAKE
UP NEXT YEAR.
[APPLAUSE]
>> FOR SOME INSIGHT ON THE
CHALLENGES AHEAD, WE TURN TO A
NATIONAL AUTHORITY AND EXPERT
WITNESS, INCLUDING IN
WISCONSIN'S CASE.
KEN MAYER, PROFESSOR OF
POLITICAL SCIENCE AT UW MADISON.
AND THANKS SO MUCH FOR BEING
HERE.
>> GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.
>> WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION?
>> THIS IS A SYMBOLIC ATTEMPT BY
THE GOVERNOR TO CREATE AN
ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL.
IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN
WHAT HE PROPOSED LAST YEAR,
WHICH IS TO CREATE A FORMAL
STATUTORY PROCESS THAT WOULD
GENERATE A MAP THAT THE
LEGISLATURE WOULD HAVE TO
CONSIDER.
THIS IS MORE OF A BLUE RIBBON
COMMISSION.
THE DETAILS OF WHICH WE DON'T
ACTUALLY KNOW JUST YET.
BUT THE IDEA WOULD BE TO CREATE
AN ALTERNATIVE MAP PROPOSAL THAT
COULD BE LINED UP AGAINST
WHATEVER THE LEGISLATURE PUT
TOGETHER.
SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT A PROPOSAL
AND THEN AN ALTERNATIVE TO THAT
PROPOSAL.
>> HERE'S WHAT SENATE MAJORITY
REPUBLICAN LEADER SCOTT'S
FITZGERALD SAID.
HE SAYS THE GOVERNOR PROPOSED
SOMETHING HE BELIEVES TO BE
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, SAYING HE
KNOWS THE LEGISLATURE HAS THE
RESPONSIBILITY PER THE
CONSTITUTION TO NOT ONLY DRAW
THE MAPS BUT THE CONGRESSIONAL
MAPS AS WELL.
WHAT ABOUT THAT?
>> WELL, THERE'S NO QUESTION
THAT THE WISCONSIN CONSTITUTION
PLACES AUTHORITY TO DRAW THE
MAPS WITH THE LEGISLATURE.
AND EVEN THE NONPARTISAN
STATUTORY COMMISSION THAT THE
GOVERNOR PROPOSED LAST YEAR
WOULD CREATE A PROPOSAL THAT THE
LEGISLATURE WOULD HAVE TO ENACT.
AND THE BLUE RIBBON COMMISSION
IS ONE STEP BACK THERE THAT.
IT'S SIMPLY CREATING AN
ALTERNATIVE WITH PRESUMABLY THE
HOPE AND EXPECTATION THAT IT
MIGHT GENERATE SOME PUBLIC
PRESSURE, SO THAT LEGISLATORS
WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY OR
MAYBE AN AN INSENTIVE TO KE WHAT
ARE -- TO WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S -- JUST
CREATING A DIFFERENT MAP THAT
THE LEGISLATURE MIGHT LOOK AT.
>> SO OTHER LAWS WOULDN'T HAVE
TO ENACTED TO HAVE A
COMMISSION DRAW AN IMPARTIAL
MAP?
>> THE GOVERNOR AS DENVERS DO
AND -- GOVERNOR DOS AND
POLITICAL EXECUTIVES DO IN A LOT
OF PLACES, THE 1990s GOVERNOR
THOMPSON CREATED A BLUE RIBBON
ON CAMPAIGN REFINANCING FORM.
IT'S A COMMON TECHNIQUE TO
HIGHLIGHT AN ISSUE TO GENERATE
PUBLIC SUPPORT OR IN THIS CASE
PROBABLY TO FOCUS PUBLIC
SUPPORT.
BUT I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY
MEANINGFUL EXPECTATION THAT THIS
WOULD CREATE A PLOALZ THAT
ANYBODY WOULD -- PROEHL THAT
ANYBODY WOULD INTERESTIST WITH
SOME TEETH THAT THE LEGISLATURE
WOULD HAVE TO CONSIDER.
>> LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THE
WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND
COMMERCE HAD TO SAY ABOUT THE
GOVERNOR'S PLAN.
THEY TWEETED OUT SAYING,
COMPLAIN ALL YOU WANT ABOUT
SO-CALLED GERRYMANDERING.
THE REALITY IS THAT VOTERS
OUTSIDE DANE AND WALK VOTES FOR
REPUBLICANS, SAYING THEY'D LOVE
TO SEE HOW YOU DIVIDE THIS MAP
INTO 99 EQUAL POPULATION
DISTRICTS WITHOUT A GOP
MAJORITY.
WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT?
>> THAT'S AN ARGUMENT THAT WAS
MADE IN THE WISCONSIN LITIGATION
THAT THE PARTISAN IMBALANCE, THE
FACT THAT IN YEARS THAT
REPUBLICANS ACTUALLY GOT A
MINORITY OF THE STATEWIDE VOTE,
WOULD ACTUALLY GET MUCH MORE
THAN A MAJORITY OF SEATS, 61,
62, 63 SEATS.
AND THE ARGUMENT IS IT'S JUST A
CONSEQUENCE OF HOW PEOPLE ARE
SORTED.
THE DEMOCRATS ARE CONCENTRATED
IN CITIES, MILWAUKEE, MADISON,
YOU
EAU CLAIRE, SUPERIOR.
AND REPUBLICANS ARE MORE
EFFICIENTLY DISTRIBUTED.
THERE'S A GRAIN OF TRUTH IN
THAT, THAT WISCONSIN -- THAT
DEMOCRATS TEND TO -- OR PROBABLY
THE WAY TO PHRASE IT IS THAT
CITIES WHICH HAVE LARGER
POPULATIONS TEND TO BE MORE
DEMOCRATIC.
BUT THE NOTION THAT THAT
EXPLAINS THE ENTIRE SCOPE OF
THE -- OF THE PARTISAN EFFECT OF
THE GERRYMANDERING -- IT'S
LUDICROUS.
THAT LEGISLATURE ADMITTED IN
COURT THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO
CREATE THE MAXIMUM PARTY
ADVANTAGE, THAT IF YOU LOOK AT
THE MAP AND DISTRICT AFTER
DISTRICT, THE DEMOCRATS ARE NOT
ONLY PACKED PUT ALSO CRACKED.
SO THAT THEY ARE SITUATED IN
DISTRICTS THAT HAVE 53, 55, 57%
REPUBLICANS.
SO IT'S REALLY A RHETORICAL
ARGUMENT THAT SIMPLY DOESN'T
REFLECT THE REALITY OF WHAT THE
EFFECT OF GEOGRAPHIC SORTING
MIGHT BE.
>> WHAT ARE THE BEST MODELS FOR
NONPARTISAN COMMISSIONS DRAWING
MAPS?
>> THAT'S THE QUESTION, ISN'T
IT?
THAT THIS IS A PARTISAN PROCESS.
I THINK ONE OF THE MODELS THAT
PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT IS IOWA,
WHERE IN IOWA IT'S A STATE
AGENCY THAT LOOKS AT -- LOOKS AT
SOLELY POPULATION.
THEY ARE NOT PERMITTED TO LOOK
AT ANY ELECTION RETURNS.
THEY'RE NOT PERMITTED TO LOOK AT
WHERE INCUMBENTS LIVE.
THERE ARE SOME SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS IN IOWA,
PARTICULARLY HOW COMPANY,AN
DISTRICTS HAVE TO BE -- HOW
PARTICULAR DISTRICTS HAVE TO BE
DONE.
THIS AGENCY IS SORT OF THEIR
EQUIVALENT OF THE LEGISLATEIRE
TECHNOLOGY SERVICES HERE.
THE LEGISLATURE CAN IT'S PASS IT
OR NOT PASS IT.
IF THEY DON'T PASS IT, IT GOES
BACK TO -- FOR REVISIONS.
BUT EVERY DECADE SINCE THIS
SYSTEM HAS BEEN CREATED, THE MAP
HAS GONE THROUGH WITH NO
LITIGATION, WITH VERY LITTLE
CONTROVERSY.
AND SO I THINK THAT WAS WHAT THE
GOVERNOR WAS TRYING TO GET AT
LAST YEAR.
BUT ONE OF THE WAYS THAT IS
COMMON IS TO NOT ALLOW ELECTION
RETURNS TO BE TAKEN INTO
EFFECT -- TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
AND THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT
BECAUSE YOU CAN CREATE A PROCESS
THAT SAYS YOU CAN'T LOOK AT
THIS.
BUT IT'S HARD NOT TO BECAUSE THE
DATA ARE THERE.
BUT THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
ALTERNATIVES TO HAVING A
LEGISLATURE DRAWING THE MAP IN A
WAY THAT IS DESIGNED TO SECURE
MAXIMUM PARTY ADVANTAGE.
>> ALL RIGHT.
WE NEED TO LEAVE IT THERE.