THE NEXT, THOSE IMPOSSIBLE-TO-IGNORE LINES APPEAR, SEEMINGLY OUT OF NOWHERE.

AND EVEN THOUGH WE RECOGNIZE THEY'RE NO MORE AVOIDABLE THAN DEATH OR TAXES, THESE LINES OFTEN ELICIT A MIX OF DISBELIEF AND ANGER - ESPECIALLY WHEN “CRACKING” AND “PACKING” ARE ON FULL DISPLAY.

HI, I'M JON SCHWANTES, AND ALTHOUGH IT MIGHT SOUND AS IF I'M INTRODUCING ONE OF THOSE LATE-NIGHT INFOMERCIALS FOR BOTOX INJECTIONS AND COLLAGEN FILLERS, THIS IS INDEED INDIANA LAWMAKERS.

THE LINES I'M TALKING ABOUT AREN'T WRINKLES; THEY'RE THE CONGRESSIONAL AND LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT BOUNDARIES THAT ARE REDRAWN EVERY 10 YEARS, BASED ON DATA GLEANED FROM THE U.S. CENSUS.

OVER THE YEARS - IN INDIANA AND ELSEWHERE - THESE LINES HAVE BEEN DRAWN TO DIMINISH THE ELECTORAL CLOUT OF RACIAL MINORITIES AND/OR KEEP A DOMINANT POLITICAL PARTY IN POWER.

ON THIS WEEK'S SHOW, WE'LL EXAMINE THE LONG-RUNNING DEBATE OVER HOW HOOSIERS' DISTRICT MAPS TAKE SHAPE.

DON'T GO AWAY INDIANA LAWMAKERS - FROM THE STATEHOUSE TO YOUR HOUSE.

♪♪ >> >> JOINING ME TO TALK ABOUT INDIANA'S REDISTRICTING PROCESS ARE SENATOR TIM LANANE, A DEMOCRAT FROM ANDERSON JULIA VAUGHN, POLICY DIRECTOR OF COMMON CAUSE INDIANA AND JAY YEAGER, AN INDIANAPOLIS ATTORNEY WHO'S BEEN AT THE FOREFRONT OF SEVERAL RECENT LEGAL BATTLES OVER GERRYMANDERING.

AND GERRY MANNEDERING, WE ALL THINK WE KNOW WHAT IT IS, IT HAS A LOT OF BAGGAGE ATTACHED TO IT.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF DEFINITIONS.

BY DEFINITION, DRAWING POLITICAL MAPS IN A WAY THAT GIVES ONE PARTY OR GROUP AN ADVANTAGE, A DISTINCT ADVANTAGE, WHETHER FAIR OR NOT.

SO, ALL REDISTRICTING IS NOT JE JERRY -- HAVING SAID THAT, SENATOR, YOU MUST THINK THAT YOUR DISTRICT, DISTRICT 25 IS BEAUTIFULLY DRAWN, AND MAYBE WE WOULD SAY THE SAME FOR YOUR 10 DEMOCRAT SENATE COLLEAGUES.

WHAT'S WRONG IF THERE IS ANYTHING WRONG WITH INDIANA'S CURRENT SYSTEM?

>> WELL, I THINK IN TERMS OF MY DISTRICT, YOU COULD SAY THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT IN TERMS OF THE GERRYMANDERING PERSPECTIVE, IT IS STRONG, IN MY OPINION, THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT TO PACK, IF YOU WILL, AS MANY DEMOCRATS INTO ONE DISTRICT AS POSSIBLE AND SURROUND IT WITH ANOTHER DISTRICT WHICH IS DOMINATED BY REPUBLICAN VOTERS.

>> AND I SALUTED THE OPENING TO PACKING AND CRACKING.

YOU TALK ABOUT DILUTE INFLUENCE BY PUTTING EVERYBODY IN ONE DISTRICT, THE OPPOSITE, OF COURSE, IS CARVING UP THAT INFLUENCE BY PUTTING A FEW IN YOUR CASE DEMOCRATS HERE, A FEW DEMOCRATS THERE.

>> BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE WAY IT WAS REDISTRICTED PREVIOUSLY, WHERE YOU HAD DISTRICT 25, WHICH HAD A COMMUNITY OF INTERESTS BASICALLY WHICH INCLUDED MOST OF MADISON COUNTY AND ANDERSON AND THE ENVIRONS AROUND THAT.

AND DISTRICT 26, WHICH WAS DELAWARE COUNTY, MUNCIE AND MOST OF THE COMMUNITIES AROUND THAT.

YOU WOULD SAY THAT, WELL, THAT REALLY DID EMBODY MORE OF A COMMUNITY OF INTEREST IN EACH CASE.

>> SO WHAT'S WRONG?

YOU'RE NOT ARGUING AGAINST THE SYSTEM >> WHEN THEY DID MY DISTRICT, THEY DECIDED TO TURN OUTSIDE AND COMBINE MUNCIE AND ANDERSON.

AND SO YOU REALLY DID CARVE UP THOSE PREVIOUS COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST, IS THE PROBLEM I THINK THAT HAPPENED THERE.

AND YOU ALSO INSTEAD OF THE -- HAVING DEMOCRATS COMPETITIVE IN TWO DISTRICTS BEFORE, YOU ACTUALLY ONLY MADE DEMOCRATS COMPETITIVE IN ONE DISTRICT.

>> OF COURSE, JOKED ABOUT THIS BEING A SHOW OF DEFINITIONS, COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST IS ALSO IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER, SOME COULD SAY YOU HAVE TWO TRADITIONAL MANUFACTURING COMMUTES IN MUNCIE AND ANDERSON THAT ARE VERY SIMILAR THEREFORE THEY DESERVE TO HAVE THEIR VOICE -- JULIA VAUGHN, YOU'VE BEEN STUDIES MAPS PROBABLY SINCE YOU WERE IN KINDERGARTEN.

THAT TAKES US BACK AT LEAST FOR THE LAST -- CENSUS.

YOU WOULD SAY THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN, AND NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

>> THE PROBLEM HERE IN INDIANA AND IN TOO MANY STATES IS THAT THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS ALLOWS POLITICIANS TO CHOOSE THEIR VOTERS RATHER THAN ALLOWING VOTERS TO CHOOSE THEIR POLITICIANS THROUGH ELECTIONS.

TOO MANY DISTRICTS IN OUR STATE BOTH AT THE CONGRESSIONAL AND STATE LEGISLATIVE LEVEL HAVE BEEN MADE SAFE DISTRICTS.

THEY'RE NOT COMPETITIVE.

WE ALREADY KNOW PRETTY WELL MONTHS BEFORE THE GENERAL ELECTION WHO IS GOING TO WIN THAT DISTRICT BECAUSE THE NUMBERS, THE MAP DRAWER HAD MORE INFLUENCE THAN THE VOTERS WILL HAVE ON ELECTION DAY.

AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REAL REASONS WE HAVE SUCH LOW VOTERS TURNOUT HERE IN INDIANA.

TOO MANY VOTERS LIVE IN DISTRICTS WHERE THERE ARE NO CHOICES IN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION.

IN TOO MANY DISTRICTS, THE REAL COMPETITION IS IN THE PRIMARY.

THAT'S WHY I THINK WE HAVE SEEN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN INDIANA REALLY DRIFT STEADILY.

THIS DECADE TO THE HARD RIGHT.

WHEN YOU HAVE A DISTRICT THAT WAS DRAWN TO FAVOR ONE PARTY HEAVILY OVER THE OTHER, THEN THE ONLY COMPETITION YOU HAVE IS IN THE PRIMARY, AND IN OUR STATE, REPUBLICANS ARE PRIMARIED FROM THE RIGHT.

SO I THINK THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS WE HAVE A LEGISLATURE AND A CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION THAT IS FAR MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN HOOSIERS GENERALLY, AND THEY'RE NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF VOTERS E THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

>> YOU'VE ARTICULATED THE GOAL WILLING IN MANY CASES TO - CONCEDE.

I'VE HEARD BACK IN 1990, AND IN 2000, PEOPLE WERE DRAWING THE MAPS TOOK GREAT PRIDE IN THEIR ABILITY TO -- >> DRAW SAFE DISTRICTS.

>> DOES IT MATTER, JAY YEAGER, THAT THEIR GOALS ARE NOT MET?

AGAIN, LET'S REFER TO 90 WHEN REPUBLICANS DREW THE MAPS, AND YET BY THE END OF THE DECADE GUESS WHO WAS IN CHARGE?

DEMOCRATS, AND DEMOCRATS DREW THE MAPS THE NEXT TIME THE DIE SENNIAL -- CENSUS PRODUCED RESULTS, BY THE END OF THAT DECADE, THEY FAILED IN THEIR MISSION.

CAN WE GET SO BENT OUT YOU HAVE SHAPE IF PEOPLE WANT TO KEEP IT -- MAKE SAFE DISTRICTS, BUT IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK THAT WAY?

>> IT IS MORE OF A SCIENCE NOW THAN IT'S EVER BEEN.

FOR A LONG TIME IT'S BEEN AN ART.

LIKE EVERY ART IT DOESN'T WORK PERFECTLY.

WE TALKED ABOUT 1981, 1991.

I DON'T KNOW PERSONALLY HOW HARD THEY WERE TRYING TO DO A GERRYMANDER.

IF THEY TRIED, THEY DIDN'T SUCCEED.

>> YOU'RE RIGHT.

I MISSPOKE.

I SAID 90.

80, WHICH PRODUCED THE STEREO SPEAKERS BY THE END OF THE DECADE.

>> IN 81, THEY DID A GERRYMANDER THAT LASTED THREE ELECTIONS, AND BY THE STANDARD OF THAT DAY, THAT WAS PROBABLY WORTH THE EFFORT FOR THOSE FOLKS WHO DID THAT GERRYMANDER, THREE ELECTIONS WHERE THEY HAD UNFAIR RESULTS, HAD POLARIZATION RESULT AS WELL THAT JULIA TALKED ABOUT.

AND THEN THEY GOT TO THE END OF THAT DECADE AND THEY GOT TO DO A REDISTRICTING AGAIN.

SO THAT WASN'T REALLY A TERRIBLE BAD RESULT, BUT WASN'T ON THE LIST OF ALL TIME WORST JERRY MANNEDERS.

WHAT HAS CHANGED WAS THE ACCESS OF GERRYMANDERERS, ACCESS TO GRANULAR DATA AT THE PRECINCT LEVEL ABOUT HOW PEOPLE VOTE HOW PRECINCTS VOTE.

AND FOLKS CAN PUT THAT TOGETHER WITH PARTICULAR SPECIALIZED COMPUTER SOFTWARE NOW AND DO SO MUCH BETTER JOB.

SO BY THE TIME WE GET TO 2000 THE GERRYMANDER THAT WAS PUT IN PLACE WAS -- IT WASN'T COMPLETELY DEVELOPED, BUT IT WAS EFFECTIVE, AND EFFECTIVE ENOUGH THAT IN 2011 THE NATIONAL REPUBLICAN PARTY TOOK A LOOK AT INDIANA, THE INDIANA HOUSE MAP AND THEY LOOKED ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND THEY SAW THEY HAD AN OPPORTUNITY WITH THE IMPROVING DATA POSSIBILITIES, OR DATA CAPABILITIES, THEY COULD, IF THEY COULD GET CONTROL OF STATE LEGISLATURES AND CONTROL THE DRAWING OF THE MAPS IN 2011 THEY COULD CONTROL THEN CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS THAT WOULD COST THEM BY THEIR OWN CALCULATION PROBABLY TEN TIMES AS MUCH TO TRY TO ELECT DOWN THE ROAD.

SO IT'S GOTTEN -- THE STAKES HAVE GOTTEN HIGHER AND THE AMP ATTITUDE OR THE DEGREE OF THE JERRY MANNEDERS HAVE GOTTEN WORSE.

>> THE PROOF IS IN THE PUDDING, WE'VE HAD NO COMPETITION IN OUR CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS FOR THE PAST DECADE, SO 2011, THEY DID IT WELL.

THE GERRYMANDER HELPED.

>> IN TERMS OF STATE LEGISLATURE RACES, AND THERE IS, I GUESS, IF YOU WANT TO SAY BLAME, AGAIN, THIS SUGGESTS THAT AS YOU WOULD CALL IT BLAME BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE THE SYSTEM, BUT THERE ARE ALSO UNOPPOSED DEMOCRATS WHO ARE ADVANTAGED BY THE SYSTEM.

>> AND A PROBLEM AS WELL.

>> LET ME SUGGEST IT IS NOT JUST REPUBLICANS GETTING A CAKE WALK -- >> ALL VOTERS ARE GETTING CHEATED.

>> YOU CAN LOOK AT THOSE DISTRICTS IN THE DEMOCRAT COLUMN, IF YOU WILL, AND WHEN YOU SEE URBAN DISTRICTS WHERE 70% PLUS DEMOCRATS, YOU HAVE TO THINK, WELL, THERE WAS -- THIS WAS DONE BY VIRTUE OF THE DATA AVAILABLE, AND HOW EASY IT IS TO DRAW THOSE LINES NOW ON A COMPUTER, AND TO COME UP WITH DISTRICTS LIKE THAT WHICH ARE NOT COMPETITIVE IN THAT REGARD.

BUT YOU'RE PACKING, TOO.

>> PACKING AS OPPOSED TO -- >> DEMOCRATS INTO THOSE FEW DISTRICTS.

>> OKAY.

SO LET'S STIPULATE YOU ALL FIND FAULT WITH THE CURRENT SYSTEM, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SEE HAPPEN?

AND YOU CAN TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT TO SEE HAPPEN, AND THEN I WILL POINT OUT, BECAUSE IT'S MY ROLE TO INTRODUCE SOME REALITY THAT THAT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN.

AND SO GO AHEAD AND SAY WHAT YOU WANT.

>> WELL, WE'VE WORKED FOR YEARS TO PASS REFORM THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE AND YOU'RE RIGHT, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, BECAUSE IT'S EXTREMELY DIFFICULT -- >> AND WHAT'S YOUR VISION OF REFORM.

>> WE NEED A MULTI-PARTISAN AND DIVERSE GROUP OF VOTERS WHO HAVE NO DIRECT INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME OF REDISTRICTING TO BE IN CHARGE OF IT, TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS, TO TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED.

>> DOES SUCH A CREATURE EXIST?

>> WELL WE'VE CREATED IT.

>> IS THAT SOMEBODY SO DIVORCED FROM THE PROCESS AND SO DETACHED FROM THE STATE'S FORTUNES.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

>> LIKE A JUROR THAT KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT ANYTHING.

DO YOU REALLY WANT THAT PERSON?

>> ABSOLUTELY DO.

WE WANT PEOPLE WHO ARE ENGAGED IN THEIR COMMUNITIES, BECAUSE WE WANT MAPS THAT ARE DRAWN FOR THE GOOD OF COMMUNITIES ACROSS OUR STATE.

>> BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO ATTACH R OR D IF YOU WANT EQUAL REPRESENTATION, WE ALL KNOW THEY'RE NOT CREATED FROM THE SAME MOLD.

>> INDIANA AS A REPUBLICAN OR A DEMOCRAT.

WE PUT TOGETHER THE INDIANA CITIZENS REDISTRICTING COMMISSION.

>> GRASSROOTS GROUP THAT YOU'RE HAVING YOU'RE OWN HEARINGS IN NON-CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS.

>> TO SHOW THE PUBLIC AND THE LEGISLATURE HOW THIS SHOULD BE DONE.

WE'VE MADE UP A GROUP OF REPUBLICANS, DEMOCRATS, PEOPLE WHO ARE NEITHER.

>> THREE OF EACH -- YOU EVEN BRAG FROM AGE 18 TO.

>> 19 TO 86, YES, OUR 86-YEAR-OLD IS LEE MORRIS, ONE OF OUR REPUBLICAN MEMBERS, THE FORMER MAYOR OF LAPORTE, INDIANA.

>> YOU KNOW THE BEST VOTERS ARE 87 AND UP, SO PROBABLY -- >> WELL, MR. MORRIS HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN HIS COMMUNITY FOR DECADES.

AND SO HE KNOWS NORTHWEST INDIANA.

HE'S THE PERFECT KIND OF PERSON TO BE PUT IN CHARGE OF THIS PROCESS.

WE'RE HOLDING PUBLIC HEARINGS, WE'RE TAKING PUBLIC TESTIMONY, WE'RE TALKING TO VOTERS ABOUT WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED?

SHOULD WE PRIORIIZE COMPACTNESS, WHICH IS WHAT REPUBLICANS DID IN 2011, OR SHOULD WE PRIORITIZE COMPETITIVENESS?

DO YOU WANT DISTRICTS WHERE YOUR CANDIDATE HAS A PRETTY GOOD CHANCE OF WINNING?

SO FAR, VOTERS ARE TELLING US -- >> OF COURSE THAT INTRODUCES ANOTHER KIND OF GERRYMANDERING, COULD BE A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE, DEPENDING ON ONE'S POINT OF VIEW.

I KNOW THE WEBSITE 538, A VERY WELL RESPECTED POLITICAL SITE NATIONALLY DID AN EXERCISE WHERE THEY LOOKED AT SOME OF THESE THINGS WITHOUT RHYTHM AND LET'S DO ONE WITH COMPACTNESS, COMPETITIVENESS, AND YOU CAN GET COMPETITIVE DISTRICTS, A COMPUTER CAN SPIT THAT OUT, BUT THEY LOOK EVEN MORE SURREAL THAN THE MOST BIZARRE INK BLOTS.

>> YOU CAN'T ALWAYS JUDGE A GERRYMANDER BY ITS SHAPE.

SOMETIMES THERE ARE GOOD REASONS TO HAVE WEIRD SHAPED.

IT IS WHAT DO VOTERS WANT OUT OF THEIR DISTRICTS?

VOTERS IN INDIANA WANT THEIR VOTE TO COUNT.

AND THE ONLY WAY THEY'RE GOING TO GET THAT IS IF WE DRAW DISTRICTS MORE WITH AN EYE TOWARDS COMPETITION.

NOW, YOU CANNOT DRAW NINE COMPETITIVE CONGRESSIONAL SEATS, 100 COMPETITIVE HOUSE SEATS AND 50 COMPETITIVE SENATE SEATS.

BUT WE CERTAINLY CAN DRAW MORE COMPETITIVE DISTRICTS THAN EXIST NOW.

HANDFUL IN OUR STATE >> VIOLATE STATE STATUTE WHICH REQUIRES CONTIGUOUS LINES, YOU CAN'T HAVE A DOT HERE AND THERE.

>> NO.

AND WE'RE NOT PROPOSING THAT.

AGAIN, THERE IS MORE COMPETITION IN THIS STATE THAN IS REPRESENTED BY THE CURRENT MAPS.

THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

>> JAY YEAGER, IS THAT THE MODEL?

THIS NOTION OF THREE OF THIS PARTY, THREE OF THAT PARTY, THREE OF NO PARTY?

IS THAT A MODEL THAT WOULD WORK?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

AND I AGREE.

YOU'RE NOT LOOKING FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IGNORANT OR UNINFORMED, YOU'RE LOOKING FOR BALLOTS.

AND THE FOLKS DRAWING THE LINE OR NOT BALANCED.

SO IF YOU HAVE A BALANCED GROUP, DRAW YOUR MAP EITHER COMMISSIONS OR EVEN A STATE GOVERNMENT DIVIDED BETWEEN THE PARTIES, THE DATA SHOWS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME YOU GET FAIR MAPS.

WHEN THE PROCESS IS BALANCED.

WHEN THE PROCESS IS ONE-SIDED, WHEN ONE PARTY CONTROL, THAT'S WHEN YOU GET THESE BIG JERRY MANNEDERS.

>> I'M HEARING YOU SAY THAT THE COMPUTER AND TECHNOLOGY IS -- HAS REACHED A POINT, WE ALL KNOW THIS FROM OUR DIRECT MARKETING.

ONE TIME YOU LOOK FOR AN INFLATABLE KAYAK, I'M NOW NEVER GOING TO DODGE THAT BULLET FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE ON ADVERTISING, THIS TAKES THAT TO ANOTHER LEVEL IN THE POLITICAL ARENA.

IF TECHNOLOGY IS SO GREAT, AND WE DON'T LIKE HUMAN INFLUENCE, WE WANT FAIRNESS, WHY NOT JUST DO WHAT SOME PEOPLE -- THIS IS NOT A JOKE, SOME PEOPLE HAVE SUGGESTED USE ALGORITHMS AND JUST TELL THE COMPUTER YOU WANT COMPACTNESS, EQUAL NUMBERS IN THE DISTRICTS AND JUST LIVE WITH WHERE THE CHIPS FALL.

>> I GUESS IT WOULD BE FINE IN AN IDEAL WORLD.

BUT AS LONG AS JAY AND JULIA HAVE MENTIONED HERE THE SYSTEM'S CONTROLLED BY NOT ALL POLITICIANS, BUT THE POLITICIANS IN THE MAJORITY PARTY, WHICH NOW WE HAVE SUPERMAJORITIES.

>> SOMEBODY HAS TO PROGRAM THE COMPUTER.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

AND THEY'RE GOING TO PROGRAM IT INTO WHAT IS THE POLITICAL ADVANTAGE.

AND IT'S SO EASY TO DO BECAUSE OF THE ELECTION DATA'S AVAILABLE.

YOU CAN -- AS HAS BEEN SUGGESTED, THE SOPHISTICATION OF THE PROGRAMS WHERE THEY CAN JUST SIMPLY -- YOU KNOW, THEY CAN MOVE ONE HALF OR ONE QUARTER OR ONE EIGHTH OF A CENSUS BLOCK, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, AND SEE WHAT THE ADVANTAGE IS.

AND I'VE SEEN IT DONE.

YOU CAN GO AND SEE HOW IT'S DONE IN THE COMPUTER AND THEY CAN DO IT, AND THEY CAN COME UP WITH 7 DIFFERENT SCENARIOS IN 10 MINUTES, IF YOU WANT, OR LESS.

SO THE SOPHISTICATION.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE NUMBER ONE GOAL IS POLITICAL ADVANTAGE OF ONE PARTY.

AND IT'S ALL DRAWN WITH THAT IN MIND.

EVERYTHING ELSE IS JUST RATIONALIZATION.

>> IF YOUR PARTY -- ON THE DOWN SIDE WOULD YOU BE AS ENTHUSIASTIC?

HONESTLY.

>> WOULD I BE ENTHUSIASTIC.

>> YEAH, ABOUT REFORM.

>> YOU CAN LOOK AT HISTORY WHEN THE DEMOCRATS HAD CONTROL OF THE HOUSE.

THEY DREW THOSE DISTRICTS FOR -- >> BEFORE THEY HAD JAY'S COMPUTER.

>> EXACTLY.

BUT THEY TRIED TO DO IT THAT WAY.

>> THEY TRIED.

>> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE, WE, THE DEMOCRATS, AND THE SENATE, HAVE HAD BILLS, WE HAVE ONE THIS YEAR TO CREATE THE COMMISSION.

MAYBE NOT EXACTLY THE DETAILS JULIA IS TALKING ABOUT.

BUT TAKE IT OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE POLITICIANS INITIALLY SO THAT GOOD GOVERNMENT TYPE OF GOALS IS WHAT IS USED TO TRY TO DRAW THESE DISTRICTS AND PUT SOME HEAT ON THE POLITICIANS TO LOOK AT THOSE MAPS AND ALLOW PUBLIC INPUT.

I'M WORRIED THIS YEAR THERE IS VIRTUALLY NO PUBLIC INPUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING TO SHAKE OUT >> ARGUABLY THERE MIGHT BE MORE BECAUSE IT WILL BE DONE IN A SPECIAL SESSION.

I KNOW -- FIRST OF ALL, LET ME BACK UP, I PROMISED TO INTRODUCE REALITY, YOU WANT ALL TO SEE A COMMISSION BILLS INTRODUCED, THAT AIN'T GOING TO HAPPEN.

SO THE BEST -- I MEAN, JUST THE REALITY.

IT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN POLITICALLY.

SO I GUESS YOU'RE TRYING TO DEMONSTRATE WITH YOUR GRASSROOTS COMMISSION HOW THIS COULD WORK, YOU'LL PUT A REPORT TOGETHER, YOU'LL SUBMIT IT TO LAWMAKERS, BUT ARE YOU MORE OPTIMISTIC?

I'VE SEEN YOU SUGGEST THAT BECAUSE TYPICALLY THIS IS DONE DURING THE REGULAR SESSION, BUT BECAUSE OF COVID AND CENSUS CHALLENGES, MAP DRAWERS AREN'T GOING TO GET THE MAPS UNTIL, WHAT, SEPTEMBER.

SO THERE WILL BE A SPECIAL SESSION.

YOU SAID LAST TIME IN 2011, THERE WERE 17 DAYS BETWEEN THE INTRODUCTION OF THE MAPS, THE UNVEILING -- SO IS THIS ACTUALLY A GOOD THING?

>> THE INTERVENING -- >> SUGGEST MORE PROBLEMATIC.

>> THE INTERVENING MONTHS ARE A GREAT THING, WE'LL BE SPENDING THIS TIME EDUCATING CITIZENS HOW IMPORTANT THIS PROCESS IS.

BUT I FEAR LIKE SENATOR LANANE, THEY COULD COME IN AND GET OUT QUICKLY.

ONCE THE REGULAR SESSION IS OVER, WE'RE GOING TO START NEGOTIATING WITH THE LEADERSHIP ABOUT AN EXTENDED.

>> PUT THE MAPS OUT, FOR CONSUMPTION WELL BEFORE THE DATE, SCHEDULED DATE.

>> WE NEED PUBLIC TESTIMONY BEFORE SO THEY CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PUBLIC WANTS TO SEE, AND THEN WE NEEDED A QUIT TIME AFTER THEIR MAPS ARE RELEASED SO THAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO THE ANALYSIS.

I MEAN THAT'S THE REAL HELP THAT COMPUTERS, WE CAN NOW ANALYZE THE MAPS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED TO PREDICT WHAT THE ELECTORAL OUTCOMES, TO ANALYZE HOW COMMUNITIES WILL BE DIVIDED.

SO IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW THE LEGISLATURE WANTS TO OPERATE THIS SPECIAL SESSION.

THE OTHER PART OF OUR DEMONSTRATION PROJECT THIS YEAR IS WE'VE GOT THE COMMISSION, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A PUBLIC MAPPING WEBSITE.

WE'RE GOING TO BE INVITING ALL CITIZENS ACROSS THE STATE TO TRY THEIR HAND AT DRAWING DISTRICTS.

IT'S NOT ROCKET SCIENCE.

WE'VE GOT SOME VERY EASY TO USE SOFTWARE, AND, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO OUTSOURCE THIS ACROSS OUR STATE, GET LOTS OF GOOD IDEAS ON THE TABLE.

BECAUSE THE REPUBLICAN SUPERMAJORITY DOESN'T HAVE ALL OF THE GOOD IDEAS.

>> DEMOCRACY IS A PARTICIPATION SUPPORT.

>> JAY, WE'VE HEARD NOW THAT THE POLITICAL REALITIES ARE SUCH THAT INDIANA PROBABLY IS NOT, EVEN IF THERE WERE A SEAT CHANGE IN THE PARTY MAKE-UP NOW AND DEMOCRATIC SUPERMAJORITIES, YEAH, THERE'S SOME IDEALISM STILL THERE, HEY, IF THEY'RE GOING TO DRAW THE MAPS AND ARMED WITH GREAT COMPUTERS AND TECHNOLOGY, THERE MAY BE A DIMINISHED ENTHUSIASM.

SO IS THE ANSWER FOR REFORM ADVOCATES, THE COURTS -- I MENTIONED YOU'RE INVOLVED IN SEVERAL -- I MEAN ULTIMATELY, THOSE FOLKS WHO DON'T LIKE THE CURRENT SYSTEM, WHERE IS WHERE LAWMAKERS DRAW THEIR OWN MAPS, ARE THE COURTS THE ANSWER?

>> THE COURT SOLUTION IS UNFORTUNATELY LIMITED.

THERE WAS A MOVEMENT IN SEVERAL STATES THAT MOST GERRYMANDERED STATES, MICHIGAN, WISCONSIN, OHIO, TWO OR THREE OTHER STATES.

>> YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS, YOU WERE INVOLVED.

>> I HAD THE MICHIGAN CASE WITH A GROUP OF OTHER LAWYERS AND COLLABORATED IN THE OTHER CASES, WE WERE UP IN THE SUPREME COURT A COUPLE TIMES, WENT UP TO THE SUPREME COURT ON STANDING, CAME BACK DOWN AND WENT UP.

ULTIMATELY ALL THE DISTRICT COURTS, THREE JUDGE PANELS, OVERWHELMINGLY THE DISTRICT COURTS FOUND ON THIS EVIDENCE THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, THIS DATA, QUANTITATIVE ANALYSES OF THE METRICS ABOUT HOW BAD THE MAPS ARE, AND THE OTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE INTENT TO GERRYMANDER.

THESE COURTS FOUND OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE THAT THESE WERE UNCONSTITUTIONAL JERRY MANNEDERS THAT THEY WERE GRAVE VIOLATIONS OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, 5-4 VOTE OVER A VERY VIGOROUS, AND I RECOMMEND THIS JUSTICE KAGAN DISSENT, EXCELLENT.

NOT SAYING IT IS NOT A PROBLEM, BUT IT IS NOT OUR PROBLEM.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COURT DOOR IS PROBABLY CLOSED NOW.

THE JUSTICE ROBERTS DID SAY, GO TO STATE COURT.

BECAUSE STATE CONSTITUTIONS HAVE OTHER LANGUAGE THAT THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION DOESN'T HAVE.

AND OUR CONSTITUTION HAS THAT LANGUAGE.

SO THAT DOOR IS OPEN.

OTHER THAN THAT, I THINK WHAT COMMON CAUSE AND WHAT JULIA AND THE COALITION HAS BEEN DOING IS LEADING THE CHARGE THAT HAS TO BE LED NOW.

AND THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE COMING TO REINFORCE.

THERE ARE OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, WOMEN FOR CHANGE IN INDIANA, INDIANA CITIZEN.ORG, OTHER ORGANIZATIONS, WELL RESOURCE THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A COMMISSION, MAPS, DATA, NATIONAL EXPERTS WHO ARE GOING TO COME AND ANALYZE THE EXISTING MAPS, THE NEW MAPS, THE MAPS THAT ARE GOING TO BE PROPOSED.

AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS TIMEFRAME THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO COMPETE WITH ALL THE OTHER ISSUES IN THE LEGISLATURE.

SO THERE'S A REASON TO BE A LITTLE BIT HOPEFUL, IF NOT OPTIMISTIC.

>> AND BY THE NEXT TIME AROUND THERE WILL BE, BECAUSE THERE ARE STATES, AS HAS BEEN NOTED, THAT DO HAVE COMMISSIONS, AGAIN THEY'RE KIND OF ALL DIFFERENT MODELS ABOUT HOW THEY'RE PUT TOGETHER, CALIFORNIA HAS ONE THAT SEEMS TO HAVE -- A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL BE WATCHING, THERE WILL BE PROOF OF PERFORMANCE, PROOF OF CONCEPT, I GUESS, DO YOU THINK THE COURTS ULTIMATELY -- THE COURTS, GENERALLY THE COURTS DON'T LIKE TO WEIGH IN ON ELECTIONS, GENERALLY SPEAKING.

NINE TIMES OUT OF TEN.

AND WHEN THEY DO WEIGH IN, IT TENDS TO BE OVER RACIAL GERRYMANDERING AS OPPOSED TO WITH THE EXCEPTION JAY MENTIONED.

IS YOUR FAITH IN THE COURTS?

OR ARE YOU GOING TO KEEP HAMMERING AWAY WITH THE BILL INTRODUCED?

>> IT'S FRUSTRATING.

BECAUSE THERE WAS LESS OF AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE COURTS.

I HAVE TO LOOK AT THE COURTS.

I DON'T HAVE MUCH FAITH THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS.

THEY'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY MANY TIMES AND THEY'VE TURNED IT DOWN.

>> ALL RIGHT.

I HAVE ABOUT ANOTHER 400 QUESTIONS TO ASK.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE OUT OF TIME.

FASCINATING TOPIC, AND YOUR EXPERTISE THAT YOU BRING TO THE TABLE IS MUCH APPRECIATED.

WE WILL WATCH AND SEE HOW THIS TURNS OUT.

THIS SESSION, AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT THIS TIME, TEN YEARS WE'LL RECONVENE.

AGAIN, MY GUESTS HAVE BEEN SENATOR TIM LANANE OF ANDERSON JULIA VAUGHN OF COMMON CAUSE INDIANA AND INDIANAPOLIS ATTORNEY JAY YEAGER.

IF YOU LIVE IN THE COUNTRY WOULD YOU RATHER HEAR THE TRAINS A COMIN' OR KEEP ON TRUCKEN.

NEXT INDIANA LAWMAKERS.

TIME NOW FOR OUR WEEKLY CONVERSATION WITH INDIANA LAWMAKERS ANALYST ED FEIGENBAUM, PUBLISHER OF THE NEWSLETTER INDIANA LEGISLATIVE INSIGHT, PART OF HANNAH NEWS SERVICE.

ED, WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON OUR CURRENT SYSTEM FOR REDISTRICTING, YOU'VE BEEN THROUGH A FEW OF THESE, YOU KNOW, THE PROCESS IS AN INTERESTING TIME EVERY TEN YEARS.

>> WHERE DO I GO FROM THERE?

THERE IS REALLY NO PERFECT WAY TO RUN A REDISTRICTING SYSTEM.

I THINK THAT THE PANELISTS ALL AGREED ON THAT, AND EVERYBODY'S GOT THEIR OWN DEFINITION OF WHAT GERRYMANDERING IS, YOU ALSO HAVE TO DEAL WITH REALITY, IN INDIANA, THE REALITY IS THAT THE DEMOCRATIC VOTE IS STARTING TO CENTER IN THE MAJOR CITIES, AND THE REPUBLICANS ARE SEEING A LOT OF THEIR VOTES IN THE SUBURBS AND IN DECLINING RURAL AREAS.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE DEMOCRATS IN THE CITY, AND DISTRICTS FOCUSED ON DEMOCRATS IN THE CITY, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SOME OF THE RURAL DISTRICTS BECOME BIGGER, AND BIGGER, AND HAVE FEWER AND FEWER REPRESENTATIVES AS THE RURAL AREAS DECLINE IN POPULATION.

WE'VE ALSO SEEN, AND SOMETHING THE PANEL REALLY DIDN'T TALK ABOUT, JUDICIAL LINES CAN WORK WHEN THEY'RE DRAWN BY JUDGES.

WE SAW TED BOW DRAW SOME DISTRICT LINES WHEN HE WAS ON THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT FOR THE INDIANAPOLIS CITY COUNCIL.

AND HE DID THAT IN JUST A FEW WEEKS.

AND JUST A FEW WEEKS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ELECTIONS AND DID THAT WITHOUT REGARD TO THE PARTIES.

I THINK THAT BOTH SIDES WOULD AGREE THAT THAT WORKED OUT PRETTY WELL.

>> DON'T YOU THINK -- >> DEMOCRATS... >> MOST JUDGES -- I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT SORT OF THING.

THEY DON'T WANT TO WADE INTO THE WEEDS, THIS CENSUS, THAT CREEK, THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANT TO WADE IN?

>> ABSOLUTELY NOT, THE INDIANA SUPREME COURT DID IT WELL A DECADE AGO.

POLITICS CHANGE, AND YOU MENTIONED THIS WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT THE 1981 REDISTRICTING WHICH THE US COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE 7th CIRCUIT, I THINK IT WAS, SAID WAS PROBABLY THE MOST PARTISAN REDISTRICTING PLAN IN THE COUNTRY, AND GEE, JUST A COUPLE OF ELECTION CYCLES LATER IN 1988, THE DEMOCRATS CAME TO PARITY IN THE HOUSE AND TOOK OVER IN 1990.

AND THEN WHEN THEY DREW THE DISTRICT LINES AS YOU POINTED OUT IN 1991, THEY LOST THE 1992 ELECTIONS.

SO THINGS DO CHANGE.

AND IT IS JUST GOING TO BE VERY INTERESTING, VERY DIFFERENT THIS YEAR, IT'S GOING TO BE THE FIRST TIME THAT WE WILL NOT HAVE DONE REDISTRICTING WITHIN A REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION, OR THROUGH A REDISTRICTING COMMISSION CONSTITUTED BECAUSE WE COULDN'T GET IT DONE.

IT WASN'T OUR FAULT, IT IS THE FED THIS TIME.

>> INTERESTING TO SEE IF IT PROVIDES FEWER OPPORTUNITY, OR MAYBE JUST GIVES MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC INPUT AS JULIA VAUGHN SUGGESTED.

WHEN OUR GREAT GREAT GREAT GRAND KID GET TOGETHER FOR THIS DISCUSSION OVER BEERS, WILL THEY BE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE CURRENT SYSTEM, OR THAT COMMISSION WHICH HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR 100 YEARS THAT NOBODY LIKES?

WHAT'S THE FUTURE HOLD?

>> I THINK THEY'LL BE DOING VIA VIRTUAL REALITY.

EVEN EASIER THAN JULIA VAUGHN SAYS IT'S GOING TO BE, AND I THINK THAT YOU'LL PROBABLY SEE A LOT LESS POLITICS INVOLVED IN THAT DECADES DOWN THE LINE.

>> WE'LL CHECK BACK IN SEVERAL HUNDRED YEARS AND SEE IF YOU'RE RIGHT, ED, THANKS AS ALWAYS FOR YOUR INSIGHT, MUCH APPRECIATED.

>> FOR MORE INFORMATION, EPISODE STREAMS AND OTHER EXPERT CONSENT, VISIT US ON THE WEB AT WFYI.ORG/LAWMAKERS.

WELL, THAT CONCLUDES ANOTHER EDITION OF INDIANA LAWMAKERS, I'M JON SCHWANTES, I THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, UNTIL NEXT WEEK, TAKE CARE.

♪♪