Can Politics be Removed from Redistricting - Essay Example

Politics can and should be removed from Redistricting The redistricting process is the act of practically dividing the original district into smaller forms of the district. This process is essential because it helps the government in the proper and effective governing and further distribution of the states resources. The process of redistricting of a given specific district is chiefly for the benefit of both the political agenda and also for the population of that specific state. The process of redistricting is the job of the legislative body. The legislators have the right to redistrict a specific district by following a given set of rules (Vork 1). The act of redistricting is a process that requires adequate planning by the legislation body before they come up with a complete and fair form of new districts. Though the legislation body has the right and privilege to plan for the redistricting process, they are not competent enough of guaranteeing that the plan will be successful. Thus my stand concerning the matter is that politics can and should be removed from redistricting. Iowa is the single state that is capable of giving any of the nonpartisan community the right of setting up laws that governs the procedures that apply in the redistricting process. This is because in many of the known states, the procedure of the redistricting is solely carried out by the government body and also the political alone. This is in inclusion of the republicans as well as the democrats of the states. Consequently, this action is often for the benefit of the republicans and moreover for the advantage of the democrats. This is because; they use this idea to their benefit of the political interests. Subsequently, the republicans and the democrats do this to obtain a large section of their states to enlarge the district area. Moreover, this action is chiefly for them to gain sole security in the job sector. Thus in Iowa, this procedure is solely performed by a group of selection of three parties. These parties include lawyers, the governor, the secretary, and the auditor. Additionally, there are also the two main individuals who are from the popular political parties (Vork 1). This is chiefly to avoid any form of corruption and manipulation of the process that governs the redistricting procedures (Vork 1). Consequently, for the redistricting process to be in order, there are asset of states laws that the body ought to follow. There are a variety of redistricting methods that a state can employ in the process of redistricting. There is the independent body system, which involves the employment of individuals from the independent section with a few representatives from the politicians and the government. The costs and benefits of different redistricting systems Thus the benefit of this body system is that there will be no interference during the redistricting processes by the political parties (Ansolabehere, Gerber & Snyder 768). Second, there is the legislators system. This system utilizes the legislative body of the government. The chief cost that this body brings is the implications during the redistricting procedure. This is because the legislative body utilizes the laws set by the government body. Therefore it becomes hard for the legislators not to favor the government as well as the political parties. Although the two types of the redistricting are different, the chief goal of the process is to attain balanced and equal forms of districts without favor (Ansolabehere, Gerber & Snyder 770). Thus the chief benefit of the redistricting process is that the state gets the opportunity of being in the list of the government for the development process. For instance, the minority group gets to obtain the financial support from the government with ease. This further allows an equal and uniform amount of expenditure by the government for the districts from the minorities (Ansolabehere, Gerber & Snyder 768). Considering or not considering how certain factors may change the sort of districts drawn For an effective procedure in sorting the right process of redistricting, the process ought to follow a given specific set of rules. First, the body of lawyers that is redistricting the states ought to come up with an equal number of the district’s population in each district. This is to prevent the implication of the process and the negative impact the process will have on the population and the political parties (Vork 1). This is to further avoid the negative impact the process of redistricting will have on the type of the district made. Second, for the redistricting process to be of great value to the community, it should be capable of retaining the original form of the district counties, the states cities as well as the existing political boundaries. This idea is vital for the state because it assists in the promotion of peace among the population subsequently preventing any form of political wars amid the population (Vork 1). Evidently, for the redistricting process to be effective and fair, and also for the process to be free of the political influence, the body must try to retain the compactness and also the contagiousness of the district strictly (Vork 1). How a reform system like Iowa’s affect the types of representatives who are elected Iowa is one amid the many states that is putting more efforts in the isolation of the politics from the procedures of redistricting. The sate does this by ensuring that the political issues do not interfere with their districting process. Furthermore, the state is trying hard to separate the politics from the process by preventing the politicians from using this idea as a way of gaining votes from the population of this state (Vork 1). Therefore with the implementation of this type of procedures, the state can appoint representatives who are adequate and fair in their official duties. Moreover, this act will evidently lead to the elimination of the leaders who stay in power for long while utilizing the idea of redistricting process as means of attaining votes (Vork 1). The law that these representatives ultimately pass as compared to a system where the state legislature redistricts itself The rules set to govern the redistricting process by the representatives are extremely strict while those laws set by the legislators are not extraordinarily strict. For instance, the type of laws that the representatives of the Iowa lay down encompass a set of strict rules. This is because the legislative laws are only designed in a manner that will favor the republicans alone. Moreover, these guidelines make it difficult for the fellow democrat to be competent of constructing a map to use (Vork 2). What are the upsides and downsides of majority-minority districts (such as those in Arizona) on representation of minorities? Arizona is competent of utilizing the form of pane l called the independent body for redistricting commission. One of the upside of the Arizona representation of the minorities includes the formation of the independent body. This body consists of the two members of the republicans as well as the two people from the democrats. Finally, there is an individual representing the independent (Vork 3). Thus this state is competent of representing both the majority and minority groups during the redistricting thereby preventing discrimination of groups of individuals. Subsequently, the process of redistricting in Arizona is effective because it follows a set of six factors that governs them. These factors are set by the commission body. They include the equality, district compactness, representation of the minority, the federal law, as well as the respect for the boundaries of the community. Finally is the act of making the redistricting district to be of winnable state for both parties (Vork 3). Eventually, the downside of Arizona representation of the minorities group is that, though the state follows the same process as that of the Iowa, the utilization of this process is not an assurance for it to work for them as it does for the Iowa sates. This is because no map has been in court for testing like in other states (Vork 4). Conclusion The idea of redistricting processing ought to be the work of an independent body and not the government body. This is because the government body will take advantage and utilize this process as a mechanism of obtaining votes and fame for political benefits. Thus an independent body will guarantee an effective form of redistricting process. For instance, in Wisconsin, the Mayor by the name of Barret emphasizes on the employment of an independent body for the procedure of redistricting. Moreover, many sates are known to be employing the independent body during the redistricting process. Evidently, the utilization of an independent body for this process will further guarantee an efficient process that can effectively produce the map on the specific date set for planning to take place. Hence, Politics can be removed from redistricting and it should be eliminated completely because there is actually no effect. Furthermore, Arizona has worked without politics in her redistricting. Works cited Ansolabehere, Stephen, Gerber, Alan and Snyder, Jim. Equal Votes, Equal Money: Court Ordered Redistricting and Public Expenditures in the American States. American Political Science Review, 2002, 96 (4): 767-777. Print Vock, Daniel. Can politics be removed from redistricting? 1-5 Print Read More