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 Missouri | |
General information | |
Partisan control: Republican | |
Process: House and Senate Apportionment Committees | |
Deadline: Six months from committee formation | |
Total seats | |
Congress: 8 | |
State Senate: 34 | |
State House: 163 |
This article details the timeline of redistricting events in Missouri following the 2010 census. It also provides contextual information about the redistricting process and census information.
During the 2010 redistricting cycle, Missouri employed two distinct processes for legislative and Congressional redistricting. With respect to Congressional redistricting, the Missouri General Assembly beared primary responsibility, proposing and passing the redistricting plan as ordinary legislation. As such, the Governor of Missouri had the authority to veto the plan.
For legislative redistricting, two bi-partisan commissions were appointed to carry out the process for each chamber. The state committees for both major parties presented a list of nominees to the Governor, each including 10 Senate commission members and 18 House commission members. Two House commission members had to be nominated from each Congressional district. The Governor then selected half of the nominees from each party for a total of 10 Senate commission members and 18 House commission members. The Governor had to appoint a Democratic and Republican House commission member from each Congressional district.
From the date of their appointment, the commissions had six months to complete redistricting for their respective chamber. If one of the commissions failed to reach a compromise by the deadline, the process for that chamber would be turned over to a panel of six appellate judges. Provided that the other commission had met the deadline, the panel would not intervene in that chamber's maps. Once the panel of judges had taken control, it had 90 days to complete the redistricting plan.[1]
With respect to redistricting, the Missouri Constitution provided authority for the two redistricting committees in detail in Section 2 of Article III.
The Missouri House Special Standing Committee on Redistricting held four public hearings during the week of February 28. Those dates and locations were:[2][3]
The Governor's office announced the members of the House and Senate Redistricting Commissions on March 18, 2011. The full list included 18 House commission members and 10 Senate commission members.[5][6]
The following were members of the Senate Redistricting Commission:[6][7]
Democrats (5)
|
Republicans (5)
|
The following were members of the House Redistricting Commission:[6][8]
Democrats (9)
|
Republicans (9)
|
In March 2011, the first potential Congressional plan, HB 193, was released. As expected, St. Louis lost a seat. Elsewhere in the state, the 6th District was expanded into a seat that covered much of the rural north and the rest of state's seats were reconfigured.[9][10]
The map broke the 3rd district apart, divvying up southern St. Louis and its surrounding area into three other seats. [11]
John Diehl, Jr. (R) discusses redistricting in Missouri after the census figures were released. |
The same map shifted two Democratic strongholds, Boone County and the city of Columbia, from one district into another.[12] While the 4th would pick up Columbia, Jefferson County would also migrate, into the 9th. A bid from Cole County Presiding Commissioner Marc Ellinger, a Republican, to rework some central Missouri areas failed.[13]
On April 18, Republican members of the Congressional delegation and key legislative Republicans sequestered themselves for a meeting to resolve lingering differences over maps and making sure party leaders were on board.[14][15]
The bill passed 106-53 on a floor vote on April 6, 2011.[16]
On April 14, the House rejected the first version of the Senate map sent to them and requested a conference, a request that Senate leadership initially ignored.[17][18]
The House adjourned on April 18 while still waiting to hear from the Senate on the invitation to conference.[19] After the state's top Republicans met to discuss redistricting, the House renewed its request to the Senate for a conference.[20] The Senate voted to send both versions of the map to conference on April 20.[21][22]
On April 4, 2011, Republicans in the state Senate endorsed the House plan, though they ended the day still debating their own map, SB 264.[23]
On April 5, the committee sent the original plan on to the full House by a 10-1 vote.[24] The map passed the full House 106-53 on April 6. [25]
On April 5, the Senate passed a map out of committee 7-0.[26]
The following week, the House version of the map was passed narrowly by the Senate committee in a 4-3 vote.[27]
Opposition to the original bill, specifically splitting Polk County between the 7th and 8th Districts, threatened to block the map's passage in the House.[28] Republican Senators felt that too much left-leaning territory was moved into Republican districts; Democrats took issue with the way particular counties were divided.[29]
On April 13, the Senate passed its own map 22-11, despite attempts from several Senators to block it.[30] A vote to reconsider failed 10-22.[31]
On April 22, 2011, the House approved another map and sent it to the Senate, who adjourned for the Easter holiday without looking at the map.[32][33]
Passing 91-47 on a voice vote, the map had been retitled as SB 68.[34] SB 68 was initially a bill concerning the subpoena power of the state Senate, and had seen the substance of the redistricting bills added into it. The Senate then had the option of agreeing to SB 68 or continuing the conference with the House on HB 193.
The House passed a map 96-55 on April 27 and the Senate concurred 27-7.[35]
Nixon vetoed the map on April 30, sending it back to the legislature. In his veto, Nixon said the map inadequately represented Missourians and that he hoped the legislature would have something for him before they adjourned over the summer.[36][37]
On May 4, 2011, the Senate and House each voted to override Nixon's veto. Four Democrats were needed to vote with the Republicans in the House. [38] With a final vote of 109-44, the four House Democrats to vote in favor of override were Leonard Hughes, Jamilah Nasheed, Penny Hubbard, and Michael Brown.
Later that day, the upper chamber followed suit, voting 28-6 to override the veto.[39] That the Senate actually added one 'aye' above the initial vote to pass the map seemed to give Rupp some grounds for his boast.
The state level process differed from the Congressional model, which followed the legislative pattern. State legislative maps were drawn by commissions.
The Senate and House each had a distinct committee, but they scheduled hearings together for the sake of public input.[40][41][42][43]
Ideal Senate districts were at 176,145, with House seats at 36,742.
The House and Senate bi-partisan redistricting commissions failed to agree on a new plan for Missouri's legislative districts. The deadline for selecting a plan passed on August 18, 2011. The House commission held its last meeting on August 12, determining that a compromise was impossible prior to the deadline. Similarly, the Senate deadlocked on August 16, abandoning efforts to complete maps. The task moved to a special commission of state appellate court judges.[44][45][46][47][48]
The following are clips from commission meetings:
Excerpts from August 12 House Redistricting Commission meeting[49] |
Excerpts from August 16 Senate Redistricting Commission meeting[50] |
On October 13, 2011, the judicial panel tasked with redrawing Missouri’s legislative districts heard public testimony at a hearing in Jefferson City. The Appellate Apportionment Commission, which consisted of six appeals court judges, also heard testimony from lawmakers involved in the deadlocked redistricting commissions. The judicial panel had to complete maps by mid-December.[51][52]
Missouri's judicial redistricting panel, which took over after lawmakers failed to reach a compromise, finalized the state's new legislative redistricting maps on November 30, 2011. The plan featured significant changes to the state's House districts. The new map left 55 House districts vacant and 26 districts with more than one incumbent. Thirty-four Republicans were paired while 23 Democrats were paired. The Senate saw less change with only two incumbents paired. The new districts would be used in the 2012 election.[53][54]
Following the Missouri Supreme Court's rejection of the court-drawn Senate redistricting maps, the process went back to square one. On January 31, 2012, Gov. Nixon appointed a new bipartisan commission to redraw the chamber's districts. The commission met for the first time on February 18.[55][56][57]
The bi-partisan panel tasked with redrawing Missouri's Senate districts approved a new plan on February 23, 2012, redrawing the 34-district map. The plan faced a 15-day public comment period before the plan could be officially approved by the panel.[58][59]
The bipartisan redistricting commission heard testimony on its preliminary maps on March 8, 2012,. One of the lawyers for the recently-filed lawsuit was present to testify. A final vote on the maps was scheduled for March 12. Several senators -- including Jane Cunningham (R), Jim Lembke (R), and Eric Schmitt (R) -- expressed opposition to the preliminary plan.[60]
On March 12, 2012, Missouri's bipartisan redistricting commission approved a new redistricting plan for the state Senate. The plan included adjustments from the preliminary map. The first maps had triggered a lawsuit over the population balance between urban and rural districts. The final plan tweaked the St. Louis districts and evened population disparities across the state. The lawsuit was officially dropped in response to the modifications.[61]
On September 23, 2011, a group of Democrats filed suit to block Missouri's new congressional districts, calling the plan overreaching and egregious. The group was supported by the National Democratic Redistricting Trust. The lawsuit argued that the districts were neither compact nor contiguous and that they unnecessarily divided and diluted voters in St. Louis and Jefferson County. State Party Chair Matt Teter said that he only learned of the suit the day it was filed. Teter said that he supported the idea of a court-drawn plan.[62][63]
The Missouri Attorney General's office asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit. The AG's filing contended that the plaintiffs failed to show that lawmakers ignored the compactness criterion or lacked a rational basis for drawing districts as they did.[64]
A group of Kansas City Republicans also challenged the congressional map arguing that the lines, especially those for District 5, were drawn for the sole purpose of protecting incumbents.[65]
Less than a week after the judicial redistricting panel approved new legislative districts, there was speculation that the new lines may be challenged. Critics pointed to several county splits that they contended were not required by county population figures. The Missouri Constitution mandates that "no county lines shall be crossed except when necessary to add sufficient population to a multi-district county or city."[66]
On December 13, 2011, just days after a judge dismissed two lawsuits against Missouri's congressional map, plaintiffs in the Democratic lawsuit filed an appeal with the Missouri Supreme Court. The other challenge, filed by Kansas City Republicans, was also dismissed but was not appealed.[67]
On January 4, 2012, attorney David Brown of Columbia filed suit against Missouri's State Senate redistricting plan. Despite revisions to the court-drawn plan, Brown argued that the map still inappropriately divided counties and, due to staggered Senate elections, would leave at least one district without representation until 2014. He also maintains that the court had no authority to revise its redistricting map after giving it final approval.
On January 17, 2012, the Missouri Supreme Court overturned the state's Senate redistricting maps. The court found that the Senate plan unconstitutionally divided counties. The court also addressed two lawsuits concerning Missouri's new congressional districts, ordering a lower court to review the maps for compactness -- the lower court had initially rejected the lawsuits without considering the question.[68][69]
A lawsuit was filed against the new state House plans with the Supreme Court. The court declined to hear the case and directed plaintiffs to file the case in state circuit court. The lawsuit was re-filed in circuit court on January 27, 2012.[70] A new 10-member redistricting committee, composed of residents, would be appointed by the Governor to redraw the Senate maps. It was unclear if the revision process would be completed in time for the February 28 candidate filing deadline.[71]
On February 3, 2012, a Missouri Circuit Court judge upheld the state's congressional redistricting plan. The judge had previously dismissed the lawsuit, but was ordered by the Missouri Supreme Court to consider the case on the merits. The plaintiffs were expected to appeal to the state State Supreme court. They argued that the maps violate the Missouri Constitution's compactness requirement. Rep. Russ Carnahan (D) expressed support for the lawsuit, presumably hoping to restore his former district eliminated under the map.[72]
On February 16, 2012, the Missouri Supreme Court heard arguments in the legal challenge of the state's congressional districts. Meanwhile, a county circuit judge upheld Missouri's state House districts. This case too was expected to be appealed. In light of these legal challenges, the Missouri State Senate voted to delay the beginning of the filing period for state candidates from February 28 until March 27. The bill moved to the House.[73][74][75]
On February 27, 2012, the Missouri Supreme Court heard arguments in a lawsuit challenging the new state House maps. The House maps were already upheld by a lower court, but so were the State Senate maps prior to their rejection by the state Supreme Court. The House maps were drawn by a panel of judges.[76]
On March 27, 2012, the Missouri Supreme Court upheld the state's House of Representatives maps.[77] On May 25, the Missouri Supreme Court issued an opinion elaborating on its approval of the state House districts.[78]
On March 2, 2012, a federal lawsuit was filed challenging Missouri's tentative Senate redistricting maps. The maps in question were a revision of earlier maps already struck down by state courts. The lawsuit argued that the revised maps discriminated against rural areas by placing too many voters in several rural districts, thus reducing the number of districts allotted to rural Missouri.
The lawsuit also contended that changes to district numbering would disenfranchise voters by making them wait longer to vote in the state's staggered Senate elections. Only half of Missouri's senators are up for election at each biennial election--odd numbers in 2012, evens in 2014. As a result, some voters who had already waited four years to elect senators might be forced to wait another two if they were moved from an odd-numbered to an even-numbered district.[79]
On March 12, Missouri's bipartisan redistricting commission approved a new redistricting plan for the state Senate. The plan included a few adjustments from the preliminary map. The first maps had angered St. Louis area Republicans and drawn a lawsuit over the population balance between urban and rural districts. The final plan tweaked the St. Louis districts and evened population disparities across the state. The lawsuit was dropped in response to the modifications.[80]
On May 25, the Missouri Supreme Court upheld the state's new congressional districts. The map paired Reps. William Lacy Clay (D) and Russ Carnahan (D). Plaintiffs argued that the maps violated the Missouri Constitution's compactness requirement.[81]
2000 Population deviation[82] | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Office | Percentage | ||||||
Congressional Districts | 0.00% | ||||||
State House Districts | 6.08% | ||||||
State Senate Districts | 6.81% | ||||||
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. |
The following measures have appeared on the Missouri ballot pertaining to redistricting.
|