Which occurs first reapportionment and redistricting

The current system of single-member districts rather than a general ticket system, where voters could select a slate of Representatives for an entire state is provided by 2 U. For example, in the s and early s, some federal apportionment statutes included other standards for congressional districts, such as population equality or geographic compactness. Many of the other federal parameters for congressional redistricting have resulted from judicial decisions. One area of redistricting addressed by federal standards is population equality across districts.

Legislative provisions, requiring that congressional districts "[contain] as nearly as practicable an equal number of inhabitants," were found in federal apportionment acts between and Supreme Court has also addressed population size variance among congressional districts within a state, or malapportionment.

Under what is known as the "equality standard" or "one person, one vote" principle, the Court has found congressional districts within a state should be drawn to approximately equal population sizes. These equal population standards apply only to districts within a state, not to districts across states.

To illustrate how district population sizes can vary across states, Table 3 provides Census Bureau estimates from to for the average district population size nationwide, as well as estimates for which states had the largest and smallest average district population sizes. Wide variations in state populations and the U. Constitution's requirement of at least one House seat per state make it difficult to ensure equal district sizes across states, particularly if the size of the House is fixed.

Census, in order to account for the sizable population shifts that can occur within a year span. Table 3. Summary of Average U. House District Population Sizes, State had a single House district during the noted apportionment year. To assist states in drawing districts that have equal population sizes, the Census Bureau provides population tabulations for certain geographic areas identified by state officials, if requested, under the Census Redistricting Data Program, created by P.

Under the program, the Census Bureau is required to provide total population counts for small geographic areas; in practice, the Bureau also typically provides additional demographic information, such as race, ethnicity, and voting age population, to states.

One key statutory requirement for congressional districts comes from Section 2 of the VRA, as amended, which prohibits states or their political subdivisions from imposing any voting qualification, practice, or procedure that results in denial or abridgement of the right to vote based on race, color, or membership in a language minority. In addition to requirements of population equality and compliance with the VRA, several other redistricting criteria are common across many states today, including compactness, contiguity, and observing political boundaries.

These factors are sometimes referred to as traditional districting principles and are often related to geography. The placement of district boundaries, for example, might reflect natural features of the state's land; how the population is distributed across a certain land area; and efforts to preserve existing subdivisions or communities such as town boundaries or neighborhood areas.

Redistricting laws in many states currently include such criteria, but they are not explicitly addressed in current federal statute. Previous federal apportionment statutes, however, sometimes contained similar provisions. Table 4. Additional information may be available from individual states. See the following text sections for an explanation of the criteria used as column headings in this table.

Notes: States excluded from this table do not specify any of these criteria for congressional redistricting. As a districting criterion, compactness reflects the idea that a congressional district should represent a geographically consolidated area. In some conceptualizations, a compact district would have an identifiable "center" that seems reasonably equidistant from any of its boundaries.

Federal apportionment acts between and contained a provision requiring that congressional districts be of "contiguous territory," 49 and most states have included similar language in their current redistricting laws. For a district to be contiguous, it generally must be possible to travel from any point in the district to any other place in the district without crossing into a different district. Most states require that redistricting practitioners take into account existing political boundaries, such as towns, cities, or counties.

In many instances, districts may not be able to be drawn in ways that encompass entire political subdivisions, given other districting standards, like population equality, that could take precedence. Maintaining political subdivisions can also help simplify election administration by ensuring that a local election jurisdiction is not split among multiple congressional districts. Some state laws direct redistricting authorities to preserve the "core" of existing congressional districts; other states prohibit drawing district boundaries that would create electoral contests between incumbent House Members.

Some states include the preservation of communities of interest as a criterion in their redistricting laws. People within a community of interest generally have a shared background or common interests that may be relevant to their legislative representation.

These recognized similarities may be due to shared social, cultural, historical, racial, ethnic, partisan, or economic factors. In some instances, communities of interest may naturally be preserved by following other redistricting criteria, such as compactness or preserving political subdivisions. Some states include measures providing that districts cannot be drawn to unduly favor a particular candidate or political party.

The term gerrymander originated to describe districts drawn to favor a particular political party, 53 and it is often used in this context today. Redistricting has traditionally been viewed as an inherently political process, where authorities have used partisan considerations in drawing district boundaries.

Districts generally may be drawn in a way that is politically advantageous to certain candidates or political parties, unless prohibited by state law. Redistricting processes are fundamentally the responsibility of state governments under current law and practice. Among the 43 states with multiple House districts, a variety of approaches are taken, but generally, states either allow their state legislatures or a separate redistricting commission to determine congressional district boundaries.

The map in Figure 3 displays the redistricting methods currently used across states. Figure 3. State Redistricting Methods. Notes: Iowa has nonpartisan legislative staff create its redistricting maps but requires legislative approval to enact them. Montana would use a redistricting commission if it receives an additional House seat. Historically, and in the majority of states today, congressional district boundaries are primarily determined by state legislatures.

Currently, 37 states authorize their state legislatures to establish congressional district boundaries. Most of these states enable the governor to veto a redistricting plan created by the legislature; Connecticut and North Carolina do not allow a gubernatorial veto. Other states, in recent years, have begun to use redistricting commissions, which may be more removed from state legislative politics. In five other states Maine, New York, Rhode Island, Utah, and Virginia , a commission serves in an advisory capacity during the redistricting process.

Commissions may also be used as a "backup" or alternate means of redistricting if the legislature's plan is not enacted, such as in Connecticut, Indiana, and Ohio. The composition of congressional redistricting commissions can also vary; many include members of the public selected by a method intended to be nonpartisan or bipartisan, whereas other commissions may include political appointees or elected officials, such as in Hawaii and New Jersey. A commission's membership, the authority granted to it, its relationship to other state government entities, and other features may affect whether a commission is perceived to be undertaking an objective process or a more politicized one.

Some proponents of redistricting commissions believe that using independent redistricting commissions can prevent opportunities for partisan gerrymandering and may create more competitive and representative districts.

The timeline for redistricting also varies across states, and can be affected by state or federal requirements regarding the redistricting process; the efficiency of the legislature, commission, or other entities involved in drawing a state's districts; and, potentially, by legal or political challenges made to a drafted or enacted redistricting plan.

Many states complete the process within the next year. After the reapportionment, for example, Iowa was the first state to complete its initial congressional redistricting plan on March 31, , and 31 other states completed their initial plans by the end of The remaining 11 states with multiple congressional districts completed their initial redistricting plans by the middle of , with Kansas becoming the final state to complete its initial plan on June 7, Although redistricting processes in practice today are largely governed by state law, Congress has, at times, considered an expanded federal government role, which could serve to standardize certain elements of the redistricting process across states.

Given the historically limited role the federal government has played in the redistricting process, concerns about federalism may arise in the context of certain congressional efforts addressing redistricting. The types of legislative proposals briefly introduced in this section reflect some common examples of redistricting bills introduced in recent Congresses; they are not meant to be an exhaustive list of all the options Congress has considered or could consider related to redistricting.

Some legislative proposals in recent Congresses would establish criteria for districts, such as population equality, compactness, contiguity, or preservation of existing political subdivisions. Most of these bills have been referred to committee but not passed by either chamber.

In the th Congress, H. Apportionment and redistricting address fundamental elements of representational democracy. Determining how many elected representatives should serve in the House, and how many people should be in each congressional district, are central questions for those who are concerned with how responsive the House can be to the interests of the American public.

During earlier eras in the United States, the number of seats in the House of Representatives generally increased as the American population increased, and district sizes could be kept more equal over time and across states. The House size, however, has been set at seats throughout the last century, while the national population has continued to grow and concentrate in certain geographic areas, leading to larger constituencies across all House districts over time and disparate district sizes across states.

Certain elements of the apportionment process are established by the U. This includes the requirement for representation in the House based on state population size; the reallocation of House seats every 10 years upon the completion of a national population count; and the requirements that each state receives at least one Representative and that there can be no more than one Representative for every 30, persons. Other elements of the process are addressed through congressional legislation, such as the overall number of House seats or method of distributing seats among the states.

Congress more regularly legislated in this area prior to the mid th century, passing decennial acts to address upcoming censuses and apportionments, rather than creating bills intended to apply for all future reapportionment cycles. Whereas apportionment is a process largely governed by federal statute, redistricting is a process, in practice, largely governed by state law.

Certain federal standards apply to House districts, generally in the interest of preserving equal access to representation, but the method and timeline by which those districts are created is largely determined by state law. In states with multiple congressional districts, there are a multitude of ways in which district boundaries can be drawn, depending upon the criteria used to create the districts.

There is often an expectation that congressional districts will be drawn in a way that ensures "fair" representation, but "fairness" can be a somewhat subjective determination. Many lawmakers and members of the public may agree on some of the more basic representational principles embedded in apportionment and redistricting law, but can find it difficult to apply those principles in practice.

The criteria commonly used for redistricting today reflect a combination of state and federal statutes, judicial interpretations, and practices from past redistricting cycles that may require trade-offs between one consideration and another.

Ensuring equal population size across all congressional districts, for example, may be an agreeable goal for many individuals. In practice, however, the geographic and demographic distribution of residents within and across states, coupled with requirements to observe state boundaries, provide all states with at least one Representative, and maintain a constant number of House seats, make this goal more difficult to achieve.

Although mapmaking software today can design districts with increasing precision with respect to geographic boundaries and population characteristics, this technological capacity has not necessarily simplified the overall task of redistricting.

A majority of states faced legal challenges to congressional district maps drawn following the census, and several cases remained pending in , reflecting differing perspectives on fairness, representational access, and how competing redistricting criteria should be weighted. Congress is a bicameral legislature, in which each state receives equal representation in the Senate and each state's representation in the House is based upon its population.

Essentially, any method of apportionment for the House must consider three key variables: 1 the number of House seats; 2 the number of U. A mathematical decision must also be made regarding how fractions of seats are addressed, since House seats must be allocated as whole numbers, and simple division methods are unlikely to produce this outcome for all or any states. Because the Constitution does not specify a particular method for apportionment, several options have been considered and utilized throughout history.

When determining apportionment, parameters could be set for the number of seats in the House, the population size of a district, or both. Based on the number of states and U. As a general principle, House size and district size are inversely related: a larger number of House seats means smaller population sizes for districts, and a smaller number of House seats means larger population sizes for districts.

Attempts by the Framers and various Congresses to address apportionment reveal a number of perspectives on how best to create a representative legislature, along with political and logistical considerations related to changes in the size of the House. An apportionment method prioritizing relatively equal district population size would establish a representation ratio, where there would be one Representative per x number of persons.

If the ratio remains the same across apportionment cycles, increases or decreases in the U. The representation ratio could also be adjusted to create larger or smaller districts, in order to limit the magnitude of changes to the overall size of the House. If states receive fractional allocations of House seats and there is no constraint on the size of the House, a simple rounding rule could be utilized to arrive at a whole number of seats for the House overall.

A general example of an apportionment approach prioritizing relatively equal district size follows:. Until the early 20 th century, the size of the House generally increased with each apportionment, due to the addition of new states and population growth, 72 but today, the number of House seats is set at by federal statute.

Yet concerns have also been raised that it would not be feasible to increase the House size apace with national population growth. To be sure that a particular apportionment conforms to a specified size of the House, each state must receive a whole number of seats, and the sum of all states' seats must equal the desired total House size.

Many apportionment approaches vary on how to address fractional seats, as remainders will often result when calculating state seat quotas. A general example of an apportionment approach to reach a certain House size follows:. The following discussions provide an introduction to several methods that have been used for congressional apportionment in the United States.

To illustrate how these methods work, for each method an imaginary example is provided in the accompanying table, in which the size of the House is fixed at 20 Members and the seats are divided among four states states A, B, C, and D with the populations specified in the tables.

President George Washington, however, exercised his first veto on the measure, in part, because the resulting apportionment calculations would have violated the requirement of at least 30, persons per district for multiple states. Each state receives the whole number of seats in its quota, q , of seats. The remainders from q are rank-ordered from largest to smallest, and any additional House seats are apportioned to the states with the largest remainders. Table A Source: Adapted from U.

Following the presidential veto of the Hamilton method, Congress adopted the Jefferson method of apportionment, which was used from to The Jefferson method for apportionment is based on a fixed House size, H , and each state's quota of seats, q , is rounded down to the nearest whole number. Often, the sum of the rounded-down q values is less than H. Redistricting, state legislature draws new district boundries This article chronicles the redistricting cycle in Florida.

The Commission will review the distribution of the population and re-draw the political districts to ensure that citizens are equally represented. The process of reapportionment is conducted every 10 years after the national census. Redistricting is the process of drawing new congressional and state legislative district boundaries.

Redistricting alone could give Republicans control of the House in , experts say More About Gerrymandering. According to the Minnesota Secretary of State's website, redistricting is the process of redrawing the boundaries of election districts to ensure that the people of each district are equally represented. New York gained population between decades, but at a very low rate. These political scientists examine the specific challenges facing western states in ensuring fair and balanced political representation.

Saltar al contenido. Under the Constitution of , senators were elected by the state legislature. The Idaho Commission on Redistricting strives to ensure that all information made available to the public through this web site is accurate, complete and in conformance with the Idaho Public Records Act.

That kind of small gain could come from reapportionment and redistricting alone. Drawing new lines for congressional districts in that latter context also fed opposition to reapportionment.

Democrats currently occupy five … The Commission for Reapportionment is commonly referred to as the Redistricting Commission. The next reapportionment will be conducted in Gerrymandering is voter suppression. Upon completion of the census, Florida will draft and enact new district maps. Why are they important? The general assembly has adopted a nonpartisan redistricting law to perform this task. Published by Joshua Simons on May 20, May 20, Census, Reapportionment, and Redistricting.

The Dutchess County Independent Reapportionment Commission is responsible for drawing legislative districts following every decennial census. Chapter 60, Laws of provided for the redistricting and reapportionment of the state for legislative purposes. Our commission is good. A count of the population. Redistricting is the process by which new congressional and state legislative district boundaries are drawn.

Together we can stop it! Reapportionment, Redistricting, and Gerrymandering Typically, we think that the voters are the ones that choose our elected officials. A web-based version, Maptitude Online Redistricting, is suitable for individual citizens and legislators who wish to propose boundaries for their district or even an entire plan. To learn more about Maptitude for Redistricting, please see the Features page.

The Ohio Redistricting Commission consists of the governor, auditor, secretary of state, and four individuals appointed by the state legislative party leaders. Connect With Us. These changes are recorded by the U. Census, which is conducted every 10 years. Washington State has been a leader in redistricting reform for 90 years. All About Redistricting: all the information about the law and process of redistricting Congress and state legislatures, tracking the history and progress of the maps, reform proposals, and redistricting-related litigation around the country.

Reapportionment is the process of allocating seats in Congress. This count is one of the foundations of democracy in the United States. The purpose of redistricting is to establish and maintain voting districts that are faithful to the principle of one-person, one-vote.

Provision was made for the election of ninety-four representatives from fifty-six districts. Reapportionment is conducted every ten 10 years following the census. Redistricting must occur every ten years. What is redistricting? Explain the processes of redistricting and reapportionment. The official reapportionment data, which counts state-level population and decides how the House seats are divided among the states, would typically already be published.

Q: Is redistricting different from reapportionment? The Alliance is all about getting the representation we need and deserve in order to make real changes in our communities. Redistricting sets representation for the next 10 years by defining your State and Federal voting districts. Reapportionment and Redistricting Favor Republicans. The 81st Session of the Nevada Legislature convened February 1, Thereafter, reapportionment became much more of a zero-sum game in which states with growing populations gained seats and those with stable or shrinking populations lost seats.

Redistricting and reapportionment of membership would make it easier for committee staff to conduct producer nominations and ensure the appointment of a full Committee. An election. The redistricting process in the United States can be distinguished from redistricting elsewhere in the world in at least two very fundamental ways: the extent to which the process is overtly and acceptably political — legislators still have the responsibility for drawing electoral districts in most states — and the degree to which the American courts have intervened in the process.

This census-driven shuffling of seven seats is the smallest reapportionment in a century. Redistricting is the process of redrawing voting district lines to reflect population changes. State: The House and Senate have begun redistricting hearings. Why is the Town Integrity Principle such an important benchmark for redistricting?

Also based on the Census, representation at the federal and state level is reevaluated and reapportioned. This is the only book to date to analyze the impact of congressional redistricting and reapportionment from the early s to the s.

Redistricting is done using U. Census data, which is released around March 31, To answer that, it is important to recognize the original distinction between the two terms. What is gerrymandering? Redistricting as originally envisioned was designed to keep elections fair and balanced as the population of the country evolved in demography.

From to , Congress used a method proposed by Thomas Jefferson, sometimes called the 'method of greatest divisors,' which divided the total population by the number of seats and assigned each State its quota, disregarding any fractional remainder. Redistricting After the number of seats in each state has been reapportioned, the process of redistricting begins and each state will then determine what the boundaries of congressional districts are.

Last day of early voting in May 1st Uniform Election. Done after the release of the state population totals based on the latest decennial census.

Redistricting and reapportionment are a potential threat to House incumbents. The reapportionment data which will confirm which states are gaining or losing congressional seats based on population is supposed to be delivered by the end of April. The effects were limited, however, because the federal courts were reluctant to become involved.

Redistricting is the process of drawing electoral district boundaries in all states. Why is redistricting important? In , the Court expanded the opportunities for racial minorities to mount successful challenges to reapportionment plans when it decided, in Thornburg v.

Gingles, that the effects of redistricting could be used to prove racial discrimination. What are the Census, Reapportionment, and Redistricting? In Shaw v. Reno and Miller v.

Reapportionment and redistricting mean essentially the same thing. Found insidePublisher Description Found insideThis book considers the political and constitutional consequences of Vieth v. However, even well-known or popular representatives might fear for their jobs, not because of elections, but owing to population changes.

Reapportionment and Redistricting. In the meantime, we have other newsletters that you might enjoy. Find more at www. Census Block-level projections, which are more granular, can be used to measure the impact of a proposed redistricting plan over a ten-year period. Reapportionment vs. Recognizing that reapportionment always involves political motives, the courts have been reluctant to decide the legality of redistricting that favors one political party at the expense of another.