Note: Redistricting takes place every 10 years after completion of the United States Census. The information here pertains to the 2010 redistricting process. For information on more recent redistricting developments, see this article. |
Redistricting in Arkansas | |
General information | |
Partisan control: Democrat | |
Process: Board of Apportionment | |
Deadline: None | |
Total seats | |
Congress: 4 | |
State Senate: 35 | |
State House: 100 |
This article details the timeline of redistricting events in Arkansas following the 2010 census. It also provides contextual information about the redistricting process and census information.
During the 2010 redistricting cycle, the Arkansas Board of Apportionment was responsible for redistricting at the state legislative level. This was one of 11 commissions nationwide that are responsible for redistricting. The following three state officials served on the Board:
In 2011, the board members were comprised of 2 Democrats and 1 Republican:
The Arkansas Legislature is responsible for redrawing the Congressional district lines.[1]
The Arkansas Constitution provides authority to and outlines the duties of The Board of Apportionment in Article 8, which is entitled Apportionment-Members in General Assembly.
Although the Arkansas Board of Apportionment directs state-level redistricting, the House and Senate Committees on State Agencies And Governmental Affairs direct congressional redistricting in the legislature.[2]
In 2011, the Board of Apportionment redrew the state legislative districts. The 3 members of the board were:
In April 2011, the Board of Apportionment voted 2-1 to hire Joe Woodson as redistricting coordinator. Mark Martin -- the lone Republican -- voted against Woodson.[3]
The Census Bureau released local population data to Arkansas during the week of February 7, 2011.[4]
State Senator Gilbert Baker (R) explaining why redistricting was expected to be completed earlier than usual in 2011. |
The new legislative districts were estimated to be completed by September 2011.[1]
According to Article 8, Section 4 of the Arkansas Constitution, the Arkansas Board of Apportionment was required to draw state legislative districts on or before February 1 of the year when census data is received. However, historically, this deadline has not been adhered to. Senator Gilbert Baker (R) pushed for the Board to stick closer to that deadline. Baker stated that with new technology, district maps could be generated in one day, and the earlier they get to citizens, the better.[5]
On April 6, 2011, a timeline was adopted by the Board of Apportionment. Plans were made to finish the map-drawing process by the end of June 2011.[6][7] Arkansas received its official local census data on February 9, 2011.[8] Fort Smith grew by 7.4 percent -- allowing it to remain the second-largest city behind Little Rock. The five most populated cities in Arkansas were:[8]
The largest percentage growth of any city in the state was in Bentonville -- which saw a 79 percent increase to 35,201.[9]
In 2011, there was only one U.S. House district held by a Democratic representative -- Mike Ross -- while the other three Representatives -- Rick Crawford, Timothy Griffin, and Steve Womack -- were Republican. One early estimate was that Democrats would use their control over redistricting to strengthen their hold on District 4, rather than trying to make headway into the three Republican districts.[10] As a result of the election, Republicans were expected to have equal numbers of members on the State Senate Agencies Committee, which was tasked with most of the oversight over Congressional redistricting.[11] Arkansas was the only southern state without a majority-minority district.[12]
State representative Tracy Pennartz (D), who sat on the House State Agencies Committee that oversees Congressional redistricting, said boundaries should be drawn in the people's interests -- not to protect incumbents.[13]
Legislators received an early briefing on redistricting as they opened session on January 10, 2011.[14] One early theory was that some counties would end up being split among Congressional districts.[15] A.J. Kelly, deputy director of the secretary of state, said the population breakdown could make it impossible to keep with the historical manner of Congressional redistricting.[16] County population figures were expected to be released on February 22, 2011.[15]
Several state legislators also hinted that counties would be split. Senator Robert Thompson (D) described the process as much art and science as math. Senator Gilbert Baker (R) also said if the one-person, one-vote mandate was to be met, then counties would have to be split.[17] Clark Hall (D), chair of the House State Agencies committee, said no more than three counties would likely be split.[18]
State Senator Gilbert Baker (R) discusses redistricting and the possibility of moving counties. |
Arkansas was one of three states at the time -- along with Iowa and West Virginia -- that split Congressional districts along county lines.[15]
Early census figures showed large population loss in the 4th Congressional District, coupled with high growth in the 3rd Congressional District. There were questions over whether Sebastian County would remain in the 3rd District or move to the 4th.[13] State Senator Gilbert Baker (R) said it was likely that Sebastian County -- and parts of Pulaski County -- would move into the 4th Congressional District.[19]
Other possible county moves were:[12]
Arkansas had four Congressional districts. At the time of redistricting, none of those were majority-minority districts. However, some black lawmakers pushed for one of those districts to become a majority black district. Representative Darrin Williams (D) said a majority-minority district would provide black residents more of a say at the ballot box. Fifteen percent of the state's population was African-American.[20] The NAACP Arkansas implied there could be a lawsuit if there was no majority-minority district.[21]
Prior to redistricting, Fayetteville was located in the 3rd Congressional District. One potential redistricting plan would have moved Fayetteville into the 4th Congressional District.[22] On March 1, Steve Clark, president of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce, openly opposed such a plan, saying it was not in the community's best interest. Clark is a former Democratic Attorney General and sent an email to the community, requesting assistance in rejecting the proposal. The city of Fort Smith also sent a resolution to oppose being removed from the 3rd Congressional District.[23] On March 17, 2011 the Forth Smith Regional Chamber of Commerce sent a resolution to the Arkansas State Legislature requesting that Fort Smith and Sebastian County be kept in the 3rd Congressional District.[24]
In early March 2011, drafts of Congressional maps began to emerge. The State House Agencies Committee met behind closed doors to analyze options. Options included:[25]
State senator Johnny Key (R) proposed a map that would have:
"My aim was to get a map that looked like it made sense. It got the population deviation to where we needed it to be," Key said. There were 17 redistricting bills filed as of March 2011.[26]
The final map is referred to as Fayetteville to the Fourth (See Figure 2) and emerged from the State House Agencies Committee via an 11-7 vote on March 22.[27] The party-line vote included all 11 Democrats voting in favor of the plan, which would move Fayetteville from the 3rd Congressional District to the 4th District. Republicans argued that the move would help carve districts in favor of Democratic candidates.[28] The bill was nicknamed the Pig Tail Gerrymander. Two Republican proposals in the committee were rejected, which would have kept Fayetteville in the 3rd District.[29]
Some reactions to the plan:
Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (D) said he expected the map to end up in court.[32] The Republican Party state chairman, Doyle Webb, said he was prepared to file a lawsuit if the Fayetteville to the Fourth map passed the Arkansas House of Representatives.[33]
On March 30, 2011, Fayetteville to the Fourth was amended (See Figure 3 for comparisons to the original, in Figure 2).[34] Among other things, the changes would have:[35]
On March 30, 2011, three Republican-sponsored proposals were rejected in two different legislative committees. The Senate Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee rejected two bills -- one each by Bill Pritchard (R) and Johnny Key (R) -- while the House Agencies and Governmental Affairs Committee rejected a proposal from Andrea Lea (R).[36]
Although the deadline for completing Congressional redistricting was supposed to be April 1 when the legislative session ended, the Senate members did not vote on a plan in time and amended the Sine Dine resolution to allow legislators to return and finish the process. The Arkansas House of Representatives passed a map by a 52-46 vote on March 31 and sent it to the Senate for approval.[37] But with only one day to consider the map and strong resistance from Republican legislators, the Fayetteville to the Fourth map remained unapproved.[38] The Senate committee in charge of redistricting was split with four Democrats and four Republicans.[39]
The Senate returned on Monday, April 4 to continue debating the maps.[40]
On Monday, April 4, the Arkansas State Senate State Agencies Committee rejected the Fayetteville to the 4th map. Once again, the vote was 4-4, with five votes needed to send the map to the full Senate.[41] On Tuesday, April 5, the Senate met again briefly but once again adjourned to negotiate a compromise map. A poll of Fayetteville residents found that 83 percent were opposed to moving from the 3rd to the 4th Congressional District.[42]
One option Democrats considered was pulling the map directly out of committee. Only 18 votes would have been needed -- Democrats had 20 members in the chamber. "We're trying to find a map that can get five votes in the committee. My sense is the Senate wants to work through the committee process and wants to avoid pulling something out of committee," said Sen. Gilbert Baker, (R), the Senate panel's vice chairman.[43] However, the option was ultimately not exercised.
On April 5, 2011, the Senate approved a new compromise map (See Figure 5) that would keep Fayetteville in the 3rd Congressional District.[44][45] The amended map passed on April 6, 2011 by a 20-13 vote and was sent to the House. One representative -- Andrea Lea (R) -- indicated she might further amend the map in the House.[46][47]
On April 7, 2011, the House State Agencies Committee rejected the Senate's amended map. Speaker of the House Robert Moore (D) maintained that he wanted to see the Senate approve the initial Fayetteville to the Fourth map.[48] Both chambers returned on Monday, April 11 to continue negotiating in order to reach a compromise.[49]
After the House rejected the Senate map, the legislature adjourned for the weekend of April 12-13 to negotiate on a compromise.[50] On April 14, the House approved a new map and the Senate approved a companion piece of legislation (See Figure 6 for map).[51]
The final map kept Fayetteville in the 3rd District, but split five separate counties, including Sebastian County. House Speaker Robert Moore (D) said that the map was a fair compromise. "If we stay here another week, another month, another year is everybody going to be satisfied? No. The diversity of the opposition suggests we've done as good a job as we can do."[52]
Each map passed its respective chamber with bipartisan support. The bill passed the House by a 64-28 vote and the Senate by a 24-9 vote.[53]
Once the chambers approved each other's legislation on April 12, an error was found in the map, as two precincts were left unattached to any district. This oversight forced the chambers to return on April 13 in order to hold a follow-up vote.[54]
On April 14, 2011, Governor Mike Beebe (D) signed the Congressional redistricting law into effect. Beebe called the map status quo. "I think both parties think that probably the congressional districts that are in play are still in play, and those that aren't, aren't," Beebe said.[55]
After the November 2010 elections, Democrats lost their supermajority in both houses of the Arkansas Legislature. At the state legislative level, population gains in northwest Arkansas were expected to lead to Republican gains in that portion of the state. It was thought the Board of Apportionment might draw a Latino-majority district as well, owing to a large growth of the Hispanic population.[11] According to Jay Barth, a political science professor at Hendrix College, the demographic shift was a large factor in the Republicans' strong showing in the 2010 elections. "We are now getting closer and closer to that point where the combination of Northwest Arkansas and the suburban counties around Little Rock have enough votes to really guide the outcome of statewide elections, and those tend of course to be more Republican than almost any other counties in the state," Barth said.[18]
Four early versions of the Senate maps were released in late March 2011.[56] In May, the Board of Apportionment released five proposed House maps. Public hearings were held starting May 24 and ending July 6.[57]
Northwest Arkansas was expected to go from six to seven Senate districts.[58]
An initial House map would have split Van Buren, which rested entirely within District 66. Under a May 10 version of the map, Van Buren would have been split between Districts 85 and 86. "As it stands right now, the drafts they have for Crawford County are a total nightmare. Just like the congressional districts were," said Crawford County Clerk Teresa Armer.[59]
Governor Mike Beebe (D) and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (D) released their initial map proposals in late July 2011. The two maps were largely similar and drew criticism from some incumbents. Bruce Holland (R) said the maps would destroy his district. According to Beebe spokeswoman Stacey Hall, the proposed map would not place any two existing incumbents in the same district. Kim Hendren also expressed displeasure at the proposed map. Another Senator, Jack Crumbly (D), was displeased to see the African-American population decrease in his district.[60]
Governor Mike Beebe (D) and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (D) released maps that differed from the proposed map from Secretary of State Mark Martin (R). Notably, the number of majority-minority districts varied. At the time there were 13 such districts. The Beebe and McDaniel maps would have created 11 majority-minority districts. Meanwhile, the Martin map created 15 districts.[61]
On July 29, 2011, the Board of Apportionment approved new state legislative maps by a 2-1 vote. Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (D) and Governor Mike Beebe voted for the maps while Secretary of State Mark Martin (R) was the lone dissenting vote.[62] Among the changes the new maps made:
State senator Jack Crumbly and a group of residents from eastern Arkansas sued the three-member Board of Apportionment on January 23, 2012. The suit was filed in federal court.[66] The lawsuit alleged that the new boundaries diluted the black vote in Crumbly's district, as the number of voting-age blacks was lowered from 58 percent to 53 percent. The maps were defended by Board of Apportionment members Governor Mike Beebe (D) and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel (D).[67]
The hearing began on May 7.[68] A panel of three federal judges on May 9 dismissed Secretary of State Mark Martin (R) from the suit.[69] The court ruled it would not delay the May 22 primary as it considered the case.[70]
On September 17, a three-judge panel upheld the new districts, rejecting Crumbly's allegations. The judges stated that the decrease was an unintended consequence, not purposeful discrimination, saying, "We find credible Governor Beebe's and Attorney General McDaniel's testimony that they did not engage in intentional discrimination or know that Representative Ingram, or any other white incumbent, would run for senator against Senator Crumbly in Senate District 24 at the time that the district map was drawn."[71]
Crumbly's lawyer, James Valley, filed a notice of appeal with the court on October 17.[72]
In May 2011, the Board of Apportionment began hosting public forums across the state to gather input from citizens. "Of course, there’s no way to please everyone, but to some degree, no one is going to get exactly what they want. Everyone is going to have to share in the discomfort if there is any. We just want to make sure every effort is made to ensure the districts make sense and they’re legal and fair. At the end of the day, hopefully everyone will understand why we did it the ways we did," said Joe Woodson, redistricting coordinator. The board visited seven cities.[73]
Schedule of public meetings:
The following measure has appeared on the Arkansas ballot pertaining to redistricting.
Awaiting detailed Census data, due in March 2001, were Governor Mike Huckabee, Secretary of State Sharon Priest, and Attorney General Mark Pryor. The legislature, already in session, wanted to have a plan in time for their 2002 midterm election campaigns. The Republican Governor along with Priest and Pryor, both Democrats, had a map ready to present to County Clerks in July 2004.
Northwestern Arkansas, a heavily white area, lost some legislative representation to the Eastern region, in keeping with an order to increase minority representation. By early autumn, a final map was circulated for approval. Five seats, four in the House and one in the Senate, paired incumbents against one another.
The final vote was set for the end of September 2001, but Governor Huckabee, the lone Republican, asked for numerous changes at the local level. To accommodate Huckabee, the Board of Apportionment's staff was given a week to research and prepare a state level map reflecting the Governor's wishes. While staff worked to render a visual of Huckabee's suggestions, the NAACP pursued its own set of changes to give greater weight to black voters.[74] Though the plan would ultimately pass, in the spring of 2002, the NAACP filed a lawsuit against the plan.
2000 Population Deviation[75] | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Office | Percentage | ||||||
Congressional Districts | 0.04% | ||||||
State House Districts | 9.87% | ||||||
State Senate Districts | 9.81% | ||||||
Under federal law, districts may vary from an Ideal District by up to 10%, though the lowest number achievable is preferred. Ideal Districts are computed through simple division of the number of seats for any office into the population at the time of the Census. |
<ref>
tag; no text was provided for refs named usatd1
|