State Republicans Say They Changed Their Mind on "Iowa Model" of Redistricting; State Democrats Call it Bogus

Sunday, September 17th, 2023 -- 10:00 AM

(Jessie Opoien and Molly Beck, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) After a decade of Democratic efforts to adopt the "Iowa model" of nonpartisan redistricting in Wisconsin, GOP Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, who shot down the idea at every turn, appeared to have a change of heart. Assembly Republicans introduced a bill on Tuesday that he said would do just that.

But, according Jessie Opoien and Molly Beck with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, this time, Democrats wanted no part of it. Within an hour of the announcement, it was clear the minority party saw the proposal as more of a fig leaf than an olive branch.

Gov. Tony Evers called it "bogus." Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer wrote it off as "an obvious attempt to distract from (Republicans') efforts to impeach Justice (Janet) Protasiewicz and undermine our democracy."

Sen. Kelda Roys characterized it as “a ridiculous political stunt meant just to manipulate headlines, otherwise known as the Robin Vos special.” "Sometimes you have to listen, and you change your mind," Vos told reporters of his about-face on Tuesday.

While he prefers Wisconsin's existing redistricting system, the Assembly Speaker said, he thinks "people want politicians who say, 'I have an open mind to be persuaded.'" Democrats aren’t buying that.

“I don't see this as a genuine offer,” said Sen. Mark Spreitzer, D-Beloit. “I think Speaker Vos doesn't do anything unless it benefits him. And there's a reason he's putting this out right now to distract from his talk of impeachment, and to try to find any excuse to delay action in the state Supreme Court that might overturn his gerrymandered maps. I don't think it is his goal to get fair maps and end gerrymandering in Wisconsin.”

Republicans aggressively used the redistricting process in 2011 to draw maps that heavily favor the party in legislative races, after the GOP wave election in 2010 that gave the party control of both houses of the Legislature and the governor's mansion.

The state Supreme Court last year ruled in favor of maps drawn by legislative Republicans that made minimal changes to the 2011 election boundaries that handed them a lop-sided majority.

After years of opposing such plans, Vos and Assembly Republicans announced Tuesday they would pursue legislation this week that would allow the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau to write new legislative maps instead of partisans.

The move is aimed at bypassing lawsuits before the state Supreme Court that seek to rewrite the current GOP-favorable maps that were adopted in 2021. Republicans have threatened to pursue impeachment proceedings against Protasiewicz if she doesn't recuse herself from the cases, having referred to the state's maps as "rigged" during her election campaign this year.

Since 1980, Iowa’s nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency has drawn district boundaries for state legislative and congressional seats. Some argue this system is cheaper, faster, more transparent and fairer than the current system in Wisconsin.

Every 10 years, the LSA holds three public hearings on a proposed set of maps, then submits a report on the maps to the state’s General Assembly. From there, the Assembly may vote to approve or reject them. No amendments are allowed other than corrections to errors.

Here's how it works, the Legislative Services Agency is required to submit legislative and congressional maps to the Iowa General Assembly by April 1 of the year after a Census. State law requires districts to be as equal in population as possible, to respect political boundaries by trying not to divide cities and counties, to be contiguous and to be reasonably compact.

It is a blind process that cannot favor political parties or incumbents or be used to enhance or dilute the voting strength of minority groups. A five-member advisory commission holds public hearings. The Iowa legislature is on a tight leash.

It must consider the plan promptly and can only vote up or down. And if lawmakers reject the plan, they have to explain why, based on the criteria for drawing districts. The agency then submits a second plan, and the same rules apply.

An up-or-down vote is called and nothing but “corrective” amendments is allowed. If the second plan is rejected, the agency draws up a third plan based on legislative feedback, using those same criteria, and submits it to the General Assembly.

Only then can lawmakers draw their own maps, if they reject for a third time the agency’s handiwork. That's never happened. However, though the Iowa approach to this most political of tasks is even-handed, there are limits to what reforming the redistricting process can accomplish.

And there are questions about whether the Iowa model can be transplanted to a more diverse state.

Feel free to contact us with questions and/or comments.