A proposal to redraw Nebraska\u2019s 49 legislative districts to reflect changes in the state\u2019s population fell six votes short on a motion to end general file debate Sept. 20. <\/p>\n
Sen. Lou Ann Linehan of Elkhorn, Redistricting Committee chairperson, said Nebraska\u2019s population grew at roughly the same rate as the country as a whole but that growth was not evenly distributed throughout the state. <\/p>\n
She said three districts in the eastern portion of Nebraska \u2014 10, 39 and 49 \u2014 grew substantially, meaning parts of those districts must become part of a newly created district in Douglas or Sarpy counties to meet population requirements. <\/p>\n
Linehan said lawmakers also will have to change the boundaries of some districts in Douglas County that did not grow at the same rate as the rest of the state. And although the committee worked to \u201ckeep as much of rural Nebraska represented as we possibly can,\u201d she said, most districts west of Kearney must change dramatically due to population loss. <\/p>\n
\u201cUnderstand that it\u2019s not personal,\u201d Linehan said. \u201cIt\u2019s just a math problem.\u201d<\/p>\n
To account for a population shift from west to east, her proposal in LB3 would combine existing districts 23 and 24 and create a new District 24 in southwestern Sarpy and southeastern Saunders counties. <\/p>\n
An alternative plan in LB4, created by Omaha Sen. Justin Wayne, would even out district populations by moving District 44 from southwestern Nebraska to southwestern Douglas and western Sarpy counties.<\/p>\n
Venango Sen. Dan Hughes said LB3 would leave his District 44 \u201crelatively intact,\u201d while Wayne\u2019s plan would divide its 10 counties among several legislative districts. Hughes said further expanding western Nebraska legislative districts by moving District 44 would make it even more difficult for those senators to represent their constituents. <\/p>\n
\u201cThat\u2019s a disservice to those citizens,\u201d he said. \u201cWe\u2019re denying them access to their senators because of the great distances we have to travel.\u201d<\/p>\n
Sen. Adam Morfeld of Lincoln said lawmakers must consider population data when redrawing district maps, not geographic area or other considerations. <\/p>\n
\u201cLand is not people,\u201d he said. \u201cPeople are people \u2014 that is what we are redistricting with.\u201d<\/p>\n
Under guidelines adopted by the Legislature last session in LR134, senators may not consider a legislative redistricting plan that results in an overall range of deviation of more than 10 percent or a relative deviation of more than 5 percent from the ideal population.<\/p>\n
Also in support of LB3 was Albion Sen. Tom Briese. With the exception of District 24, he said, the bill recognizes the importance of preserving the core of prior districts. Briese said that goal, which the LR134 guidelines allow for, enhances continuity and consistency in representation. <\/p>\n
\u201cBy necessity, in LB3, one and only one proposed district does not contain a portion of the old,\u201d he said. <\/p>\n
Among other requirements, LR134 also stipulates that district boundaries follow county lines whenever practicable and, as far as possible, define districts that are easily identifiable and understandable to voters and preserve communities of interest.<\/p>\n
Several senators who opposed LB3 said the proposal would not follow those guidelines. <\/p>\n
Sen. Anna Wishart of Lincoln said it would move 10 of 14 neighborhoods from her District 27 into other districts for \u201cno reason other than partisanship.\u201d <\/p>\n
\u201cIf you look at LB3 \u2026 it is pretty much 70 percent [a] different district than the one I was just elected in,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Omaha Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh said she would lose approximately 80 percent of her current District 6 constituents under Linehan\u2019s proposal, for what she also said were partisan reasons.<\/p>\n
Sen. Jen Day of Omaha said LB3 would remove or split in half every community of interest in the current District 49, which she represents, including Papillion, La Vista, Chalco and Gretna.<\/p>\n
Under Linehan\u2019s proposal, she said, many of the residents in her primarily suburban district would become constituents of the new, primarily rural, District 24. <\/p>\n
\u201cYou cannot tell me that there is any attempt that was made at maintaining the core or preserving communities of interest when it came to LD49,\u201d Day said.<\/p>\n
Omaha Sen. Steve Lathrop also opposed LB3. He said Linehan\u2019s map uses the population deviation allowance \u2014 which is intended to give lawmakers leeway to avoid splitting a town or county between legislative districts \u2014 to create rural districts with smaller populations than urban ones. <\/p>\n
\u201cIf it\u2019s not gerrymandering, it\u2019s deviation-mandering,\u201d Lathrop said. \u201cWe\u2019re going to game the deviation to blunt the consequences of population loss west of Kearney and then stand up and say we\u2019re doing this to preserve the core of the district.\u201d<\/p>\n
Lincoln Sen. Matt Hansen introduced an amendment that would replace Linehan\u2019s proposal with the plan outlined in Wayne\u2019s LB4. <\/p>\n
Hansen said he introduced the amendment to give lawmakers an opportunity to compare the competing proposals, which he called nearly identical in some places.<\/p>\n
Sen. Mark Kolterman of Seward said it would be possible to preserve the core of his District 24 with \u201cjust a few tweaks.\u201d Kolterman introduced an amendment to Hansen\u2019s amendment that he said would more or less keep his district intact, along with districts 30 and 32, represented by Adams Sen. Myron Dorn and Sen. Tom Brandt of Plymouth, respectively.<\/p>\n
Hansen supported Kolterman\u2019s amendment, saying it would modify boundary lines for 10 districts in Lincoln and southern Lancaster County. He said the associated map fits within an eight-county section of Wayne\u2019s legislative redistricting plan. <\/p>\n
Senators voted 26-21 to adopt Kolterman\u2019s amendment. <\/p>\n
After eight hours of first-round debate, Linehan filed a motion to invoke cloture, which ceases debate and forces a vote on a bill. The motion failed on a vote of 27-18. Thirty-three votes were needed. <\/p>\n
A failed cloture motion ends debate on a bill for the day.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A proposal to redraw Nebraska\u2019s 49 legislative districts to reflect changes in the state\u2019s population fell six votes short on a motion to end general file debate Sept. 20. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":30846,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[28],"tags":[190],"class_list":["post-30848","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-redistricting","tag-sen-lou-ann"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/Kolterman9-20-21a.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30848","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=30848"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30848\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":30850,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30848\/revisions\/30850"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/30846"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=30848"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=30848"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/update.legislature.ne.gov\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=30848"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}