Iowa lawmakers vow to keep redistricting neutral
Mike Glover, The Associated PressDES MOINES - In a state known for politics, Iowa has largely kept them out of redistricting, although the process still gives lawmakers ulcers because of its ability to move them into unfriendly districts and out of office.
Whereas politicians in most states control the once-a-decade process of redrawing legislative and congressional district boundaries to account for population changes recorded by the U.S. Census, Iowa leaves the task to nonpartisan legislative staffers. The system largely prevents the partisan bickering that happens in most states, and legislative leaders say they have no intention of changing the law.
"We aren't planning on touching or changing it," House Speaker Pat Murphy, D-Dubuque, said Monday. "We try to take the politics out of it as much as possible."
Democrats hold majorities in both legislative chambers, so they could change the law to give legislators more control. In most states, lawmakers use redistricting power to reward certain politicians with safe districts, or threaten others by placing them in districts with another incumbent or voters who lean toward another party.
At a time when Iowa will likely lose one of its five congressional seats, there would seem to be pressure to divvy up the state in ways that would help one party or particular candidates, but Murphy said it won't happen.
And Republicans said they back the Democrats' stance. The GOP has stood by the system in previous years when it held majorities.
"History has proven that both parties stick to that path," said House Minority Leader Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha. "Iowans appreciate the way it's been handled and history has shown that both parties follow it."
Under Iowa's redistricting system, the Legislative Service Agency - a nonpartisan arm of the Legislature made up of lawyers who draft bills and other experts - will prepare a new map of legislative and congressional districts after the 2010 census.
That map will be presented to the Legislature, which must approve or reject it without changes. If the first map is rejected, staffers prepare a second map, which also must be accepted or rejected in whole.
If that second map is turned down, staffers prepare a third map, which lawmakers can alter. Since 1980, however, lawmakers have approved a proposal before reaching the third map.
Legislative staffer Gary Rudicil, who is an expert on the redistricting process, said Iowa's system is unique.
"As of right now Iowa is the one and only," said Rudicil. "There are some states where a commission is named every 10 years, but that commission is usually political. Iowa is the only state that turns over the initial crack at it to a nonpartisan agency."
Redistricting could be especially difficult this time because of the loss of a congressional seat, expected because Iowa's population in the past decade has grown more slowly than many states in the South and West.
Even when the number of congressional seats remains the same, redistricting often results in big legislative turnover because districts are redrawn to reflect population shifts within the state. Often, two incumbents find themselves running against each other, or lawmakers will find themselves in districts with new groups of voters.
Typically, about one-third of lawmakers are not re-elected in the first election after redistricting.
With that kind of turnover, Murphy questions why a state would need term limits. Iowa has none.
"When you're eliminating a third of the chamber due to redistricting, it tells me you don't need term limits," Murphy said.
