Census-based redistricting provides new opportunities for AORN's Legislative Grassroots Network - Health Policy Issues - includes contact information for secretaries of state - Directory

Do you have complete plumbing facilities in your residence, including hot and cold running water, a flush toilet, and a bathtub or shower? What about complete kitchen facilities? Questions 39 and 40 on the long version of the 2000 census form asked for information on these home features. Question 17 asked respondents to assess recent effects of any physical, mental, or emotional conditions they may be experiencing. (1)

Sociological research and demographic analysis have become important components of the US census; however, the basic constitutional purpose of the census is the same now as when it first was taken. The purpose was to count the number of people in the United States to determine how many representatives each state has in Congress. The US Constitution specifically states that

   representation and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several
   states which may be included within this union according to their
   respective numbers. (2)

The original taxation clause and the census' role in tax collection were changed with the implementation of the federal income tax. (3)

Under current constitutional provisions, there are 435 seats in the US House of Representatives. Each state is assigned a portion of these seats based on its population from the most recent census, which is taken every 10 years. Each state has at least one seat in the House, along with two seats in the US Senate. State governments also apply census figures to the composition of their legislatures.

Using census results to determine the number of seats in the House for each state is called reapportionment. The process of actually drawing boundaries for congressional and legislative districts is called redistricting. These processes can be politically contentious and heavily influenced by partisan maneuvering because the desired outcome for everyone involved is maximum representation and increased power in the lawmaking branches of government.

RESULTS FROM THE 2000 CENSUS

A brief review of the 2000 census results indicates the following highlights.

* The official population of the United States was determined to be 281,421,906. This was an increase of 13.2% from the 1990 census, which showed an increase of 9.8% between 1980 and 1990.

* Every state experienced some population growth during the previous decade. Only the District of Columbia declined in population. In 1990, four states and Washington, DC, had overall losses.

* California had the largest overall increase; its population of 33,871,648 increased by more than 4 million from 10 years earlier.

* In terms of growth rate, five western states (ie, Nevada, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Idaho) led the nation with the highest percentage of population increases. These were followed by four southern states (ie, Georgia, Florida, Texas, North Carolina). The population of first-place Nevada grew an astonishing 66.3%.

* Texas now is the second largest state in terms of population, ahead of New York and behind California. Wyoming continues to be the smallest state in terms of population. North Dakota has the second smallest population, but Wyoming's population grew at a rate of 8.9% compared to North Dakota's 0.5%. If this trend continues, North Dakota will become the smallest state in terms of population during the next decade.

* Regarding reapportionment, four states (ie, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Texas) each will gain two additional congressional districts. Four other states (ie, California, Colorado, Nevada, North Carolina) each will gain one new district. California will have a total of 53 seats in the House of Representatives, which is the equivalent of almost one out of every eight members.

* Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin each will lose one seat in the House, while New York and Pennsylvania will each lose two seats. (4)

The ideal population number for a congressional district can be set at 646,952 people per district, and reapportionment decisions are based on how closely a state's population conforms to that ideal. (5) It is common to refer to states as reapportionment winners and losers, but a more positive perspective is taken by Kenneth Prewitt, former director of the US Census Bureau and the person responsible for managing and reporting the 2000 census. He says

   When the framers of the constitution established the census, they knew that
   the population of the United States would shift to the south and west as
   the nation grew. Performing the census is fulfilling the Constitution. An
   accurate and thorough count means that everyone is a winner. (6)

Also among the winners of the census are those citizens actively involved in government affairs, such as members of AORN's Legislative Grassroots Network. The outcome of census-based redistricting provides members with an opportunity to start fresh in legislative outreach and public policy activities. This is true whether a person has participated in advocacy efforts in the past or is looking to begin such a role. Reapportionment and redistricting change the political landscape. The key to effective involvement is awareness.

REDISTRICTING: PROCESS AND POLITICS

State legislatures have the responsibility for redistricting. Even if a state has not gained or lost any seats in Congress from the census reapportionment, boundaries for congressional and state legislative districts must be redrawn to achieve balanced population distributions. This is mandated by the landmark "one man, one vote" ruling of the US Supreme Court in 1962, which requires that districts within a state have relatively uniform populations. (7)

Timelines for redistricting vary from state to state. New maps for congressional and legislative districts must be completed in time for a state to administer its general election calendar, yet political infighting often delays redistricting until election events are about to start. The practice of gerrymandering historically is part of the process. Gerrymandering is the politically motivated tactic of drawing district boundaries for partisan advantage. Three general methods of gerrymandering include

* packing boundaries, which are areas that include large numbers of the opposition's supporters grouped into a small number of districts;

* stacking boundaries, which encapsulate as large a number of supporters as possible into irregularly shaped districts; and

* cracking boundaries, where the opposition's supporters are split between a large number of districts. (8)

To diminish gerrymandering, many states have established a special commission to handle the redistricting process under the authority of the state legislature. Those who are unhappy with the results, however, often file lawsuits challenging the legality of new maps, regardless of whether they are determined by commissioners or legislators. Additionally, states covered by the Voting Rights Act must have redistricting plans approved by the US Department of Justice to protect minorities against discrimination. (9) Many final decisions are made by court rulings, which further delays the process.

Web sites for individual secretaries of state are excellent resources for updated information on redistricting. The secretary of state's office is responsible for carrying out a state's comprehensive election procedures. Maps of new legislative and congressional districts, along with a listing of dates pertinent to the 2002 election cycle, can be found on each secretary of state's web site. (See "Government Affairs Toolbox.")

ELECTION 2002: LOOKING AHEAD, STAYING ALERT

At the federal level, the impact of redistricting on Congress is expected to be significant because of the narrow margin of control held by the current majority party. The Washington Post reports that

   over the years, both parties have skillfully used reapportionment to winnow
   the number of truly competitive House seats across the country. But this
   time, the rejiggering has also created a small set of races that could
   determine which party controls the House after the 2002 election. With most
   incumbents nearly unbeatable, moving thousands of voters from one district
   to another often represents a party's  best chance of unseating a (current)
   member. (10)

The following examples illustrate this strategy.

* Rep Tom Latham (R-Iowa) once represented a district with the most Republican seats in his state. He did not face an opponent in 1998, and in 2000, he carried 69% of the vote. In 2002, he finds himself in a district with thousands more Democratic voters because of redistricting by the state's independent redistricting commission.

* Rep Jim Matheson (D-Utah) has represented a compact district in the greater Salt Lake City area, but his new district covers 50,000 square miles and includes large segments of rural areas. The state's Republican governor and legislature expect the redistricting to make Matheson's reelection much more difficult.

* Raucous redistricting battles in Georgia, Michigan, and Illinois have left some incumbents challenging each other. In 2002, Rep John Linder (R-Ga) and Rep Robert Barr, Jr, (R-Ga) are in the same district, as are Rep John Dingell (D-Mich) and Rep Lynn Rivers (D-Mich). Rep John Shimkus (R-Ill) and Rep David Phelps (D-Ill) also are now in the same district. Rather than challenge a colleague, some incumbents in other states have decided to retire or run for different offices. (11)

In some states, incumbents who are representing new territory are eagerly seeking to meet new constituents and getting to know their concerns. In other states, candidates for new districts are eager to introduce themselves to the public as they try to understand the issues that are most important to their communities.

State legislative races reflect these same circumstances. In each case, there is a heightened eagerness on the part of those seeking elective office to listen and learn. Will they hear about the nursing shortage, RN first assistant reimbursement, patient and staff member safety in the OR, and other perioperative RN priorities? They will if perioperative RNs are alert to and act on opportunities presented by redistricting.

BEING AWARE

A researcher with the Center for Voting and Democracy offers a fitting summary for this topic.

   Redistricting is an issue of tremendous importance, but it is one typically
   ignored by the average citizen. Most people are unaware of the vast effect
   which redistricting has upon the political process as a whole. It is a
   process which is vital to the parties. (12)

Indeed, awareness of redistricting also is vital to effective legislative outreach by professional associations. Members of the AORN Legislative Grassroots Network have an exciting opportunity to work within this new political environment to achieve the Association's legislative goals in 2002. Knowledge of the system is the first step on a successful journey.

GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS TOOLBOX

Secretaries of state: A resource regarding redistricting

There are 435 seats in the US House of
Representatives. Reapportionment from the 2000 census
will cause a shift of 12 seats, starting with the
2002 elections. States losing a congressional district
include Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
Mississippi, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin, and New
York and Pennsylvania each will lose two seats. States
gaining one district are California, Colorado, Nevada,
and North Carolina; states gaining two districts are
Arizona, Florida, Georgia, and Texas. Redistricting (ie,
drawing of boundaries for congressional and state legislative
seats) occurs in all 50 states. The US Supreme
Court has ruled that districts within a state must have
relatively uniform populations.

Timetables for redistricting vary from state to state,
The legislature in Nevada, for example, meets biannually
and will not have a scheduled session in 2002. A
special legislative session was held in the summer of
2001 to establish a map for the state's new third congressional
district. (1) County Commissioner Dario
Herrera (D-Clark County) and state Sen Jon Porter (R)
were the only major party candidates to announce
their candidacies, so their campaigns are up and running.
(2) Colorado, like other states, could not resolve
partisan disputes about redistricting during 2000. A
district court judge waited until recently to decide on
the final map, which includes the state's new seat in
Congress. (3) Declared and potential candidates just now
are starting to organize their campaigns.

For up-to-date information on redistricting in a particular
state, contact the elections division in your state's secretary
of state's office. This division also has information
on voter registration, qualifications for candidates,
and the overall calendar of activities related to the
state's election cycle in 2002. (4)

State             Secretary of state web site

Alabama           http://www.sos.state.al.us
Alaska *          http://www.gov.state.ak.us/ltgov
Arizona           http://www.sosaz.com
Arkansas          http://www.sosweb.state.ar.us
California        http://www.ss.ca.gov
Colorado          http://www.sos.state.co.us
Connecticut       http://www.sots.state.ct.us
Delaware          http://www.state.de.us/sos
Florida           http://www.dos.state.fl.us
Georgia           http://www.sos.state.ga.us
Hawaii *          http://www.hawaii.gov/ltgov
Idaho             http://www.idsos.state.id.us
Illinois          http://www.ilsos.net
Indiana           http://www.state.in.us/sos/
Iowa              http://www.sos.state.ia.us
Kansas            http://www.kssos.org
Kentucky          http://www.sos.state.ky.us
Louisiana         http://www.sec.state.la.us
Maine             http://www.state.me.us/sos
Maryland          http://www.sos.state.md.us
Massachusetts     http://www.state.ma.us/sec
Michigan          http://www.sos.state.mi.us
Minnesota         http://www.state.mn.us/ebranch/sos
Mississippi       http://www.sos.state.ms.us
Missouri          http://www.mosl.sos.state.mo.us/
Montana           http://www.sos.state.mt.us
Nebraska          http://www.nol.org/home/SOS/
Nevada            http://www.sos.state.nv.us
New Hampshire     http://www.state.nh.us/sos
New Jersey        http://vwvw.state.nj.us/state
New Mexico        http://www.sos.state.nm.us
New York          http://wwvw.dos.state.ny.us
North Carolina    http://www.secstate.state.nc.us
North Dakota      http://www.state.nd.us/sec
Ohio              http://www.state.oh.us/sos
Oklahoma          http://www.sos.state.ok.us
Oregon            http://www.sos.state.or.us
Pennsylvania      http://www.dos.state.pa.us
Rhode Island      http://www.sec.state.ri.us
South Carolina    http://www.scsos.com
South Dakota      http://www.state.sd.us/sos/sos.htm
Tennessee         http://www.state.tn.us/sos
Texas             http://www.sos.state.tx.us
Utah *            http://www.governor.state.ut.us/lt_gover/home.html
Vermont           http://www.sec.state.vt.us
Virginia          http://www.soc.state.va.us
Washington        http://www.secstate.wagov
West Virginia     http://www.wvsos.com
Wisconsin         http://www.state.wi.us/agencies/sos
Wyoming           http://soswy.state.wy.us

State             Telephone

Alabama           (334) 242-7205
Alaska *          (907) 465-3520
Arizona           (602) 542-4285
Arkansas          (501) 682-1010
California        (916) 653-6814
Colorado          (303) 894-2200
Connecticut       (860) 509-6000
Delaware          (302) 739-4111
Florida           (850) 245-6500
Georgia           (404) 656-2881
Hawaii *          (808) 586-0255
Idaho             (208) 334-2300
Illinois          (217) 782-2201
Indiana           (317) 232-6536
Iowa              (515) 281-5204
Kansas            (785) 296-4564
Kentucky          (502) 564-3490
Louisiana         (225) 342-4479
Maine             (207) 626-8400
Maryland          (410) 974-5521
Massachusetts     (617) 727-7030
Michigan          (517) 373-2510
Minnesota         (651) 296-2803
Mississippi       (601) 359-1350
Missouri          (573) 751-4936
Montana           (406) 444-2034
Nebraska          (402) 471-2554
Nevada            (775) 684-5708
New Hampshire     (603) 271-6316
New Jersey        (609) 984-1900
New Mexico        (505) 827-3600
New York          (518) 474-0050
North Carolina    (919) 807-2005
North Dakota      (701) 328-2900
Ohio              (614) 466-3910
Oklahoma          (405) 521-3911
Oregon            (503) 986-1523
Pennsylvania      (717) 787-6458
Rhode Island      (401) 222-2357
South Carolina    (803) 734-2170
South Dakota      (605) 773-3537
Tennessee         (615) 741-2819
Texas             (512) 463-5770
Utah *            (801) 538-1520
Vermont           (802) 828-2363
Virginia          (804) 786-2441
Washington        (360) 902-4151
West Virginia     (304) 558-6000
Wisconsin         (608) 266-8888
Wyoming           (307) 777-7378

* In Alaska, Hawaii, and Utah, the lieutenant governor's office
handles secretary of state duties.

NOTES

(1.) D Heller, "Summary of Nevada's 2001 redistricting legislation,"
Nevada Secretary of State,
http://www.sos.state.nv.us/nvelection/redistricting/summary.htm
(accessed 29 Jan 2002).

(2.) "Directory of Nevada state and congressional candidates,"
Politics1.com, http://www.politics1.com/nv.htm
(accessed 29 Jan 2002).

(3.) F Brown, "Judge John Coughlin, Cartographer," Denver Post, 21
Dec 2001, sec B, 4.

(4.) "The office of the secretary of state,"  National Association
of Secretaries of State, http://www.nass.org/sos/sos.html
(accessed 29 Jan 2002).

NOTES

(1.) United States Census 2000 Informational Copy, form D-61B (Washington, DC: US Bureau of the Census, 2000).

(2.) Constitution of the United States, Article 1, Section 2.

(3.) "The constitution, the congress, and the census: Representation and reapportionment," US Bureau of the Census, http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/dropin7.htm (accessed 30 Jan 2002).

(4.) E McCormick, L Freedberg, "State Gets Political Clout from Census: California, Neighbors Gaining House Seats," San Francisco Chronicle (Dec 29, 2000) http:// www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive /2000/12/29/MN171843.DTL (accessed 30 Jan 2002).

(5.) "Ending the canoe districts in Hawaii is not that tough," West Hawaii Today (Sept 14, 2001), http://www .westhawaiitoday.com/daily/2001/Sep-14-Fri-2001/opinion/ (accessed 5 Feb 2002).

(6.) K Prewitt, personal communication with the author, Denver, 4 Feb 2002.

(7.) "Glossary of redistricting terms," National Committee for an Effective Congress, http://www .ncec.org/redistricting/glossary.phtml (accessed 29 Jan 2002).

(8.) "GIS dictionary--Search results: Gerrymandering," Association for Geographic Information, http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/agidexe/term? 1063 (accessed 29 Jan 2002).

(9.) W W Hearne, "Methods to madness: Alternative schemes for single-member redistricting," Center for Voting and Democracy, http://www.fairvote.org /reports/monopoly/redist.html (accessed 29 Jan 2002).

(10.) J Eilperin, "Redistricting Rattles In-House Hopes," Washington Post, 31 Dec 2001, sec A, 3.

(11.) Ibid.

(12.) Hearne, "Methods to madness: Alternative schemes for single-member redistricting."

BURKE BEU
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST

COPYRIGHT 2002 Association of Operating Room Nurses, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group