A Senate redistricting plan passed a house committee today, despite complaints from democrats and some republicans. Governor Shaheen has pledged to veto the measure should it reach her desk, but veto or not some say redistricting will ultimately end up in the courts.
According to senate Republicans, the plan they adopted last month in a party line vote, was a noble effort that balanced the constitutional principle of one person one vote, with the realities of New Hampshire?s changing population. Senate President Arthur Klemm assured the house election law committee that partisanship played no role in the plan?s drafting..
"As lawmakers we cannot allow the drawing of districts to come down to party politics. We also cannot protect our colleagues. As a matter of fact there?s a good chance some of our colleagues may not like what we proposed."
Klemm?s words proved a large understatement. One after another, Democratic senators railed against the proposal, which they say was crafted to ensure the GOP?s present 13-11 majority, swells to at least 16-8 after the fall elections. New Castle democrat Burt Cohen says the plan puts politics before principle.
"What you have here is gerrymandering at its worst. This plan doesn't maintain one person one vote. And that?s not right."
As evidence, democrats pointed to the plan? average population deviation of 9.4, which, while within the allowable legal limit of 10 percent, exceeds those in the plan they championed. Democrats also stressed the plan?s severing of linked communities like Rochester and Somersworth, which have been in the same senate district since 1792. To highlight how splitting up associated towns would affect the lives of his constituent, Senator Cohen pointed to Rye and Newcastle, which under the new plan would no longer be share senate representation with Portsmouth.
"Rye, New Castle children go to high school in Portsmouth?.high school ?Or water to a large extent comes from Portsmouth. What?s happening here is that certain interests are trying to do legislatively what they could not do politically?."
Alton Republican Robert Boyce, dismissed that argument as posturing?..And Boyce urged the house election law committee to remember that redistricting was about more than isolated particulars
"As you review the senate plan judge it as a whole and not as the sum of its parts?..it is easy to suggest that some town should or should not be in any one particular district. But it?s meaningless to look at one or two districts and ignore the rest. We had to draw 24 districts."
But not all republican?s were inclined to buy Boyce?s argument??House lawmaker, and state senate hopeful Marshall Quandt says the redistricting was carried out with little regard for principle??According to the Exeter conservative, the plan was less a product of the senate than it was the state republican committee.
"You can make an argument that a high ranking republican official lost two senatorial campaigns in the seacoast, and now he?s wiping it out. The state republican party has its fingers in this up to its elbows?..I don?t think the senate wrote the plan."
Quandt?s concerns weren?t shared by House speaker pro-tem Robert Clegg?who sharply challenged the testimony of many who rebuked the plan??And unlike Quant, who pledges to fight the plan when it reaches the house floor, Clegg says the best policy is to stick to the tradition of allowing the senate to sort out its own affairs.
"For us to try to decide what the senate should do is next to impossible. This bill was the amendment that got accepted on the floor of the senate, so I?m willing to let it go through. It?s their house it?s their body, not ours."
With the governor veto a certainty, redistricting rancor is not likely to end anytime soon?..And even if passed into law the measure could still face a court challenge?.which those on both sides of the aisle says is likely.
