Know your vote. Take a look at your sample ballot now!

Redistricting in Nevada after the 2010 census

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Public Policy Logo-one line.pngin Nevada

Note: Redistricting takes place every 10 years after completion of the United States Census. The information here pertains to the 2010 redistricting process. For information on more recent redistricting developments, see this article.


Redistricting in Nevada
Election Policy on Ballotpedia Logo.png
General information
Partisan control:
Republican
Process:
Legislative
Deadline:
-
Total seats
Congress:
4
State Senate:
21
State House:
42

This article details the timeline of redistricting events in Nevada following the 2010 census. It also provides contextual information about the redistricting process and census information.

Process

See also: State-by-state redistricting procedures
Figure 1: This map shows the Nevada Congressional Districts after the 2000 census.

Once the legislature proposed a plan, the Governor could veto it. Should that happen, the legislature could not override a gubernatorial veto. With a Democratically held State Assembly and a Republican Governor in Brian Sandoval, such a scenario was a possibility.

The first hearing was announced for March 10, 2011.[1] Lawmakers were briefed on target sizes for districts and current discrepancies ahead of time.[2]

Hearings wrapped up on Saturday, April 2, 2011, and the process of drawing maps began the following Monday.[3] Legislators promised to make up for the largely closed-door mapping process by unveiling the maps at a public hearing.[4]

The Nevada Constitution provided authority over redistricting to the Legislature in Section 5 of Article 4.

Leadership

2011

The redistricting process was overseen by the Legislative Operations and Elections committees of the State Assembly and Senate. The members were as follows:

Senate Legislative Operations and Elections Committee

Democratic Party Democrats (3)

Republican Party Republicans (2)

House Legislative Operations and Elections Committee

Democratic Party Democrats (9)

Republican Party Republicans (6)

Panel

After vetoes by Governor Brian Sandoval (R) led to the legislature's failure to create maps, Judge Todd Russell appointed a panel of three masters to generate maps. The following individuals served on the panel:

  • Alan Glover, Carson Clerk/Recorder
  • Tom Sheets, Las Vegas lawyer
  • Bob Erickson, former director of Legislative Counsel Bureau's Research Division

A hearing occurred on September 19, 2011 with the intent of resolving any remaining legal issues and providing instructions to the panel. All panel meetings were open to the public.[5]

Census results

Nevada's growth owed much to Las Vegas; Clark County alone represented 72% of the state's population in April 2010. Overall, the southwest region grew, adding its growth among minority residents; Hispanics grew 82% and Asians 116%.[6]

Special panel redistricting

On October 14, 2011, the three-member panel of special masters tasked with redrawing the districts in Nevada released draft maps. A hearing was scheduled for October 27 for Judge James Todd Russell to review the maps.[7]

The Congressional proposal drew the new 4th District in urban Las Vegas. That district would be 42.7 percent Hispanic.[8]

 Special masters redistricting proposals 
  • Proposed Congressional districts.

    Proposed Congressional districts.

  • Proposed state senate districts.

    Proposed state senate districts.

  • Proposed state assembly districts.

    Proposed state assembly districts.

October 2011: Panel maps approved

On October 27, 2011, Judge James Todd Russell approved the maps after meeting with the panel. Several minor changes were made to the maps based on concerns expressed by both parties.[9]

Democratic and Republican lawyers said they would review the maps before deciding if an appeal would be filed to the Supreme Court.

Congressional redistricting

Gaining a fourth seat in the U.S. House, Nevada took up the challenge of drawing four equitable Districts to cover the bulk of the population, concentrated in Clark County, and the residents of the hundreds of sparsely populated miles.[10] With population growth centered on Clark County, home of Las Vegas, the new District was bound to be drawn around the heavily Democratic urban center, a scenario that would see Nevada's four seats be more or less evenly divided between two 'safe' seats for each party.[11]

In 2001, working out the lines of the then-new 3rd District, successive deals fell through and the process ran into a special session, something elected officials were anxious to avoid across the board. 2001's session left the executive and legislative branches in open opposition.[12]

February 2011: First lawsuit

Anticipating that the legislature might not complete redistricting by June 6, 2011, when sine die occurred, Nevada Democrats filed a precautionary lawsuit on February 24, 2011 - the first day they were able to do so as the law does not allow any redistricting lawsuits to be filed until full data is delivered by the Census Bureau.[13]

The suit sought to ensure that any lawsuits would be heard in the state capital of Carson City, where Democrats had some hope of using their legislative majorities and countering the fact that Governor Brian Sandoval belonged to the GOP. Fear that Governor Sandoval might veto the legislature's redistricting plan was a partial driver of the suit.

Specifically, the suit named Democratic Secretary of State Ross Miller, and sought to bar him from administering any elections or certifying any results for the 2012 election cycle until all three series of maps - Congressional, assembly, and senate - were complete.

The argument was that Carson City's courts had substantial experience with election and law and were therefore the most logical and speedy courts to take any redistricting cases.

Figure 2: This map shows the Nevada Assembly Districts after the 2000 census.
Figure 3: This map shows the Nevada Senate Districts after the 2000 census.

April 2011: First maps

Democrats held off on proposing Congressional boundaries alongside the legislative maps released in late April. Republicans did however offer a map, one with two Democratic, one Republican, and one competitive seat.[14]

The proposal made the new 4th into an urban seat that would be wholly surrounded by the 1st. It also split the current second to make up the 2nd and 3rd.[15]

The Democratic map was published the first week of May, drawing three competitive seats and one that leaned to the GOP.[16] Conflict emerged over how to handle the state's Hispanic population - a sizable 26% of the state. Dems wanted minority 'influence' seats while the GOP pointed to the sheer numbers of Hispanics and argued for minority 'opportunity' districts. What that difference looked like on paper was evidenced by the competing visions for the new 4th seat, where Democrats drew borders for 22.88% Hispanic voters compared to the GOP's 50.70%. In terms of the Democratic registration advantage, the respective gap was stark: 8.1% to 22.9%, leading to Democratic charges that the Republican move to hand such an advantage to their rivals in one seat was a bid to keep the other three districts more right-leaning.

May 2011: Floor vote

On Tuesday, May 10, 2011, the Nevada State Assembly passed both the Senate and Assembly maps, with at least one Democrat crossing the aisle to cast a 'no' ballot.[17] SB 497 passed the two chambers by, respectively, 11-10 and 25-17.[18]

Gubernatorial veto

Governor Sandoval vetoed the bill on May 14. In his veto message, he accused Democrats of violating the Voting Rights Act and described the maps as inequitable to minorities. Speaking specifically to the maps' treatment of Hispanics, he said, "With Hispanics accounting for 46 percent of the total population growth in our state over the last 10 years, this transparent effort to avoid creating even one additional district where this community would be likely to elect its candidate of choice is simply not acceptable."[19]

Anticipating the veto, legislative Democrats were already working on a new map, though they did comment that neither the Governor nor his staff had public testimony on the map during their formation and described the veto as, "an overt act of partisanship designed to appease his Republican base."[20] With placeholder lawsuits from both parties already before federal judges, few thought an override was at all possible.[21][22]

AB 566 was amended and passed, again on a party-line vote, out of the Assembly Legislative Operations and Elections Committee on Tuesday, May 17, 2011. A vote on the floor was expected the following day.[23] The major change was to the boundaries proposed for the 3rd Congressional seat, then held by Democrat Joe Heck.

May 2011: Second maps

Following the party-line vote in committee, the majority party unanimously backed AB 566 on the Assembly floor, passing it 26-16, only two votes shy of overriding a second gubernatorial veto.[24][25]

While they had no guarantee Governor Sandoval would not veto their map a second time, the session timing meant a third set of maps could be passed, if needed.[26]

The bill passed the Assembly on a 25-16 vote. May 25, 2011 brought another party-line vote. Republicans voted against AB 566, but Democrats passed it 11-10.[27] In the end, what legislators sent to Governor Sandoval was only slightly different the first item he vetoed.[28]

May 2011: Second veto

Brian Sandoval delivered a second veto. His message accompanying the veto echoed the first veto, saying he had vetoed the second map for the same reasons that he found the first one unsatisfactory.[29] 'The plan reflected in the bill did not provide for the fair representation of the people of the state of Nevada, nor did it comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965."

Majority Democrats said they would only release a third map if they had some assurances about the willingness of Republicans to 'negotiate' with them.

May 2011: Nevada Latino Redistricting Coalition map

The Nevada Latino Redistricting Coalition drew its own map for the state's four Congressional seats.[30]

It made NV-3, held by Joe Heck (R), the focus. Hispanics made up 41% of the district's population, and 35% of them would be eligible voters. The partisan split came down to 50% for Democrats and 28% for the GOP. Those numbers came in above what Democrats would do and below the Republican numbers, designed to make one strong Hispanic district while optimizing the demographic's numbers in other seats.

When they released their map, the NLRC spoke out against Republican maps and criticized the idea that the GOP's suggestion of a 50% Hispanic seat was a boost for their group, instead accusing Republicans of trying to pack Hispanics.

Nevada Latinos for Prosperity said of the Democratic plan, would "continue to keep the minority population silenced and unrepresented."[31] The same statement made a point of historical Hispanic voting trends in Nevada, arguing the Democrats were improper in assuming Hispanics were a strictly Democratic voting bloc.

The ten Hispanics in the state legislature were all Democrats who backed their party's maps.[32]

June 2011: Third map

Minority Leader Mike McGinness named a pair of Senators, Barbara Cegavske and James Settelmeyer, to be his party's point-men in discussions with Republicans.[33]

No compromise was reached when the session closed.[34] Assembly Segerblom confessed, "I think we just ran out of time. In his colleague, Rep. Settlemeyer's view, "...it's going to court. The Democrats want us to give up too much. And all we want are a fair set of maps."[35] There was still the option that the Governor could immediately call a special session.

With the session's end, lawyers on both sides sat down to review what had been done in other states as they prepared for their own court battle.[36] Carson City District Judge James T. Russell was still slated to hear the case. Meanwhile, the secretary of state had until June 20, 2011 to respond to complaints filed by both parties.[37]

Legislative redistricting

April 2011: First maps

Majority Democrats planned to publicize their first maps during the day on Thursday, April 28, 2011, with an evening debate to follow. Both chambers were set to meet in separate Committees of the Whole, a move designed to allow all lawmakers to take in and comment on the proposed maps at the same time.[38]

Legislative maps were expected to preserve 21 state senate and 42 state assembly seats, moving one and two, respectively, into Clark County.[39] The state's two remaining dual districts were predicted to be eliminated after redistricting.[40]

Goicoechea's northern seat was eliminated in initial Democratic maps, as was that of term limited Senator Greg Brower (R), who had already announced his Congressional race.[41] Goicoechea, however, came out in favor of the Democratic plan, saying, "Some of the stuff (Democrats) proposed clearly makes more sense."[42] That same map nested two Assembly districts inside each Senate seat, something that would end multiple cases of borders for the different chambers not aligning and would, per the majority party, reduce voter confusion. The Republican plan also shifted seats to the more populous south, though it resembled previous district lines more than the Democratic vision.

Republican maps kept the current partisan advantage at 26-16 in the Assembly and 14-7 in the Senate, both in favor of Democrats. Democrats matched that 14-7 split in the Senate but drew an Assembly map that pushed their advantage to 30-12.[43] Republicans also took the step of renumbering each district in the state in their maps. Under Nevada's code, incumbents cannot use the word reelect in their campaigns if their district number changes.[44]

Before publishing maps, staff attorneys for the House advised Republicans that their maps did not meet Voting Rights Act requirements and went so far as to recommend against releasing them at all. Instead, House Republicans had to rely only on the maps made by their Senate colleagues to make their case.[45]

Over the next week, Republicans tweaked their map, altering rural district lines to lie more neatly along county boundaries, cutting down the numbers of separate counties lawmakers would need to attend to.[46]

May 2011: Committee action

Over the first weekend in May, the Senate and Assembly committees on Legislative Operations and Elections passed both maps, SB497 and AB566, on party-line votes.[47] Republicans claimed Democrats were densely allocating Hispanics in order to dilute their vote and, in so doing, were violating the VRA. Both parties continued to use redistricting's treatment of Hispanics as the cornerstone of their criticisms.[48] On the Senate side, Republicans pressed the question of why only the Democratic map was presented as a draft bill, and were able to pass a motion to have their own map submitted as a draft, only for the next move to be a motion to pass the Democratic bill.[49]

Assembly Minority Leader Goicoechea's (R) comment on the two was maps was, "We expect their bill will pass through the Senate and Assembly, and then be vetoed. When it comes back, the veto will be sustained."[50]

Legal issues

June 2011: Legislature's failure to finish maps

On June 22, 2011, Judge James Todd Russell met with both Democratic and Republican lawyers to discuss the redistricting lawsuits.[51]

Nevada First Judicial District Court Judge James Russell ruled on July 12, 2011 that a special panel would be charged with completing the redistricting process in Nevada.[52] Russell said he would like to see the panel restricted to only 3 or 4 people.[53]

Russell gave lawyers until July 20 to propose panel members. The panel of special masters would then oversee the final map-drawing process.[54] Judge Russell suggested that using county voter registrars could be a way to remove the political nature of the maps. Governor Brian Sandoval (R) commended that idea and suggested Scott Wasserman -- chief executive officer and special counsel to regents -- as a backup option if the registrars did not agree to the process.[55]

July 2011: New panel

On July 20, 2011, Secretary of State Ross Miller submitted a list of possible candidates for the panel to Judge James Todd Russell. The motion with the list of names also contained reference to the possibility that the judge could force the Governor to call a special session. In particular, a prior example was referenced from 1965, when the court ordered the governor to declare a special session to create a new redistricting plan.[56]

Meanwhile, lawyers from both parties requested that the court decide whether Nevada qualified for a majority-minority Congressional seat due to the large Hispanic population in the state. Democrats contended that creating a majority-minority district would dilute Latino influence. Republicans contended that the requirements of the Voting Rights Act mandated that a majority-minority district be created because of the population percentages.[57]

September 2011: Court hearing

A three-hour court hearing was held on September 21, 2011 to provide more guidance to the court-appointed panel that took on the role of drawing congressional and state legislative districts. Judge James Russell said he wanted to approve a new redistricting plan by November 16, 2011. In the court hearing, Democratic lawyers argued against the need for majority-minority Hispanic districts.[58]

It was also announced that there would be two public hearings held on October 10 and October 11, at which time citizens could weigh in on possible maps.[59]

The next court hearing was on November 15 or 16, when Judge Russell would either adopt new maps or send them back to the panel for changes.[60]

October 2011: State Supreme Court intervened

In October 2011, Nevada Secretary of State Ross Miller asked the State Supreme Court to force the lower court to have a greater say in the process. At the time District Court Judge James Todd Russell appointed a panel of three masters to draw the maps before an October 21 deadline. But Miller contended that Russell did not provide sufficient guidance in the process and did not rule on questions submitted by both Democrats and Republicans. The primary question at hand was how the Voting Rights Act should be interpreted with respect to the number of majority-minority Congressional districts.[61]

On October 5, 2011, the State Supreme Court announced it would hear arguments in the redistricting case on November 14, 2011.[62]

October 2011: Special masters hearings

In October 2011, the three-member special masters panel held hearings regarding the drawing of the districts. Democratic Party lawyers argued that Nevada had a history of electing Hispanics, and thus there was less of a requirement to draw strict majority-minority districts to ensure minorities have a chance at election. Meanwhile, Republican attorneys testified that majority-minority districts were needed because of white voter bias. The main issue of disagreement centered around whether one of the four Congressional districts and 12 of the 63 state legislative districts should be majority-minority.[63]

Meanwhile, on October 12, 2011, special master Tom Sheets asked the two parties to resolve their differences, suggesting that was a better option than the panel drawing the new maps. "You can make the special masters irrelevant if you choose to," Sheets said.[64]

DEcember 2011: No challenges

There were no challenges filed against the new maps passed by the special masters panel.[65]

History

Deviation from Ideal Districts

2000 population deviation[66]
Office Percentage
Congressional districts 0.00%
State house districts 1.97%
State senate districts 9.91%
Under federal law, districts could vary from an Ideal District by up to 10%, though the lowest number achievable was preferred. Ideal Districts were computed through simple division of the number of seats for any office into the population at the time of the Census.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "Nevada lawmakers prepare for redistricting process," February 25, 2011
  2. ↑ Fox Reno, "Hearings Begin on Nevada Redistricting," March 11, 2011
  3. ↑ 8 News Now, "Lawmakers Begin Redistricting Debate," April 1, 2011
  4. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Nevadans Outline Stakes As Legislature Plans New Political Districts," April 3, 2011
  5. ↑ Nevada Appeal, "Russell names three masters to handle redistricting," August 4, 2011
  6. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "Nevada lawmakers prepare for redistricting process," February 25, 2011
  7. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Special Masters File Report, Maps, With Carson Judge – Propose Urban Las Vegas Congressional District," October 14, 2011
  8. ↑ The Republic, "Court masters propose splitting Nevada's northern congressional district; still need approval," October 14, 2011
  9. ↑ The Republic, "Judge tweaks and approves Nevada voting maps," October 27, 2011
  10. ↑ Reno Gazette-Journal, "Redistricting legislators could face rebellion if they mess up," December 12, 2010
  11. ↑ Washington Post, "Odds good for Democrats as Nevada adds a seat," January 21, 2011
  12. ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Redistricting exploits sometimes fail to achieve intended goals," December 23, 2010
  13. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Even before first redistricting plan is presented, Democrats make first legal move in Carson City court," February 24, 2011
  14. ↑ This is Reno, "Republicans in the Nevada Legislature introduce redistricting plans," April 29, 2011
  15. ↑ Fox5, "Nevada GOP, Dems Unveil Redistricting Plans," April 28, 2011
  16. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Democrats Unveil Proposed Congressional District Maps," May 5, 2011
  17. ↑ Lahontan Valley News, :Redistricting passes Nevada Legislature," May 10, 2011
  18. ↑ Reno Gazette Journal, "Democrats pass redistricting bills," May 10, 2011
  19. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Gov. Sandoval vetoes Democrats’ redistricting maps," May 14, 2011
  20. ↑ The Republic, "APNewsBreak: Gov. Sandoval vetoes Nevada redistricting bill; override unlikely," May 14, 2011
  21. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Governor Sandoval Vetoes Democratic Redistricting Plan," May 14, 2011
  22. ↑ Nevada Appeal, "Nevada governor vetoes redistricting," May 14, 2011 (dead link)
  23. ↑ Greenfield Reporter, "Nevada Assembly panel passes new Democratic redistricting bill after gov veto," May 17, 2011
  24. ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Democrats OK new redistricting bill," May 19, 2011
  25. ↑ Times Union, "NV Assembly passes Dems' 2nd try at redistricting," May 18, 2011
  26. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Democrats introduce revised Congressional maps," May 17, 2011
  27. ↑ Real Clear Politics, "Nevada redistricting gets another party line vote," May 25, 2011
  28. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "Legislators send redistricting, other bills to governor," May 25, 2011
  29. ↑ Reno Gazette Journal, "Sandoval again vetoes redistricting proposal," May 31, 2011
  30. ↑ las Vegas Sun, "Latino leaders come up with their own plan for redistricting," May 20, 2011
  31. ↑ News Review, "Hispanics and redistricting," May 26, 2011
  32. ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal, "New tensions boil over in Nevada redistricting battle," May 21, 2011
  33. ↑ las Vegas Review Journal, "Democrat, GOP lawmakers to collaborate on redistricting plan," June 2, 2011
  34. ↑ Real Clear Politics, "Nevada redistricting efforts fizzle," June 6, 2011
  35. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "Redistricting appears dead in Nevada Legislature," June 7, 2011
  36. ↑ Lahontan Valley News, "LEGISLATURE: Redistricting battle heads for the courts," June 7, 2011
  37. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Redistricting stalemate could end up in court or special session," June 9, 2011
  38. ↑ Stamford Advocate, "Lawmakers to unveil proposed voting district maps," April 26, 2011
  39. ↑ Reno gazette Journal, "Nevada redistricting debate to begin in week ahead," May 1, 2011
  40. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Lawmakers Set To Release First Maps In Redistricting Process," April 26, 2011
  41. ↑ The Republic, "Republicans release plan for redistricting Nevada legislature, await Democratic counter-offer," April 28, 2011
  42. ↑ Reno Gazette-Journal, "Nevada redistricting debate to begin in week ahead," May 1, 2011
  43. ↑ The Republic, "Republicans release plan for redistricting Nevada legislature, await Democratic counter-offer," April 28, 2011
  44. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Republican and Democrats Release Competing Political District Maps," April 28, 2011
  45. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Assembly Republicans split with Senate Republicans over redistricting plans," April 28, 2011
  46. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "After Tiff, Republicans Offer "Minor Tweaks" to Redistricting Proposal," May 3, 2011
  47. ↑ Reno Gazette Journal, "Legislative panels pass Nevada redistricting plan," May 7, 2011
  48. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Pondering the power of Hispanic voter blocs," May 8, 2011
  49. ↑ Daily Journal, "Nevada Assembly panel Oks Democratic redistricting plan," May 7, 2011
  50. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "Legislative committees pass Democrats' redistricting plan," May 7, 2011
  51. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "Judge meets with lawyers on Nevada redistricting plan," June 22, 2011
  52. ↑ New York Times, "Latino Population Increase Reshapes Election Districts," July 14, 2011
  53. ↑ Reno Gazette-Journal, "Special panel to draw Nevada voting districts," July 12, 2011
  54. ↑ KTVN "Hearing Held in Nevada Redistricting Suit," July 12, 2011
  55. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Sandoval: Courts will ultimately decide whether counties get money back," July 14, 2011
  56. ↑ Greenfield Reporter, "Secretary of state suggests redistricting masters; says judge could consider special session," July 20, 2011
  57. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "GOP, Democrats seek legal ruling on Hispanic majority district," July 20, 2011
  58. ↑ Houston Chronicle, "Nevada judge orders public redistricting hearings," September 21, 2011
  59. ↑ Nevada News Bureau, "Carson Judge Russell Expected To Rule Quickly On Redistricting Guidelines, Sets Public Hearings For Oct. 10-11," September 21, 2011
  60. ↑ Las Vegas Review Journal, "Judge wants redistricting plan in place by Nov. 16," September 22, 2011
  61. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "Ross Miller asks Nevada Supreme Court to intervene in redistricting case," October 3, 2011
  62. ↑ The Republic, "Nevada Supreme Court to hear whether Legislature ignored responsibility for redistricting," October 5, 2011
  63. ↑ Las Vegas Review-Journal, "Democratic, GOP lawyers spar about Hispanic districts," October 11, 2011
  64. ↑ Nevada Appeal, "Special master suggests parties in redistricting battle work it out," October 12, 2011
  65. ↑ Las Vegas Sun, "No challenges filed to Nevada redistricting maps," December 7, 2011 (dead link)
  66. ↑ National Conference of State Legislatures, “Redistricting 2000 Population Deviation Table”," accessed February 1, 2011
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Redistricting_in_Nevada_after_the_2010_census&oldid=9439850"