Iowa GQP Clowns vote down the non partisan redistricting map
- Thread starter Chishawk1425
- Start date
Deplorable. They can't wait to get to the third map, so they can fiddle with it, even though it's never happened before.
As predicted. They will vote down all the others, too, and simply write their own. Iowa will become a partisan gerrymandered mess soon enough.
I mean we deserve what we get. Iowa went from some of the beat leaders in the country to Trump loving knuckle draggers. And Iowans approve. This state is nearly as bad as Kentucky.
Yep. It's such a sad disgrace. The Qanon whackos running for school boards all across the metro as well including ones who were at the Capitol on January 6th.
The first set of proposed new political maps was rejected Tuesday during a key moment in Iowa’s decennial redistricting process.
Iowa Senate Republicans all voted to reject the first set of proposed maps that would redraw statehouse and Congressional boundaries for the next 10 years. All Senate Democrats voted to approve the maps.
Iowa Sen. Roby Smith, R-Davenport, during a brief debate claimed Republicans rejected the maps because of issues with how some districts were constructed.
“(The proposed maps) may meet the statutory requirements, but there are opportunities for these maps to be improved on compactness and deviation,” Smith said. “These deviations, along with compactness, should improve to better meet the standards as required under the state constitution and statute.”
Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver, R-Ankeny, issued a statement saying Senate Republicans’ votes to reject the first maps follow Iowa’s “good redistricting process.”
“By requesting a second map, the Senate has continued to follow that process,” Whitver said. “Senate Republicans believe LSA can improve the compactness and population deviation of several districts by developing a second redistricting plan. My colleagues and I look forward to reviewing that plan and its compliance with the criteria established in Iowa Code.”
https://api2.okanjo.com/metrics/pr/...s/vendor_2mLq9jpjyhrSZ3tVw%3ACTHA1PKMD/follow
Democrats argued for approving the first maps, which they said were fair based on the criteria set forth in state law and the state constitution.
“The maps before us satisfy the Iowa law and the Iowa Constitution,” said Sen. Pam Jochum, D-Dubuque. “To those Republicans in this room that may have some concerns: this map is fair, it’s independent, it does not give an advantage of one party over the other. … Nor should it.”
In a statement, Senate Minority Leader Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, alleged Senate Republicans with their vote Tuesday moved “a big step closer to rigging Iowa elections.”
“The reasons given by Republican Sen. Roby Smith on the floor ignored Iowa law and in fact demonstrated that there was no legitimate reason for legislative Republicans to reject this first map,” Wahls said. “This was a fair map drawn by the nonpartisan, independent commission. It met all the requirements laid out in state law. This is an outrageous use of political power to rig elections in their favor.”
Every 10 years, all U.S. states redraw their political boundaries to reflect changes in the population. Since 1981, Iowa has used a non-partisan process for drawing district that is considered a model because it eliminates gerrymandering, a process politicians and political parties use to draw districts to their benefit.
In Iowa, the districts are drawn by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency -- a department of nonpartisan legal and data analysts -- to make each district as equal in population as possible. By law, the LSA cannot consider the political ramifications of the changes -- how new district lines will affect individual lawmakers’ reelection chances or the balance of power in the Legislature.
With the first set of maps rejected, LSA will now draw a second set of maps, and legislators will again vote on those.
If legislators reject those maps, LSA draws a third set. Legislators must approve the third set of maps, but they then have the ability to amend those, if they choose and have enough votes to approve.
This year’s redistricting process is months behind schedule across the country because of U.S. Census data that was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of that delay, Iowa lawmakers are under something of a time crunch. The deadline set in the state constitution is already passed, and the Iowa Supreme Court has granted the Iowa Legislature an extended deadline until December 1.
In previous redistricting cycles, Iowa legislators agreed to either the first or second plan in 1981, 1991, 2001 and 2011. The court has not had to be involved. The prospect of the process being taken out of their hands has encouraged lawmakers to adopt one of the first two plans.
Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley, R-New Hartford, said he believed the first set of proposed maps were fair, but that he also understands the concerns expressed by Senate Republicans.
“I am hopeful that LSA will produce a map that improves upon the Senate's concerns and meets all of the other criteria for a fair map outlined in Iowa Code,” Grassley said. “Going to a second map is not unprecedented and we are still following Iowa’s gold standard redistricting process. We have worked to maintain the integrity of redistricting process in Iowa and will continue to do so. Iowa House Republicans stand ready to do our due diligence to ensure the second set of maps is a fair map for the people of Iowa.”
Rejecting proposed maps can come at a political cost. In 2001, the first plan would have thrown 60 of 150 legislators into districts where they faced another incumbent. That was rejected, but the plan they adopted threw Republican United States Reps. Jim Leach and Jim Nussle into the same district. Leach into an open district.
Ten years later when Iowa went from five to four congressional districts, legislators adopted a plan put Democratic Reps. Dave Loebsack and Bruce Braley into one district. Loebsack moved across the district line to run again. It also put GOP Reps. Tom Latham and Steve King into the same district. Latham moved and defeated another incumbent, the late Rep. Leonard Boswell.
The 2020 census found that 68 of Iowa’s 99 counties had population losses between the 2010 and 2020 censuses.
Iowa’s population gain of 144,014 people to 3,190,369 was largely in its most populous counties. The fastest growing county was Dallas, west of Des Moines, with an increase of 50.7% (33,543). Johnson and Linn counties grew by 16.8% (21,972) and 9% (19,073), respectively. Polk grew by 14.3% (61,761). Scott County grew 5.7% (9,445).
Census data confirmed that the 2020 head count showing Iowa has 3,192,406 residents will be enough to maintain four U.S. House seats for the next 10 years.
Iowa has seen its congressional delegation shrink over the years from a high of 11 from the 1880s to 1930. Iowa’s population has been growing for 30 years, but other states have grown faster. In 1910, both Iowa and California had 11 representatives in Congress. Today California has 53, but is in danger of losing one for the first time in its nearly 160-year history.
In 1910, there were 11 congressmen from Iowa. After the 1930 census, Iowa lost two congressional seats and one each after the 1940, 1960, 1970, 1990 and 2010 population counts. Over that time, the number of Iowans represented by each member of the House increased from 202,252 in 1910 to 763,447 currently, according to the Census Bureau.
nonpareilonline.com
Iowa Senate Republicans all voted to reject the first set of proposed maps that would redraw statehouse and Congressional boundaries for the next 10 years. All Senate Democrats voted to approve the maps.
Iowa Sen. Roby Smith, R-Davenport, during a brief debate claimed Republicans rejected the maps because of issues with how some districts were constructed.
“(The proposed maps) may meet the statutory requirements, but there are opportunities for these maps to be improved on compactness and deviation,” Smith said. “These deviations, along with compactness, should improve to better meet the standards as required under the state constitution and statute.”
Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver, R-Ankeny, issued a statement saying Senate Republicans’ votes to reject the first maps follow Iowa’s “good redistricting process.”
“By requesting a second map, the Senate has continued to follow that process,” Whitver said. “Senate Republicans believe LSA can improve the compactness and population deviation of several districts by developing a second redistricting plan. My colleagues and I look forward to reviewing that plan and its compliance with the criteria established in Iowa Code.”
https://api2.okanjo.com/metrics/pr/...s/vendor_2mLq9jpjyhrSZ3tVw%3ACTHA1PKMD/follow
Democrats argued for approving the first maps, which they said were fair based on the criteria set forth in state law and the state constitution.
“The maps before us satisfy the Iowa law and the Iowa Constitution,” said Sen. Pam Jochum, D-Dubuque. “To those Republicans in this room that may have some concerns: this map is fair, it’s independent, it does not give an advantage of one party over the other. … Nor should it.”
In a statement, Senate Minority Leader Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, alleged Senate Republicans with their vote Tuesday moved “a big step closer to rigging Iowa elections.”
“The reasons given by Republican Sen. Roby Smith on the floor ignored Iowa law and in fact demonstrated that there was no legitimate reason for legislative Republicans to reject this first map,” Wahls said. “This was a fair map drawn by the nonpartisan, independent commission. It met all the requirements laid out in state law. This is an outrageous use of political power to rig elections in their favor.”
Every 10 years, all U.S. states redraw their political boundaries to reflect changes in the population. Since 1981, Iowa has used a non-partisan process for drawing district that is considered a model because it eliminates gerrymandering, a process politicians and political parties use to draw districts to their benefit.
In Iowa, the districts are drawn by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency -- a department of nonpartisan legal and data analysts -- to make each district as equal in population as possible. By law, the LSA cannot consider the political ramifications of the changes -- how new district lines will affect individual lawmakers’ reelection chances or the balance of power in the Legislature.
With the first set of maps rejected, LSA will now draw a second set of maps, and legislators will again vote on those.
If legislators reject those maps, LSA draws a third set. Legislators must approve the third set of maps, but they then have the ability to amend those, if they choose and have enough votes to approve.
This year’s redistricting process is months behind schedule across the country because of U.S. Census data that was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of that delay, Iowa lawmakers are under something of a time crunch. The deadline set in the state constitution is already passed, and the Iowa Supreme Court has granted the Iowa Legislature an extended deadline until December 1.
In previous redistricting cycles, Iowa legislators agreed to either the first or second plan in 1981, 1991, 2001 and 2011. The court has not had to be involved. The prospect of the process being taken out of their hands has encouraged lawmakers to adopt one of the first two plans.
Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley, R-New Hartford, said he believed the first set of proposed maps were fair, but that he also understands the concerns expressed by Senate Republicans.
“I am hopeful that LSA will produce a map that improves upon the Senate's concerns and meets all of the other criteria for a fair map outlined in Iowa Code,” Grassley said. “Going to a second map is not unprecedented and we are still following Iowa’s gold standard redistricting process. We have worked to maintain the integrity of redistricting process in Iowa and will continue to do so. Iowa House Republicans stand ready to do our due diligence to ensure the second set of maps is a fair map for the people of Iowa.”
Rejecting proposed maps can come at a political cost. In 2001, the first plan would have thrown 60 of 150 legislators into districts where they faced another incumbent. That was rejected, but the plan they adopted threw Republican United States Reps. Jim Leach and Jim Nussle into the same district. Leach into an open district.
Ten years later when Iowa went from five to four congressional districts, legislators adopted a plan put Democratic Reps. Dave Loebsack and Bruce Braley into one district. Loebsack moved across the district line to run again. It also put GOP Reps. Tom Latham and Steve King into the same district. Latham moved and defeated another incumbent, the late Rep. Leonard Boswell.
The 2020 census found that 68 of Iowa’s 99 counties had population losses between the 2010 and 2020 censuses.
Iowa’s population gain of 144,014 people to 3,190,369 was largely in its most populous counties. The fastest growing county was Dallas, west of Des Moines, with an increase of 50.7% (33,543). Johnson and Linn counties grew by 16.8% (21,972) and 9% (19,073), respectively. Polk grew by 14.3% (61,761). Scott County grew 5.7% (9,445).
Census data confirmed that the 2020 head count showing Iowa has 3,192,406 residents will be enough to maintain four U.S. House seats for the next 10 years.
Iowa has seen its congressional delegation shrink over the years from a high of 11 from the 1880s to 1930. Iowa’s population has been growing for 30 years, but other states have grown faster. In 1910, both Iowa and California had 11 representatives in Congress. Today California has 53, but is in danger of losing one for the first time in its nearly 160-year history.
In 1910, there were 11 congressmen from Iowa. After the 1930 census, Iowa lost two congressional seats and one each after the 1940, 1960, 1970, 1990 and 2010 population counts. Over that time, the number of Iowans represented by each member of the House increased from 202,252 in 1910 to 763,447 currently, according to the Census Bureau.
Iowa’s GOP senators reject proposed election maps
DES MOINES — A plan that would have thrown more than 60 incumbent legislators into election districts with at least one other lawmaker and dramatically changed the state’s four congressional
The GOP is the enemy of the United States...The first set of proposed new political maps was rejected Tuesday during a key moment in Iowa’s decennial redistricting process.
Iowa Senate Republicans all voted to reject the first set of proposed maps that would redraw statehouse and Congressional boundaries for the next 10 years. All Senate Democrats voted to approve the maps.
Iowa Sen. Roby Smith, R-Davenport, during a brief debate claimed Republicans rejected the maps because of issues with how some districts were constructed.
“(The proposed maps) may meet the statutory requirements, but there are opportunities for these maps to be improved on compactness and deviation,” Smith said. “These deviations, along with compactness, should improve to better meet the standards as required under the state constitution and statute.”
Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver, R-Ankeny, issued a statement saying Senate Republicans’ votes to reject the first maps follow Iowa’s “good redistricting process.”
“By requesting a second map, the Senate has continued to follow that process,” Whitver said. “Senate Republicans believe LSA can improve the compactness and population deviation of several districts by developing a second redistricting plan. My colleagues and I look forward to reviewing that plan and its compliance with the criteria established in Iowa Code.”
https://api2.okanjo.com/metrics/pr/...s/vendor_2mLq9jpjyhrSZ3tVw%3ACTHA1PKMD/follow
Democrats argued for approving the first maps, which they said were fair based on the criteria set forth in state law and the state constitution.
“The maps before us satisfy the Iowa law and the Iowa Constitution,” said Sen. Pam Jochum, D-Dubuque. “To those Republicans in this room that may have some concerns: this map is fair, it’s independent, it does not give an advantage of one party over the other. … Nor should it.”
In a statement, Senate Minority Leader Zach Wahls, D-Coralville, alleged Senate Republicans with their vote Tuesday moved “a big step closer to rigging Iowa elections.”
“The reasons given by Republican Sen. Roby Smith on the floor ignored Iowa law and in fact demonstrated that there was no legitimate reason for legislative Republicans to reject this first map,” Wahls said. “This was a fair map drawn by the nonpartisan, independent commission. It met all the requirements laid out in state law. This is an outrageous use of political power to rig elections in their favor.”
Every 10 years, all U.S. states redraw their political boundaries to reflect changes in the population. Since 1981, Iowa has used a non-partisan process for drawing district that is considered a model because it eliminates gerrymandering, a process politicians and political parties use to draw districts to their benefit.
In Iowa, the districts are drawn by the nonpartisan Legislative Services Agency -- a department of nonpartisan legal and data analysts -- to make each district as equal in population as possible. By law, the LSA cannot consider the political ramifications of the changes -- how new district lines will affect individual lawmakers’ reelection chances or the balance of power in the Legislature.
With the first set of maps rejected, LSA will now draw a second set of maps, and legislators will again vote on those.
If legislators reject those maps, LSA draws a third set. Legislators must approve the third set of maps, but they then have the ability to amend those, if they choose and have enough votes to approve.
This year’s redistricting process is months behind schedule across the country because of U.S. Census data that was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of that delay, Iowa lawmakers are under something of a time crunch. The deadline set in the state constitution is already passed, and the Iowa Supreme Court has granted the Iowa Legislature an extended deadline until December 1.
In previous redistricting cycles, Iowa legislators agreed to either the first or second plan in 1981, 1991, 2001 and 2011. The court has not had to be involved. The prospect of the process being taken out of their hands has encouraged lawmakers to adopt one of the first two plans.
Iowa House Speaker Pat Grassley, R-New Hartford, said he believed the first set of proposed maps were fair, but that he also understands the concerns expressed by Senate Republicans.
“I am hopeful that LSA will produce a map that improves upon the Senate's concerns and meets all of the other criteria for a fair map outlined in Iowa Code,” Grassley said. “Going to a second map is not unprecedented and we are still following Iowa’s gold standard redistricting process. We have worked to maintain the integrity of redistricting process in Iowa and will continue to do so. Iowa House Republicans stand ready to do our due diligence to ensure the second set of maps is a fair map for the people of Iowa.”
Rejecting proposed maps can come at a political cost. In 2001, the first plan would have thrown 60 of 150 legislators into districts where they faced another incumbent. That was rejected, but the plan they adopted threw Republican United States Reps. Jim Leach and Jim Nussle into the same district. Leach into an open district.
Ten years later when Iowa went from five to four congressional districts, legislators adopted a plan put Democratic Reps. Dave Loebsack and Bruce Braley into one district. Loebsack moved across the district line to run again. It also put GOP Reps. Tom Latham and Steve King into the same district. Latham moved and defeated another incumbent, the late Rep. Leonard Boswell.
The 2020 census found that 68 of Iowa’s 99 counties had population losses between the 2010 and 2020 censuses.
Iowa’s population gain of 144,014 people to 3,190,369 was largely in its most populous counties. The fastest growing county was Dallas, west of Des Moines, with an increase of 50.7% (33,543). Johnson and Linn counties grew by 16.8% (21,972) and 9% (19,073), respectively. Polk grew by 14.3% (61,761). Scott County grew 5.7% (9,445).
Census data confirmed that the 2020 head count showing Iowa has 3,192,406 residents will be enough to maintain four U.S. House seats for the next 10 years.
Iowa has seen its congressional delegation shrink over the years from a high of 11 from the 1880s to 1930. Iowa’s population has been growing for 30 years, but other states have grown faster. In 1910, both Iowa and California had 11 representatives in Congress. Today California has 53, but is in danger of losing one for the first time in its nearly 160-year history.
In 1910, there were 11 congressmen from Iowa. After the 1930 census, Iowa lost two congressional seats and one each after the 1940, 1960, 1970, 1990 and 2010 population counts. Over that time, the number of Iowans represented by each member of the House increased from 202,252 in 1910 to 763,447 currently, according to the Census Bureau.
Iowa’s GOP senators reject proposed election maps
DES MOINES — A plan that would have thrown more than 60 incumbent legislators into election districts with at least one other lawmaker and dramatically changed the state’s four congressional
Full Stop
They are flat out telling us they are going to cheat. Republican voters have no problem with it either. Because authoritarianism.
Change your diaper, child.
Just go to your little god you always thank & say a prayer for him.
Honoring Iowa's redistricting process by rejecting it is like Reynolds honoring sobriety by taking a dozen shots behind the wheel.
Hahaha. I appreciate the flattery of imitation chris. Step it up bud. You cry like a bitch while cheering on people taking away people rights. You would gargle bidens limp dick for pleasure.
Pretty much. He'd fit in well in 1930's Germany. Sadly he fits in with 2021 USA Republicans. Just like many of us keep saying. Enemies in the homeland.
Lame. Do better than that. Though I guess it deviates from your stock pisspants comments so it's a start.
Dude calls someone a nazi while claiming someone with different beliefs is "enemies of the homeland" you can't even make that shit up. Well done.
I think the Iowa GOP intent is to fully reject the maps through their third iteration, which must then be adopted, but that gives the majority party the power to amend that third draft if enough votes can be gathered in support.
Let's face it, the urban areas of Iowa will eventually squeeze the Iowa GOP into a corner. Demographics are a bitch, but this deplorable GOP base here aren't going down without a fight. I expect that eventually only the NW Iowa district (largest by area by a long shot) will be consistently red.
Let's face it, the urban areas of Iowa will eventually squeeze the Iowa GOP into a corner. Demographics are a bitch, but this deplorable GOP base here aren't going down without a fight. I expect that eventually only the NW Iowa district (largest by area by a long shot) will be consistently red.
Or drunkin Governors.
I've drilled down into the numbers county by county. There is no good way to make two districts completely safe for the Rs without making two districts safe for the Dems. At best, Rs can make districts 1,2, or 3 slightly more red but we're talking a couple of percentage points. They're boxed in.
Honestly, I expect Rs to rewrite the redistricting laws. That's their best chance for true gerrymandering bliss.
This is quite the contrast from Illinois Republicans who seem to be all in on the fair districting movement. It's amazing how the attitude of the GOP changes based on what border they happened to have crossed.
As long as they are white and their version of Christianity.
Except that the Des Moines area has plenty of Trumpians. Uhhh...Brad Zaun is from URBANDALE.
It would be nice to say its all W. Iowa, but look at Ankeny. Maybe the City of DSM is blue. Clive, WDM, Grimes, etc.? Republican.
Iowa GOP just sent a message......"Mississppi, EAT YOUR HEART OUT!"
Well, the Iowa method of choosing its judges was the gold standard for 50 years, until the GOPers in the Ioway legislature went to work on it this session.......and then that Constitutional scholar Chuck Grassley advised all of us 6 years ago that how the Constitution advised us to choose Supreme Court Justices really read how everyone thought it read.........
Boyz, in Ioway, the Iowa GOP is out to dry-phuque each and everyone of us residents ......Nationally, the National GOP is out to line their pockets first and foremost! Weze phuqued!
So many fools in this thread.
There is no such thing as "non partisan". You might as well be chasing big foot.
Secondly, "Elections have consequences"
There is no such thing as "non partisan". You might as well be chasing big foot.
Secondly, "Elections have consequences"
