There is still time, though not much, for state lawmakers of both parties to get in a room and draw a compromise redistricting map before the legislative session ends next week.
If lawmakers leave town without a map showing the new boundaries of Colorado congressional districts, it will be a failure that will reflect on all of them.
They can do it and they should.
On Wednesday, Democrats released their version of a “compromise map” that is closer to the Republican maps than anything they’ve drawn previously. The latest Republican proposal, which also has been billed as a compromise, is set to be heard in committee today.
What state lawmakers need to do, and quickly, is change the process. Instead of demanding that one party largely “accept” the map of the other, they need to get in a room with all of their experts and data and hash out a revised map together.
Lock ’em in with take-out food and a deadline and let them go at it.
The alternative is to remain deadlocked, each side petulantly declaring their map, created behind closed doors, to be “fair.”
The process is political and partisan, by design, and these are political animals, who are desperately trying to tilt the process in their favor. We get that. But we don’t see how punting the process to an expensive special session or a courtroom is preferable.
State lawmakers need to look carefully at their latest proposals and find the common ground. It exists. The 7th Congressional District, for instance, looks largely the same in both proposals. The 6th isn’t tremendously different. Ditto for the 1st.
Then they need to drill down through historic voter performance data in conjunction with census numbers, while preserving important communities of interest, to come up with a map both sides can live with.
It certainly will look different than what each side is proposing now.
Based on our examination of the Republican proposal, we think it needs to be adjusted so it’s more balanced in a couple of districts, including the 3rd. The Democratic map shows the 4th and 5th districts as substantially different than what the Republicans have envisioned. There is room to negotiate there.
While political advantage is what each side is looking for, there are other, more important concerns. They must follow statutes and case law. And we think the public will be best served by having as many competitive districts as possible so those who want to serve Colorado must work to prove their value to voters.
There are many roads to a compromise map, but ultimately it ought to be one that does not give either party a long-term dominant position in the state.
Colorado is a purple state and its congressional district map ought to reflect that.
