Fairness At Heart Of Redistricting Bill
During a Senate Committee on Transportations and Elections informational hearing October 26, 2011, Government Accountability Board Director and General Counsel Kevin Kennedy answered questions from legislators about redistricting.
The Government Accountability Board (GAB) is Wisconsin’s non-partisan election gatekeeper. The GAB administers elections and certifies winners of elections. GAB rulings carry the rule of law.
State Senator John Erpenbach asked Director Kennedy a simple question: Do I represent the district drawn from the 2000 census, or the district approved this year based on the 2010 census?
“You represent the new district,” said Director Kennedy.
Simple question, simple answer. Legislators currently represent districts specified in 2011 Act 43, this summer’s redistricting legislation. Except … Director Kennedy went on to explain, while the new maps are official and legislators represent the new districts, recall elections would be conducted off the old maps. Interestingly, legislators serve one set of constituents but would be recalled and elections determined by another set, including people not living in the district, while others living within the district are prohibited from voting in the election for their Senator. Some think the legislature should sit back and let the situation fester. Ducking a tough decision and running away is not an option. The legislature needs to take immediate action to rectify the situation.
Why is this an issue now and not during previous redistricting? During past redistricting, recall elections were not an issue.
Since the GAB opined that legislators represent the new districts now it is only fair that the voters in these districts have control over their legislators’ recalls. Otherwise, recall petitions and recall elections would be conducted in old unconstitutional districts created after the 2000 census for state senators in odd numbered Senate districts, rather than elections in the constitutional districts, created because of the 2010 census, that Senators currently represent and will represent during the legislative session commencing January 2013. If the recall petitions and recall elections were in the old unconstitutional districts, people would be recalling a senator that does not represent them and electing a senator that is not and will not be their state senator. People living in the new constitutional districts will be denied the vote for their senator, relinquishing their vote to persons outside the district.
Take Senate District 28 for example. Under the new maps effective August 26, 2011, the residents of a large portion of New Berlin, formerly represented by me, are represented by Senator Leah Vukmir. If a recall took place in Senate District 5 currently represented by Senator Vukmir, the people of New Berlin living in Senate District 5 would be denied the opportunity to recall Senator Vukmir and would be denied voting rights to vote for their senator, while people in an area that is not in Senate District 5 represented by Senator Vukmir would vote to determine the senator for Senate District 5. Since I represent Senate District 28, an even numbered district, voters in the new senate district 28 boundaries are treated fairly, because the Senate District 28 election is November 2012.
Hypothetical situations illustrate the confusion of the predicament. A recall election scheduled on the same day as the spring election could result in voters having to vote in two separate places on the same day. Under other circumstances, legislators might run in old and new districts concurrently, a recall campaign in the former district, and the regularly scheduled election in the new district. If, for example, there is a recall election between now and April 15, 2012 in an even number Senate district, the recall election would take place in the old district. April 15 is the date nomination paper and signature-gathering process begins for the November 12 election. If a recall is filed during January or February 2012, it is likely the election could be after April 15, and a senator or representative could run simultaneously in two elections for the same position.
Director Kennedy raised another hypothetical. The possibility exists that a group could attempt to recall a legislator and collect signatures from within the boundaries of the old map, then have court challenges that push the recall election date to after November 6, 2012, the date the new maps take effect for elections. Then what? The state’s top election official did not have an answer. Director Kennedy said courts would likely have to determine a course of action.
The State Senate should rectify the situation and ensure all Wisconsin voters are treated fairly. The intersection of redistricting and possible recall elections has thrust Wisconsin voters, election officials, and legislators into territory of uncertainty and confusion. Clarifying the effective date of the new maps for recall purposes will chart a course through the twists and turns of the coming year.