Under the Radar: Executive Council Redistricting Plan

With little fanfare, the House Special Committee on Redistricting approved a redistricting plan for the five Executive Council districts this week.

The most dramatic change in the new map is in District Two, currently held by Councilor Dan St. Hilaire. Here’s Rep. Lucy Weber’s description:

District Two now resembles a dragon that has swallowed a medium sized mammal.  This most tortuous of districts starts at the Connecticut River with Charlestown and Walpole, curves south to include Keene east to Marlborough to Dublin, then curves north only to bulge out again around the Concord area, from whence it zigzags east in a line a single town wide until it reaches the seacoast and curves south again to end at Portsmouth. 

The newly drawn district should be a safe Democratic seat with the addition of Democratic strongholds Keene (D+19), Durham (D+21), Dover (D+11) and Portsmouth (D+18). The district would become six points more Democratic than it is today.

The primary Republican beneficiary of this gerrymandering is Councilor Chris Sununu. His District Three loses Durham, Dover and Portsmouth and gains Hudson (R+4), Pelham (R+8) and Raymond (R+5). The proposed district would be five points more Republican than it is currently.

Read More

Quote of the Day: Let Despotism Rule

The tragedy is that Republicans won so many seats in 2010 that O’Brien and company have come to believe that they can do absolutely anything they choose. To hell with the spirit of compromise. To hell with the Constitution. Let despotism rule. That’s the modus operandi for Speaker O’Brien…

— GOP state Rep. Steve Vaillancourt

GOP Rep Accuses Speaker O’Brien of Ethics Violations

In an open letter to the chairman of the House Ethics Committee, GOP state Rep. Steve Vaillancourt asks if Speaker Bill O’Brien “and his minions” violated two provisions of the New Hampshire General Court Ethics Guidelines involving coercion and lack of openness.

The first provision Vaillancourt cites is the Principle On Independent Objective Judgment which states, “Legislators should employ independent objective judgment in performing their duties, deciding all matters on merits free from conflicts of interest and both real and apparent improper influences.”

To me, this means that all legislators must put the interests of the Constitution and the people who elected us ahead of party interests. To me, this means that bullying, coercion, or intimidation by party leaders to change votes would constitute a conflict of interest. [emphasis added]

Vaillancourt details several instances of O’Brien’s coercion and intimidation, the most recent which occurred during the debate over the House redistricting plan.

In an absolute stunning development, an amendment … passed by a margin of 170-153. This was not what the Speaker and Republican leadership wanted, so the Speaker immediately called a recess for a caucus. While I don’t feel at liberty to detail what went on in the caucus, in my opinion there was blatant intimidation, coercion, arm twisting, whatever word or phrase you might choose to use. …

I ask for your clarification as to how much coercion is allowed before it would be in violation of the ethics provision I noted here. Clearly, as we learn in testimony from the Emerson bill, intimidation has been at record level this year. It seems to me that the Speaker and his minions and those who have failed to employ independent objective judgment are guilty of ethics violations many times over, but then I’m not a lawyer.

The second ethics provision Vaillancourt cites is the Principle of Accountability which reads, “Legislators should assure that government is conducted openly, equitably and honorably in a manner that permits the citizenry to make informed judgments and hold government officials accountable.”

Others have charged, and I am beginning to agree, that most of the House redistricting process was not “conducted openly”. … An investigation, sadly, would likely show that much of the redistricting work was done behind closed doors by non-elected officials. … Clearly, others were secretly involved. Clearly, these others ignored what little public input there was. The question is how much secrecy is allowed before violation of Section III occurs. Certainly, words have meaning, and if meaning is to be followed, can such secrecy be acceptable?

A Partisan Analysis of the Senate Redistricting Plan

Thursday, the Senate Internal Affairs Committee released its redistricting plan for the 24 state Senate districts. To help understand the electoral implications of the plan, I’ve compared the Partisan Voting Index (PVI) for the proposed districts to that of the the current districts. (See the New Hampshire Partisan Voting Index (PVI) for a discussion of the Cook PVI and methodology.)

Observers from Rep. Steve Vaillancourt to Paul Twomey have said this plan could have been a lot worse for Democrats. Nevertheless, the proposal clearly improves Republican electoral chances by concentrating Democratic votes in current Democratic strongholds. Four of the five districts with seats held by Democrats today will become even more Democratic under this plan. The fifth Democratic seat, held by Sen. Lou D’Allesandro, is unchanged — despite rumors that it would be targeted for a Republican takeover.

Meanwhile, nine of the 16 Republican incumbents seeking reelection will benefit from a more Republican-leaning electorate; five will run for reelection in districts with exactly the same make-up as before. The big winners are Sen. Fenton Groen, whose district will be four points more Republican, Sens. Russell Prescott and Bob Odell (five points more Republican) and Sen. Nancy Stiles (seven points more Republican).

The proposed plan will have a public hearing Wednesday at 1:00 PM in LOB 205/207. The Senate will likely vote to adopt the plan on January 25. A district-by-district analysis follows below the fold.

Read More

House “Breathtaking Disrespect” for N.H. Constitution

The New Hampshire House is moving forward with a plan to bypass the Governor and send its redistricting plan directly to the Secretary of State for implementation. Rep. Paul Mirski, chair of the House Special Committee on Redistricting, says lawmakers will accomplish this by submitting the plan in a House Concurrent Order rather than a House Bill.

Rep. Steve Winter, sponsor of the HCO, points to Article 9 of the New Hampshire Constitution.

“It says nothing about the Governor at all,” he said. “It is the duty of the Legislature. We have been doing it through a bill, making a law that these are the districts, but looking through the Constitution we cannot see where the Governor is supposed to play a role in that.”

Republican Rep. Steve Vaillancourt says the approach will “most certainly” result in a lawsuit.

“[I]t is both unconstitutional and unwise, is a slap at the separation of powers provision. It would set a dangerous precedent which could come back to bite the same Republican Parfty which is pushing it today.”

Democratic Rep. David Pierce gets the last word, calling it a “breathtaking disrespect for the constitution.”

Pierce argues those in favor of using an HCO are picking parts of the Constitution that work for them and ignoring the document as a whole, and added something as “vitally important” as redistricting should be subject to the same checks and balances as other legislation.

Sorg’s Laughable Argument Against “One Man, One Vote”

In a letter to the House Special Committee on Redistricting, state Rep. Gregory Sorg argues that the Supreme Court’s “one man, one vote” standard is “fundamentally wrong” and criticizes Chief Justice Earl Warren for his lack of experience with, and hostility to, the political process.

Chief Justice Warren was fundamentally wrong — as judges almost always are when they opine on the political process, with which they typically have little if any experience and to which they are institutionally and temperamentally hostile.

For the record, Justice Warren’s “little if any” political experience included serving as district attorney for Alameda County, Attorney General of California, three terms as Governor of California, and the 1948 Republican vice-presidential nomination. Rep. Sorg has considerably less.

And here’s how the man who criticized Warren for hostility to the political process describes the federal government:

The least representative branch (the federal judiciary) of the least representative legislature (the U.S. Congress), whose members’ political appointments are confirmed by the least representative legislative chamber (the U.S. Senate), in connivance with Senate-confirmed politically-appointed and career attorneys of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Partisan Makeup of the House Redistricting Plan

Wednesday, the House Special Committee on Redistricting released the House leadership’s redistricting plan. The plan, which creates new voting districts for the state’s 400 House members, reflects population shifts measured by the 2010 census.

This plan varies dramaticially from the current plan due, in large part, to a 2006 constitutional amendment that requires every town and city wards with the minimum population to get its own representative. This proposed plan expands the number of districts from the current 103 to 200.

To help understand the electoral implications, I have updated my original analysis of the partisan makeup of House districts based on this plan. (See the New Hampshire Partisan Voting Index (PVI) for a discussion of the Cook PVI and methodology.) This chart provides the Partisan Voting Index (PVI) for each new district.

Using methodology similar to that I used to project the 2010 state House elections (Part 1, Part 2), I projected electoral results using the current House districts and compared them to projected results using the districts in the proposed plan. The projections indicate only a 1-2 seat gain for Republicans in state-wide results in the new plan, well within the model’s margin of error. For example, the model indicates a 202-198 Democratic majority under the current plan would become a 200-200 tie under the proposed plan.

In the next few days, I’ll take a closer county-by-county look at the new plan and the electoral projections.

Concord’s Redistricting Train Wreck

Tony Schinella provides a fascinating account of an approaching train wreck involving Concord’s redistricting plan.

Two candidates vying for Concord city council ward seats –- Jennifer Kretovic and Kris MacNeil -– are living in areas of the city that will be moved from one ward to another, in the wake of voter approval of the redistricting plan. Kretovic lives in Ward 2 but the plan moves her into Ward 3; MacNeil lives in Ward 3 but the plan moves her into Ward 4.

If approved, the redistricting plan will be implemented on Jan. 1, 2012. New city councilors and the mayor will be sworn in on Jan. 9, 2012. But if the voters approve the redistricting and both candidates win, they will not be seated, according to City Solicitor Jim Kennedy, because they will no longer be residents of the wards they were elected to serve.

City officials admit they have “no idea what to do” to address the issue.

Kretovic stated that at first, it was suggested to her that she run in Ward 3. Later, she was told she could only run in Ward 2, because that is where she lives now. Then, she was told “the unthinkable — that I shouldn’t bother running at all because I would never be able to serve in either Ward.”

Right-to-Work Bribes and Threats (Cont.)

When Rep. Steve Vaillancourt, who sits on the House Special Committee on Redistricting, suggested that GOP Rep. Susan Emerson’s vote on so-called Right-to-Work legislation could impact the make-up of her house district, I read it as a threat.

Susan Emerson—After having received so much negativity publicity (at least for Republican primary voters) opposing the Speaker in the media, might she be willing to come back to the fold? Maybe if she wants to get re-elected in 2012, she better start thinking of coming back. Hey, who knows what her district will even look like next year. Just the facts, M’aam, just the facts.

I was wrong. Apparently, it was a bribe.

[Emerson] told the Portsmouth Herald she has received various inducements from Republican House leaders — including a “plum” legislative district when redistricting takes place and reinstatement to her former committee seat — to change her opposition to House Bill 474.

Regardless, Emerson remains committed to voting against Right-to-Work. “I told them (House leadership) that everyone would know I sold out to them if I changed my vote.”

NH Legislature Proposes Redistricting End Run

In yet another attempt at an end run around the New Hampshire Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine, the legislature is exploring a plan to pass a redistricting plan without sending the bill to the Governor.

[House Speaker Bill] O’Brien is also seriously exploring cutting Lynch’s office out of being able to judge the redistricting plans of the Republican-led state House of Representatives and Senate.

Constitutional lawyers are examining the proposal of Rep. Paul Mirski, R-Enfield, that redistricting of the Legislature can occur with a concurrent order, which, unlike a bill, does not require a governor’s signature.

“The question of whether this is constitutional, I tend to think that it is and we’ve shared the concern with the secretary of state who seems to believe it is entirely appropriate,” O’Brien said.

And in yet another example of claiming that black is white — in contradiction of the plain facts — Mirski offered his rationale for the approach that is certain to involve the state in a protracted court battle over the act’s constitutionality.

Mirski said the main goal is to avoid the constitutional crisis that greeted lawmakers a decade ago. That’s when the GOP-led Legislature and then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat, could not agree on House or state Senate maps.

NH Census Data: By the Numbers

Yesterday, the U.S. Census Bureau released the official 2010 population count for New Hampshire. The Granite State, with 6.9% population growth, was the fastest growing state in New England over the last decade. However, the state’s growth slowed significantly from 2000 and trailed the 9.7% growth measured for rest of the country.

      New Hampshire 2010 Population (including Military Overseas): 1,321,445
      New Hampshire 2010 Population (excluding Military Overseas): 1,316,470

      Ideal New Hampshire Congressional district size (two seats): 658,235
      Ideal New Hampshire Senate district size (24 seats): 54,853
      Ideal New Hampshire House district size (400 seats): 3,291

In February and March, the Census Bureau will release demographic data to the states and New Hampshire lawmakers will begin the redistricting process. They will have until the June 2012 filing period opens to create the new voting districts for Congress, Executive Council, State Senate, and State House.

Based on the county population estimates from the 2009 American Community Survey Data, Grant Bosse projects Coos county will lose two House seats and Cheshire county will lose one, while Belknap, Merrimack, and Rockingham counties will each gain a seat. He also projects Manchester and Nashua will each lose two House seats.

We’ll see.