EDITORIAL Redistricting reform

Boston Herald
August 24, 2009

Redistricting the last time around landed the commonwealth in court and nearly cost ex-House Speaker Tom Finneran his freedom. And that time we ended up NOT losing a congressional seat.

Massachusetts IS, however, on a course to lose another congressional district after the 2010 Census, making the decennial redistricting process that much more complicated.

And leaving aside the important question of our shrinking population for a moment, unless something changes, it will be left to the usual cast of characters on Beacon Hill to handle legislative redistricting.

But there is a better way.

Rather than allow a team of cronies with built-in conflicts of interest to apportion legislative and congressional districts, it should be left to outsiders who don't carry nearly the same kind of baggage.

There are several different models. California has adopted a system that allows average citizens to apply for a seat on a bipartisan redistricting panel. Bay State good government types have proposed a commission made up of legal and government experts. A couple of House reps last year wanted to farm the task out to a private outfit.

Maine, meanwhile, turns over redistricting to an independent commission - but gives its legislature final approval.

Whatever form it would take here surely would be an improvement over the status quo, which has historically put pols like House Speaker "Pro Tempore" Thomas Petrolati in charge of the process.

Petrolati, of course, was Finneran's go-to guy on the plan that a court found was designed largely to protect incumbents. Under current House Speaker Robert DeLeo, he continues to enjoy lofty leadership status.

Previous efforts to enact this reform have failed because lawmakers like the system just the way it is. But there is a better way, and other states are ahead of Massachusetts in proving it.