Some thoughts on reapportionment

Members of the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission got an earful of advice when they were in Havre Tuesday night. It has been pretty much the same in other communities around the state where the panel has conducted hearings.

The panel is in charge of redrawing Montana House and Senate districts to comply with the one-man, one vote U.S. Supreme court edict. That will be harder on the Hi-Line than in some other parts of the state because the area has lost population while the rest of the state is gaining. That means the Hi-Line will have fewer representatives in the Legislature and even less political clout.

Several thoughts on the process.

First of all, Montanans are lucky that the process is generally bipartisan. Since the earliest days of the republic, redrawing political lines has been used to give the shaft to political foes and draw the lines so the party in power can keep its power. In many larger states, the legislature redraws the lines itself. Legislative leaders use that authority to secure loyalty and campaign contributions from lawmakers affected by the remap.

While some contend that the process 10 years ago gave Montana Democrats an advantage, it was nothing like the blatant gerrymandering that dominates the political scene in many states.

Very few states have public hearings in 14 cities to give the panel a chance to hear the public's ideas. Traditionally lines are drawn in the dark of night at the end of the legislative session.

Second, an interesting discussion took place at the hearing about how Hill and Blaine county lines should be drawn. Both sides had interesting points to make. Should Havre be a district onto itself? It has just about the right number of people to qualify as a district. Some argued that Havre should be split in two, with each district pulling in rural communities from three surrounding counties.

While the academic debate was interesting, there was a partisan tinge to it all. Republicans feel that if Havre were its own district, it would increase chances that Republicans would be able to carry the rural district. Democrats believe that if Havre — one of the county's Democratic strongholds — were to be split, it would enhance chances of Democrats carrying both districts. On paper, that's true, though it hasn't worked out that way for Democrats in recent years.

Best of wishes to the commissioners as they make a decision on that issue.

On the third issue, we believe the case has been made.

In the last two remap cycles, lines have been drawn to ensure that Native Americans get the representation in Helena they are entitled to. On the Hi-Line, Rocky Boy's and Fort Belknap Indian reservations are included in one House district, while they are merged with a Fort Peck-based district to form a state Senate district. As a result of this and other such actions elsewhere in the state, the number of Native Americans in the Legislature is close to their percentage of population in the state.

This is a massive step forward from the decades when, deliberate or not, there were no Native Americans in the Legislature.

Rocky Boy and Fort Belknap residents have as much or more reason to stay in touch with developments in Helena than the rest of us. For a century, they were denied that opportunity. Reservations were carved up and attached to neighboring districts. Sadly, Native American politicians had virtually no chance of winning in white-dominated districts.

With the redrawing of the lines to comply with federal law and the election of the first Native American to a statewide office, Native Americans are beginning to take their seat at the table of power. That is a giant victory for Native Americans and for all of us who believe that Montana government ought to tap into the talents of all its residents, Native and white, young and old, male and female, liberal and conservative.