If I had recently held a press conference telling the General Assembly how to do its redistricting job, people would have ignored me — and rightly so. You see, it’s not my job. If I had spent $110,000 of my firm’s money to generate redistricting maps, my law partner would have been pissed. You see, it’s not my job.
But, I am — to my great misfortune, I’m sure — not Todd Rokita. Secretary of State Rokita spent $60,000 in state money to have redistricting maps created and $50,000 on a website. (I think he got taken on the web site design – the site itself didn’t seem to be worth much, let alone $50k and, for what it’s worth, the first link I clicked on, was broken. “Server Error in ‘/’ Application.”)
Mr. Rokita says that he wants to keep politics out of redistricting. An admirable goal, at least in the abstract, but again, “not his job.” IC 4-5 sets forth the general duties of the Secretary of State, though specific duties must be assigned to the office by the General Assembly elsewhere in the Indiana Code, because under the general provisions, the Secretary of State is little more than a notary public and record keeper. This highlights Mr. Rokita’s main difficulty – he is coming to the end of his term and his assigned duties don’t allow him to do a great deal of note that will help him get elected to his next position, whatever it is he plans on running for.
Leadership in the General Assembly seems to agree that Mr. Rokita is doing someone else’s job:
“I don’t think it’s his business,” said Senate President Pro Tempore David Long, R-Fort Wayne. “The secretary of state has overstepped his bounds.”
“Our constitution says this is clearly a legislative function,” said House Minority Leader Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, “and not a function of the secretary of state’s office or any other administrative office.”
I’d be interested to see how the appropriations worked on Mr. Rokita’s project. $110,000 isn’t nothing. Lots of local governments would certainly like to have that amount of money floating around for discretionary projects.
Rokita’s plan cannot be all bad, it ticked off Bosma and other gop leaders. I think it makes sense and will expose legislators to competition, something they all say they want.
He does have a role in certifying the elections, so if they are based on bogus or corrupt redistricting plans, how can he certify the results are valid? Sometimes a leader needs to break the rules, eh mitch?
Maybe Mr. Rokita could have focused on easing Indiana’s ridiculous ballot access laws, and ensuring that all votes, even write-in votes, get counted in Indiana’s elections.
Indiana legislators are mad because Rokita threw a Baby Ruth in their pool by saying this so close to another time of redistricting – and offering maps that looked sensical to anyone but a politician whose primary focus in drawing the maps is to keep themselves in office.
The Legislature knows that citizens have little they can do about gerrymandering – there’s no competition in the races, so you can’t vote the bums out to install new bums who would change the rules. Nor will they allow citizen constitutional amendments or any other means of affecting change. No sir, it’s all their job.
As far as redistricting not being Rokita’s job, recall that the same whiny legislature had one job this year – to pass a budget – and they failed to do so without a special session. I suspect that special session cost more on than Rokita spent on his maps.
Personally, I find it nuts that Doug (in Tippecanoe County) and myself (in northern Johnson County 75 miles away) share the same US representative. Or that my State Senator (Mike Young, hence I use the title “senator” loosely) has the Indianapolis Int’l Airport in his district as well as the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
I think the concern is that Kansas is rapidly catching up with us in the Passing Unnecessary Legislation Doomed To Judicial Reversal At A Cost Of Millions category. Though I admit Bosma’s refusal to sign on argues against.
Either that, or it’s the first shot in the Assume Effective Control Once Mitch Starts Really Running for President sweepstakes. Which reminds me, I’ve been trying to come up with the last Indiana Secretary of State or AG who didn’t spend all his time in office running for higher office. Anybody know anything about Crawford F. Parker?
Critics of Rethinking Redistricting have started to focus on the cost invested in this initiative.
In Tuesday’s Indianapolis Star article, the cost of the Rethinking Redistricting initiative was identified at a total of $110,000 – $50,000 for the development of the conceptual maps and $60,000 for the development of the website, creative, collateral materials, etc…
The key thing here is that the Secretary of State’s office spent no new money. As our office has usually been able to do, we were scheduled to give back over $300,000 from our budget to the state’s general fund. Instead, we reverted almost $210,000 and set the rest aside for this project, all blessed by the State Budget Agency.
But to fully complete the picture of the true cost of this initiative, there’s even more you should know. The $50,000 is a “contractual not to exceed” amount and the true cost of the maps will come in at a fraction, approximately two-thirds.
In regards to the $60,000 allocated to getting the message out to voters and taxpayers, less than half was used for the development of the Rethinking Redistricting website. The remaining amount was used to develop the necessary resources to help better alert and inform the public on this matter.
In his continued commitment to fiscal stewardship, Secretary Rokita turned in a biennial operating budget earlier this year for the Secretary of State’s office that is the same, unadjusted for inflation, as the budget approved for the Secretary of State in 1987. Under Secretary Rokita’s leadership, the Secretary of State’s office has been able to reduce costs by adopting innovative business practices and technologies to deliver services more efficiently. In fact, we were able to reduce the physical footprint of government by reducing the physical office size by over 30,000 feet this year alone.
The reality is that the redistricting process can and should be improved through a core set of criteria, increased transparency of the process, and the use of Hoosier common sense. It’s not rocket science, as the conceptual maps clearly show. That’s not to say the conceptual maps are the ideal but that they are at least a roadmap to something a whole lot better than what currently exists today.
Scott Bowers
Deputy Secretary of State & Chief of Staff
Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita
Doug:
Maybe you can give us some more insight into this since you are a lawyer, but I have a question about this whole thing.
In all the news articles about Rokita’s proposals they fail to mention that there has already been Supreme Court (SCOTUS, not Indiana SC) action on partisan gerrymandering. My understanding of it is that the SCOTUS has basically said that partisan gerrymandering is fine because that’s politics. If it turns out to be gerrymandering to disadvantage a racial or ethnic group then that’s illegal, but gerrymandering for the sake of politics is okay.
Am I understanding the SCOTUS correctly? If I am, then I can’t help but wonder what the heck Rokita thinks he is doing and why he is wasting money on something the Supreme Court has already kicked around…
Thanks, Scott, for your answer about the money issues with Rokita’s plan.
Though I appreciate your explanation, it needs to be pointed out that I don’t remember anyone complaining about spending old money versus new money, it was the fact that ANY money was spent, regardless of where it came from. According to you Rokita returns money to the general fund every year, which is great, but why is he consistently requesting more money then he needs? I know it looks good to return money to the treasury, but not if you’re only doing it by requesting extra money each year.
The point is that he still committed $110,000 taxpayer dollars to a project that he has no business doing and no say in. It will be completely mocked and ignored (as it is already being done) but the legislature and is a complete waste of time, money, and thought.
I hope that the legislature remembers the extra money that the SOS’s office has when they put together its next budget.
So, Mr. Bowers, it wasn’t real money, it was Monopoly money? Plus you didn’t spend all of it? And you’re from the government, and you’re here to help. Points for making that old joke family friendly.
Maybe if your boss hadn’t been the point man for the Republican effort to end decades of imaginary election fraud perpetrated by people with no driver’s licenses he’d have more credibility. Maybe if he showed some concern about the influence of money, especially out-of-state money, on the electoral process? Or a small nod to reducing the effective two- (well, 1.5-) party monopoly? Or maybe he could produce a plan pro bono publico that didn’t have his name splashed across the cover.
Personally, I’d settle for dirty districts drawn once a decade by honest public servants. It’d be a big step up.
Nice to know only old money was wasted on this project. You spent way too much on your consultants, were they cronies?
I could have redrawn the maps for far less. In fact, they sorta kinda resemble the education service center regions at the senate level. :)
If I do recall properly, Rokita did finally say that there was nothing to the acorn allegations up north.
Curious,
I think you’re a little confused on how courts work. The U.S. Supreme Court said that partisan gerrymandering wasn’t unconstitutional. That decision certainly doesn’t prevent states from passing laws to make partisan gerrymandering illegal. That’s what Rokita is proposing. It’s the same thing with the death penalty. The SCT has said the death penalty is constitutional. States can still outlaw it if they want to which is what New York state, for example, has done.
***************
As far as the money spent on this project, I’d point out that Indianapolis is budgeting $580,000 of new money for the redistricting for council seats. (Of course, we’re talking about Indy. The political contributors have to be paid off.) Rokita got a bargain to have three maps done for $60,000. I do think $50,000 for the website was too much.
I’m sorry but I’m not buying the notion that talking election reform is someone else’s job. Rokita is the chief election officer for the state of Indiana. It is his job to push for reform in elections. Is it technically his job to redistrict? Of course, not. That’s the legislature. That doesn’t mean though Rokita can’t be a leader proposing reform. I expect my secretary of state to be doing that.
I’m reminded of those who defended Steve Carter’s lack of initiative in office. Only prosecutors can prosecute. But there is nothing in the law prohibiting Carter from have setting up a team to assist prosecutors in the prosecution of mortgage fraud, for example, should those county prosecutors decide to prosecute. Carter would not even do that claiming he had no authority to even offer assistance unless “invited.” Pure nonsense.
Wow, Paul, I never thought I’d see the day where a lawyer was so absolutely wrong about something. Seriously, you went to law school?
SCOTUS said that partisan gerrymandering is fine, but you think it can still be made illegal without being thrown out? SCOTUS has ruled, it’s a done deal unless they change their mind.
In fact, one of the gerrymandering rulings SCOTUS decided was here in Indiana where our redistricting maps were being challenged and upheld by the court as legal.
The only possible thing I can think of that you meant was that the SCOTUS ruling only applied to Congress and not to the states, but that is even more of an idiotic statement. Congress doesn’t create districts, that’s entirely up to each state, so that certainly can’t be what you meant.
As for the comparison of Indy versus Rokita, that’s great that you have numbers but clearly don’t have any idea how to use that information. Indianapolis is legally required to redistrict, so the fact that they have money budgeted for it is good because that is their job. Rokita has no role in redistricting so every dime he spent was on something that wasn’t his job. He runs the elections in this state, not deciding the legislative districts.
In closing, I have to ask again: Really, you’re a lawyer, Paul??
I think the guy who wrote this blog is just mad because he didn’t come up with the plan that Mr. Rokita did.
“I think the guy who wrote this blog is just mad because he didn’t come up with the plan that Mr. Rokita did.”
So pithy!