IDAHO LIBRARIANS’ ROLE IN CENSUS REDISTRICTING
And How
Librarians Made a Difference
By Lily Wai,
Elaine Watson and Stephen Woods
For the first time in the State of Idaho, ten libraries from around the State were invited to participate directly in the politically charged Census 2000 redistricting process. Through legislative funding, the State of Idaho provided libraries with computer equipment and GIS (Geographic Information Systems) software to enable citizens to create and submit congressional and legislative plans through their local libraries.
Background on Federal Apportionment & Redistricting Law
The Constitution of the United
States directs Congress to determine the number of representatives that each
state may elect to the House of Representatives. To assist Congress in this process, provision for a census
was included in the Constitution for determining the population of each
state every ten years. The process
of allocating the number of seats in the House of Representatives to each state
is commonly known as apportionment.
Redistricting is traditionally defined as the act of redrawing
congressional district boundaries within a state; however, states typically also
redraw state legislative boundaries at the same time.
The redistricting process came under a tremendous amount of scrutiny by
the Supreme Court and Congress in the 1960s regarding two major issues that are
still being debated.
“One man one vote” required that legislative and
congressional boundaries be of “substantially equal” size.
The Supreme Court eventually defined equal size as a range of less then
ten percent. Another issue
addressed by Congress in the Voting Rights Act of 1965 concerned the treatment
of racial and ethnic minorities in the drawing of redistricting boundaries.
Background on Redistricting in Idaho
Historically, the Idaho State Legislature accomplished
redistricting by drawing legislative and congressional boundaries based on
counties and assigning the appropriate number of representatives.
However, with the mandate of the United States Supreme Court to create
substantially equal districts, this practice no longer was sufficient.
In the 1970s, the Idaho Legislature drew boundaries based on voting
districts as well as county lines. This
method worked until the plan was challenged in the 1980s, and declared
unconstitutional by the Idaho
Supreme Court, based on the Idaho State Constitution's provision to keep
counties intact. The Idaho
legislature failed to provide an alternative plan by the
1984 election so the Idaho Supreme Court took
unprecedented power by mandating a court-designed plan in the 1980s.
In the 1990s, the Idaho Legislature, in anticipation of the same
problems, amended the Idaho Constitution allowing the division of counties.
They also appointed a joint committee dominated by the majority party to
prepare a redistricting plan. The
1994 Idaho legislature, dissatisfied with partisanship of this committee,
decided to amend the Idaho Constitution to allow for the creation of a
bi-partisan citizens’ commission for redistricting.
The Idaho Redistricting Commission
sworn in on June 5, 2001 was composed of three Democrats and three Republicans
and given 90 days to approve new congressional and legislative districts.
The
Commission faced a number of challenges of which three were notable.
According to the 2000 Census, Idaho’s population shifted from small
rural communities and urban areas in southeast Idaho to growth in urban areas in
southwest and northern Idaho creating political tension between urban and rural
interests. Furthermore, Hispanic population growth in southwestern Idaho
and Native American reservations in Northern and Southeast Idaho raised concerns
about diluting ethnic minority votes. Finally,
business interest in southwest and southeast Idaho had opposing views on the way
that the congressional districts should be drawn based on the fact that the
Boise Metro area in southwest Idaho could theoretically contain both members of
congress.
The
potential problems related to diluting minority votes either through racial and
language discrimination or discriminating against a partisan minority is a
serious problem that can cause a plan to fail under the scrutiny of the Supreme
Court. However, a plan can also
fail through gerrymandering, drawing odd shaped districts to create an unfair
partisan advantage.
How did the libraries get involved?
It was in September 1999 that Ross Borden, Senior Budget
and Policy Analyst at the Idaho State Legislative Office approached Lily Wai,
Head of Government Documents and Project Director of INSIDE Idaho at the
University of Idaho Library about involving libraries in the Census 2001
redistricting process.
The new concept conceived by Borden was to provide each
participating library in the state with the TIGER and PL 94-171 data plus GIS
redistricting software to allow citizens to come into the libraries and actually
draw their own legislative and/or congressional plans.
They could then transmit their plans to the Commission for consideration,
or present them to the Commission when the Commission conducts its series of
statewide hearings. The Redistricting Commission appropriation would cover the
costs for computer stations pre-installed with appropriate mapping software and
data, and for library representatives to attend the GIS redistricting software
training that would be provided to commissioners and staff.
Subsequent meetings were held between the Legislative
Office staff, the INSIDE Idaho team, and Idaho State Librarians to work out the
logistics. In March 2000, the Idaho
Legislature approved the appropriation bill for the full $400,000 amount
requested to support Idaho’s 2001 redistricting process.
The plan to involve the libraries in order to provide public access received
overwhelming support. The final
plan included three parts:
In November 2000, a Memorandum of Agreement was signed by
the key contacts in each of the ten libraries to officially commit them to
participate in the Census 2001 redistricting process. Idaho Department of Water Resources and a private consulting
company, Spatial Dynamics, were contracted to prepare the redistricting data and
to provide the training workshops to librarians and the Commissioners.
Training
workshop for librarians
In
late April 2001, at the State capital in Boise, the Idaho Legislative Services
Office provided three days of training to ten Public Access Libraries from
across the state to facilitate the public’s involvement in the redistricting
process for the intended June 1st start date.
A mix of librarians from both public and academic libraries, and
the State Library were present. The
Workshop included an historical overview of redistricting in Idaho, use of
Arcview mapping software, and use of Autobound redistricting software. A
redistricting website, including a discussion board, was set up on the INSIDE
Idaho website (http://www.insideidaho.org)
to facilitate communication between the ten libraries.
As
part of the agreement with the Commission on Redistricting, each library was
required to make the computer available to the public and to provide training
during the 90-day redistricting period. At
some libraries, staff created PowerPoint tutorials for training staff and
citizens; these tutorials were later mounted on the INSIDE Idaho website for use
by all participating Libraries.
In
larger academic libraries, group workshops and hands-on training were provided to
interested reference staff. Training
for the public was entirely one-on-one with initial training taking from 1 to 1
½ hours per person. At some
libraries, users signed up for their initial training and subsequent sessions.
In most cases, learning the redistricting software was easier for staff
and citizens who had previous GIS experience using ArcView.
Idaho Libraries’ Participation in the Redistricting Process
During
the three-month mandatory redistricting period, the residents in various regions
of the state were able to create and submit plans
to the Commission using any one of the ten Public Access Libraries.
Many of the libraries set up their redistricting computer in an easily
accessible, public area of the library. Because
zip disks were required for storing plans, some libraries made zip disks
available for purchase. Libraries were not required to advertise the
redistricting computers, but some library staff did speak to the press, and
academic library staff advertised the availability of the redistricting
computers on their campuses.
Final use statistics at the Public Access Libraries, compiled by the Idaho Legislative Services Office, are included in the tables below.
Usage Statistics at Public Access Libraries
|
|
Number of Users |
Number of Sessions |
Total Patron Hours |
Total Staff Assistance Hours |
|
State Library |
6 |
21 |
44.00 |
15.25 |
|
Legislative Reference |
8 |
25 |
23.50 |
3.50 |
|
University of Idaho |
2 |
9 |
26.00 |
4.00 |
|
Idaho State University |
5 |
21 |
53.50 |
5.50 |
|
Boise State University |
10 |
25 |
38.75 |
6.75 |
|
Lewis-Clark State College |
4 |
4 |
11.00 |
4.50 |
|
Twin Falls Public |
3 |
0 |
0.00 |
0.00 |
|
Hayden Branch, Shoshone-
Kootenai Area Libraries |
|
|
|
|
|
Idaho Falls Public Library |
15 |
25 |
210.00 |
20.00 |
|
Northwest Nazarene
University |
4 |
7 |
9.50 |
2.50 |
|
Total |
74 |
184 |
501 |
73.75 |
Number of Plans Submitted
|
|
Legislative |
Congressional |
|
Number
of Plans drawn by Commission or Commissioners |
47 |
14 |
|
Number
of Plans drawn by Citizens |
19 |
1 |
|
Total Number of Plans
Considered |
66 |
15 |
Use
statistics were lower than anticipated and this can be attributed to several
factors. The largest deterrent to
submitting a plan was the time involved, not only the time required to learn the
redistricting software, but also the time required to create a plan.
The estimated time to create a new legislative plan was five hours or
more. Residents also had to
purchase their own zip disk on which to save their plans, and a floppy disk for
submitting the plan.
Final
Redistricting plans
In
early September, within the 90 day limit, Idaho’s Commission on Redistricting
approved new legislative and congressional plans. The Idaho Supreme Court rejected the Commission’s first
legislative plan (Plan L66) because the population of some districts varied by
more than 10% and no reasons were given for the deviation.
The Commission was ordered to reconvene and adopt another plan.
On March 1, 2002, the Idaho Supreme Court rejected the Commission’s
second legislative plan (Plan L91) because it violated the 10% deviation and
improperly divided counties. The
Commission was again ordered to reconvene.
On March 9, 2002, Idaho’s Commission on Redistricting approved a third
plan (Plan L97). On March 22 and 29th,
2002, the Idaho Supreme Court denied petitions for challenges to Plan L97.
Thus it appears that the 2001-2002 redistricting in Idaho finally reached
its conclusion and the newly redrawn legislative districts will be used until
the 2012 elections.
Conclusion
Out of the 66 plans considered by the Idaho Redistricting
Commission, 19 were drawn up by the citizens' groups and submitted through the
libraries. According to Analyst
Ross Borden at the Idaho State Legislative Office, the citizen-submitted plans
were useful to the Commission, particularly in the sense that they helped
commissioners better understand how others defined communities of interest.
Certain elements of citizens’ plans were borrowed and incorporated into
commissioners’ plans.
Idaho libraries' participation in the redistricting process
made a difference in the final outcome. GIS
technology and library access allowed citizens to participate directly and to
evaluate the Commission's work via the Internet.
The redistricting process was no longer done in secret in closed rooms in
the Statehouse, but was made fully accessible and understandable to the public.
From the librarians’ perspective, it was a tremendous
learning experience. Librarians
increased their GIS competencies otherwise beyond their reach; they gained
exposure to the political process of redistricting; and they found new
opportunities to promote the services of the library to their community.
Will Idaho libraries be involved in Census 2010? Analyst Ross Borden envisions “interactive, ubiquitous, Internet-based redistricting capability for the next go-round.” He says that “it will still be necessary to have places where citizens can go to learn the rudiments of the process and system” and get assistance. Borden foresees that libraries will play a similar central role in this important democratic process in the next Census redistricting.
Acknowledgement:
The authors wish to acknowledge the information provided by Ross Borden, Senior Budget & Policy Analyst at the Idaho State Legislative Office.