2 June 2012 0 Comments

Liberty Index Part 12: Act 131 of 2011 – Redistricting Gerrymandering



This is a complicated bill containing good provisions and bad provisions and there are valid reasons for voting “yea” or “nay” so this will be graded ALL MEMBERS and all members will have 50 point SUBTRACTED to their grade.

Because the 2001 Districts are, as of now because of population shifts, out of balance, the 2001 District Lines are, therefore, unconstitutional.

A fine mess our General Assembly has gotten us into. Apparently, they thought the Republican majority Supreme Court would see itself as Republican rather than an independent, separate and equal branch of government to check and balance power.

Or, more simply, why did the General Assembly wait until the last minute to perform  one of their fundamental Constitutional critical  functions to ensure free and fair elections?

Overturned by Order of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court 25 Jan 2012

Official Commonwealth Redistricting: The Legislative Guide to Redistricting

Justice Baer’s comments reported at capitolwire BREAKING: Capitolwire’s Pete DeCoursey interviewed Supreme Court Justice Max Baer. Here are the standout quotes:

“I think this year’s election is going to go on the 2001 lines,” Baer said in an interview with Capitolwire. “I think that is what the majority intended and I think that is what a reading of the chief justice’s order said.”

Justice Eakin’s comments “Justice J. Michael Eakin, a Republican, said he did not argue with the “reordering of constitutional priorities by the majority,” but said he did not see a need to make it retroactive.

“Computers or not, drawing a new plan using new rules will not happen in time for this year’s elections,” Eakin wrote in a concurring and dissenting opinion.

Redistricting May Delay Primary Post-Gazette 4 February 2012  The existing districts were drawn in 2001 and because of population shifts, they are presently out of balance and are, probably, unconstitutional.



Leave a Reply