Mr. Waddoups: With respect to your statement about the public wanting the
elected (and trusted?) representatives to draw the boundaries I only have this
to say: HB477.
I love comments like the previous poster that say " I don't have time"
and 'who care's everybody's doing it, ie, gerrymandering".Hope
you're not using this same language in parenting or your job. Poor excuses for
allowing bad things to continue happening and poor role modeling for young
people. Redistricting may not be high up your list of important
things, and that's great that you trust your rep. But there are minority groups
in our state whom do not necessarily feel represented by their rep or the
majority party and this is an important issue for them.Hope you
never find yourself in a position of lobbying for something that really matters
to you and having others say "Who cares, we've always done it this
way" or "Everybody cheats a little, just look the other way".
"What the public really wants, Waddoups said, is for the boundaries to be
determined by the lawmakers they elected and trust."I agree
with Waddoups ... I don't have time or energy to worry about this. And I do know
and trust my rep. If some gerrymandering happens- that's life in
politics. All of the other states do it ... and if the Democrats in Utah were in
power, they'd do the same thing!
Waddoups is incorrect in stating that the public comments at the field meetings
across the state were "repetitive", like a "broken record"
made by the same people over and over again.An analysis of the minutes from the
public meetings (available on www.le.Utah.gov) does NOT support his claim. The
comments were the many DIFFERENT individuals that made comments SUPPORTING the
donut hole type of map that keep SLC and SL County from being split 4 ways.There are four community groups that have been active in lobbying for a
fair and transparent redistricting process this summer:Represent Me Utah,
Alliance for a Better Utah, Utah Citizens Coalition, and the League of Women
Voters. Representatives from these groups attended the majority of the public
meeting to voice their opinions, respond to legislators comments and various map
proposals, and keep the message alive that Utah voters wanted a fair,
transparent, and non partisan redistricting process in 2011, unlike the 2001
process which was labeled by national media as a very bad example of
Sorry, Waddoups, I don't trust you and I don't trust the legislature. I saw the
gerrymandering done in 2000, and expect the same this time around. I've seen
how the legislature acted with HB477, and what they're talkign about doing with
school vouchers (even after the people of the state said NO by a very convincing
margin). We need to have the redistricting done by an independent bipartisan
committee (and I mean equal numbers from both parties). The redistricting in
2000 was abominable; I see no reason to expect anything different this time
thanks to Waddopus and the people from the legislature who will be creating
"What the public really wants, Waddoups said, is for the boundaries to be
determined by the lawmakers they elected and trust."I didn't
elect you and I don't trust any of you (elected legislature) to make the best
decision for us (the people)...only for you.
Didn't know they had republican and democratic districts. I hope I live in the
correct one? Does that mean if I am from the "other" party than my
Rep or Sen that I am not represented? Is there any wonder why Utah's is among
the lowest in the nation in voter turnout?
Hearings, hearings, herrings. Yes, I know it says herrings. Red herrings.If you have ever attended a hearing held by our current
"leaders" you know that if you speak against their plan or idea you
are held to the exact time limit and stand a good chance of being cut off for
being "off topic".All these hearings for redistricting and
on GRAMA were nothing more than a Red Herring to say look, we had hearings and
no one came. After you attend a few of these herrings you know it's a total
waste of time.If you are a proponent, of course you think it's an
amazing experience and you'll love every moment of being stroked and lead like a
lamb to the slaughter.
The public has been heard, and now decision must be made. No matter what the
districts finally are, they will be criticized as being from behind closed
doors, unfair and favoring the majority party. Of course, that rehtoric will be
led by the elites, pick-up by the minority party, because in the former's case
they want more power and in the latter's case they want to keep their minority
ideals and still get someone elected.
"But despite the unprecedented level of public involvement and so many
plans already to choose from there's still concern among some that Utah will
end up with a redistricting plan largely shaped behind closed doors to benefit
the politicians in power." To me, this incites controversy.
Basically sells papers. What a shame. This committee has done closer to 20
public meetings; begged people to come out and the numbers have been mostly
dismal if not embarrassing especially given the huge outcry over GRAMA - which
was also trumped up by an angry media force. So, my question is why
don't we start paying a little more attention to what the committee did right?
Why don't we pay a little more attention to what the Legislature does well? It
seems anger sells but are we not better than that? We have our right to find
fault and to correct it. Actually, an obligation to do so, but what about our
obligation to find what is right and good? This committee gave up a
good portion of their summer to travel the state to meet with citizens who
didn't show up. They are the experts at this point. Are you?
The Utah Republican lawmakers are "wolves in sheep's clothing" when it
comes to redistricting.Example: "A decade ago, Utah attracted
national criticism for what was seen as an attempt to ensure a Democrat couldnt
win the 2nd District by stretching it from Salt Lake through some of the most
conservative areas of the state." This time around they will do the same
thing. "Over the last few decades, however, what has changed
are the rules organizing American politics. They now encourage small interest
groups - including ideologically charged ones - to capture major political
parties as well as Congress itself. Call it ' political narrowcasting".
(Fareed Zakaria, CNN)Example: "Redistricting has created safe
seats so that for most House members, their only concern is a challenge from the
right for Republicans and the left for Democrats. The incentive is to pander to
the base, not the center." (Fareed Zakaria, CNN)The incentive
is reelection instead of doing what's best for the state and the country.
Our Republican leaders know exactly where the boundaries will be. No matter how
many hearings, no matter what you say they will put the boundaries where they
can save or gain seats. Anyone that thinks otherwise is either uninformed or a
part of the problem.No, the public will not be listened to. They may
be heard but that ends there.
The basic requirement is "one man one vote" so as long as all of
Utah's legal residents are assigned in equal numbers to four different
districts, the rest is all partisan nonsense.No one will be happy
with whatever is adopted. Liberals would complain regardless. Some Republicans
will complain if the areas inhabited mainly by Democrats are concentrated in one
district, and others will complain if they are divided among all four
districts.In some states with decreasing numbers of seats in
Congress, partisan goals may result in some of the smaller party's seats being
redesigned out of existence, but Utah is gaining a seat, so no real mischief
opportunities exist.I trust the Legislators to try to do a fair and
reasonable job designing the districts.Once the districts are drawn,
then candidates can try to sell their ideas. And, if they lose, the fault will
lie with the ideas they are selling, not the district they find themselves in.
Redistricting, will the public be heard?No.