I attended the House Redistricting Committee’s hearing after seeing the map of what the majority proposed for our second Congressional district in a My Turn in the Monitor (“Say no to Congressional gerrymandering,” Nov. 10). That map is a sad ode to gerrymandering.
The now approved new district includes a thin strip down our border with Maine all the way to Portsmouth. That thin strip used to be part of the first Congressional district. The district was politically competitive and elected both Republicans and Democrats to Congress. Republicans won the first district election five times since 2000 and seven times since 1996.
Every citizen who spoke at the Committee’s Nov. 10 hearing, approximately 40 or so speakers, was against the majority’s proposed plan. I have read most of the testimony from the Committee’s hearings before that and it was pretty much unanimously against the majority’s plan.
At the Nov. 10 meeting, every single speaker thought the majority plan was unfair at best, scandalous at worst. Many had harsh words for the plan because they felt the proposal undermined democracy and diluted or destroyed voting rights.
Several of those who spoke specifically stated that they were Republican voters but they disliked the plan. Many of the speakers pointed out that the two proposed districts watered down votes of both Republicans and Democrats.
The majority’s plan would make both of our Congressional districts uncompetitive. If you are a Democrat in the first district, a candidate in your party is highly unlikely to win an election because the majority plan intentionally cuts out Democrats from the district. If you are a Republican in second district, the majority plan has watered down or destroyed your vote because the majority plan intentionally cuts Republicans from the district.
The Republican gerrymandering plan moves about 360,000 citizens (yes, you read that right, three hundred sixty thousand New Hampshire citizens) from their current Congressional district into the other district (hereafter districts are referred to as “CD”).
The Democrats’ minority plan moved the town of Hampstead from the first CD to the second CD, to balance out the districts’ numbers since a state’s CD’s have to have roughly similar numbers of voters. I have not heard any reason why the majority’s plan moved 360,000 voters. None was offered at the hearing.
Politics has been the only rationale that I have heard so far to justify this wholesale shift in New Hampshire voters. Republican Party Chair Steve Stepanek stated that redistricting would guarantee that “we will send a conservative Republican to Washington.”
I am not naïve. I’ve watched politics for a long time. Winning elections allows the winners certain perks. But, as many citizens at the redistricting hearing pointed out in their comments, this is the officeholders picking the voters, not the voters picking the officeholders.
New Hampshire citizens would not stand for 360,000 citizens being shuffled around or moved for other reasons. And they should not stand for it for this most precious right of voting. If a highway was being relocated, New Hampshire citizens would never stand for a path that uprooted 100,000 people, let alone 360,000. That path would never be approved. There would be a citizen revolt.
Same for a power line, gas line or any other public works. In fact, a high voltage utility line that impacted far fewer than 360,000 was halted not too long ago, due to its impact. While the 360,000 voters are not being physically moved from their homes, they are being booted from their voting districts. Republicans and Democrats alike are being cast aside as if their votes don’t matter, and now they may hardly matter in the Congressional elections depending on which district you live in.
The Redistricting Committee began with the Pledge of Allegiance. I stood and said the pledge as I believe everyone did. The pledge ends with the words “with liberty and justice for all.” Approximately 780,000 people voted in the last New Hampshire election, which I believe was the highest turnout ever.
Ask yourself if moving approximately 46% of likely voters from one Congressional district to the other is consistent with “liberty and justice for all.” Personally, I think not. Every other person who spoke at the hearing on November 10 thought not, as well.
Write to or call your representative, state senator, or the governor to let them know that you do not agree with this undemocratic action.
(Corey Belobrow is an attorney with Friedman Feeney in Concord.)