Massachusetts lawmakers were cool Wednesday toward proposals to amend the state constitution and establish an independent commission to handle legislative redistricting.
Election Laws Committee members appeared reluctant to sign on with the idea, enshrined in several legislative proposals and backed by good-government advocates but already rejected by both branches this year in favor of a legislative redistricting committee.
“They tend to produce fair districts, more competitive districts,” said Pamela Wilmot, executive director of the state chapter of the Common Cause watchdog group. “We think this is sort of the basic level of democracy, because it determines who a person can vote for.”
Wilmot noted that Chelmsford’s House delegation had been divided four ways. “They don’t really have a district, and they don’t have any voter power left,” Wilmot said, peeving Rep. Thomas Golden (D-Lowell), who also represents Chelmsford. “I take exception to the comment about not being accountable, because I’m one of those legislators,” Golden said.
Most of the commission bills establish seven-member boards appointed by constitutional officers and legislative leaders. Rep. Bill Bowles said, “Unless you just pick seven people out of a hat, everyone’s got some political connection.”
Redistricting indirectly led after the last round to former Speaker Thomas Finneran’s guilty plea to an obstruction of justice charge in a perjury case, an imbroglio of which current lawmakers are acutely aware.
Wilmot noted the centralized proceedings in the 2001 redistricting, saying, “The actual committee had very little input in the process the last time around.”
Rep. Mark Falzone spoke in favor of legislation he said would reduce the influence of moneyed interests by boosting the signature threshold for ballot questions. That legislation (H 573) would raise the requirement to 3 percent of all registered voters, while current law mandates 3 percent of all the votes cast for governor in the preceding biennial election.
Rep. Paul Frost doubted the outcome of the change, saying the higher threshold could in fact assist well-funded corporate and labor interests.
Falzone had a personal comment to committee House chair Rep. Michael Moran at the outset of his testimony. “I will not go into our sordid history and where we have hung out,” said Falzone, a Saugus Democrat.
|
