Bills propose adding, removing legislative districts

The Redistricting Committee heard testimony Feb. 16 on two proposals that would change the number of representatives in Nebraska’s 49-member Legislature.

LB195, sponsored by Cedar Rapids Sen. Kate Sullivan, would increase the number of legislators to 50, while LB233, introduced by Omaha Sen. Bob Krist, would reduce the number to 45.

Under Sullivan’s proposal, a 50th legislative district would be created and the governor would appoint a representative to serve until the November 2012 general election.

Sullivan said Nebraska’s population is continually shifting east, placing a burden on rural senators whose districts are growing geographically. Creating a new district would give the committee greater flexibility in drawing new district lines based on the 2010 census, she said.

“Rural representation should not fall victim to shifting demographics,” Sullivan said, adding that representing a large rural district requires a major time commitment to stay connected to constituents.

“I spend a great deal of time traveling the district,” Sullivan said. “A lot of that, unfortunately, is windshield time. Constituents aren’t served when I’m traveling from town to town.”

Under Krist’s proposal, 45 new districts would be drawn, with representatives of the newly created odd-numbered districts elected in 2012 and even-numbered districts in 2014.

Nine senators will be barred from running for re-election in 2012 due to term limits, Krist said, making it an ideal time to implement change.

“We have a unique historic point in time in the state of Nebraska,” he said.

Reducing the number of districts would save money, increase diversity within districts and better balance the state’s rural and urban divide, Krist said. Moving to 45 districts would mean an increase of less than 5,000 constituents per senator, he said.

“A small increase would not be overly burdensome,” Krist said, adding that improvements in technology would allow senators and constituents to connect even across geographically large districts.

No testimony was given and the committee took no immediate action on either bill.