ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Preventing gerrymandering |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Preventing gerrymandering

| Sunday, January 20, 2019 10:00 a.m

With news of the Supreme Court open to hearing gerrymandering cases from North Carolina and Maryland, it’s time to fan the inferno about Pennsylvania’s own redistricting reform.

For a long time, I believed that promoting an independent, nonpartisan citizens’ commission on redistricting that is proposed by Fair Districts PA was the right answer. Someone asked me who would pick the people to serve on the commission, and I realized that there is no such thing as an independent, nonpartisan anything.

A commission would just be another layer of partisan bureaucracy for our ever-functional state government. Such a thing was killed by Rep. Daryl Metcalfe anyway last year when he eviscerated House Bills 722 and 563 and Senate Bill 22 as chairman of the House State Government Committee. Maybe he unwittingly did us a favor?

Since it seems impossible to wrangle control from the General Assembly, let’s work with that instead of trying to fight it. What we need is to write the rules to be idiot-proof, or even Metcalfe-proof. We need to lay out the terms of drawing district lines so explicitly that it would be impossible to gerrymander ever again.

Keep districts compact. Only use geography and population data from the census, then feed it to a computer algorithm and press a button. Instead of trying to circumvent the Legislature, let’s use it to our advantage. It’s like the old saying, if you can’t go around a thing, go through it.

Jeffrey Vermeire


The writer is a candidate for Pennsylvania’s 37th
Senate District.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.