How about a separate senate district for every separate community in the state? Throw out population considerations, not caring if one district has but 1,000 residents while another has 100,000.
I attended the redistricting meeting tonight. Each 10 years, the legislature redraws the lines for itself, the school board, and the U.S. House. The idea of allotting senate seats based on separate communities came to me while at the meeting.
I had other thoughts, and shared some. I told the legislators it is inherently wrong for them to be drawing the boundaries for their own districts. Why would we think they will not be tempted to draw their lines to their own advantage? And, if we can see they might be tempted, why don't we change the system?
Still, I do have faith in the legislature, that they are good people, and that they will attempt to be even-handed, not drawing to the benefit their own political parties, nor to their own self interest, not concerning themselves with boundaries that will be friendly to them come the next election. Oh, I waver in my support of them, because I know of the temptation, but, yes, I do believe they want to be fair.
"To the victor goes the spoils," it is said, and hopefully they will spurn that line and instead operate by, "To the people goes the spoils."
We now have 29 senate districts. How many would we have if we awarded one to each separate community? One each for Beaver, Milford, Nephi, Tremonton . . . hmm . . . Hildale (on the Utah side of the border from Colorado City, Arizona), and so forth. Midvale would have one, and Rose Park. The Indian reservations would each have their own senators. Can you imagine the Goshutes with a senator of their own?
Here's why I feel this system would be just: We have the principle of one person, one vote, and that principle is given bloom in the House, but what of the principle that every vote should count? When entire communities are not given equal representation, the smaller are often overshadowed by the larger ones. How much does the vote of the Goshutes count if they are part of a district that includes Tooele? Their view may run counter to the views of those in Tooele every time, but every time the voice of those in Tooele will prevail.
On a larger scale, we might struggle to give Price voters a vote that will count as we set up our Congressional Districts. But, surrounded by communities with different political leanings, the vote of a person living in Price likely will be swept away.
The U.S. Constitution provides for representation by states, two senators going to each regardless the population. Perhaps we have homogenized since then, and many states do not have a character of their own. As much as any state, Utah does, and we should appreciate this concept of representation by societal grouping.
So, give the Goshutes a voice, and give those in Colorado City a voice.
More thoughts after attending the meeting: Although what I got of it was but a quick glance, I liked the districts for the Utah House proposed by Rep. Cox. He tried to divide the seats according to municipal boundaries. Now, if you are to choose just one overriding factor in dividing the seats, choosing from ethnic boundaries, income-level lines and whatever, municipal boundaries might be as fair as any. I hope the legislators will give thought to Cox's proposal.
As for the U.S. House? I like dividing the urban areas from the rural, giving the rural areas their own representation as much as possible. I like dividing the more rural districts based on industry, or character of land use. Maybe try to put the national parks in the same district. Maybe try to put the mining and oil and gas areas in the same district.
When I came home, I happened on a website suggesting Rep. Sumsion wants to create a Congressional district for big oil. Just off the top, without having studied the accusation, that does not seem a fair attack. It is the people in those areas that are going to be represented. If they side with big oil, then it is a big oil district. But, if you throw these communities in with an urban area, then the urban area's views on how the oil land should be developed are going to have more sway than the views of the people living there. The urbanites are going to dictate the lifestyle of the rural folks. Is that just?
No comments:
Post a Comment