Redistricting is a constitutional protection

Redistricting, a term that recently seems to have, at a minimum, many controversial connotations, is actually a constitutional protection.

Delineated in the federal Constitution, reapportionment — now more commonly known as redistricting — is the process by which we ensure the extremely critical and essential concept of "one person, one vote," as defined by the courts within very limited variance.

Because of irregular population trends over the commonwealth (and, for that matter, the country) over time legislators may find themselves representing very different numbers of people. The "ideal" number of voters in a Virginia Senate district is determined by dividing the population by 40, the number of Senate districts. The method is the same for the House of Delegates, except divided by 100, the number of House districts.

In this past year's census, the district of state Sen. Mark Herring in Northern Virginia has grown so much that he is representing twice as many people as he should, based on the ideal number. At the same time, some of the legislators in Hampton Roads, where the population has not grown commensurately, are representing significantly fewer voters than the ideal.

This means, in effect, that in those types of districts, where the population is over or under the ideal, voters no longer have "one person, one vote." When Sen. Herring votes, his vote only counts for 1/40th of the total, but he is representing double that in population. The unfairness of this quickly becomes apparent, and redistricting is the constitutional remedy for this inequality.

In and of itself, redistricting is the essence of democracy and fairness. The controversy is not in redistricting but in how it is applied.

Virginia Democrats have long supported nonpartisan or bipartisan redistricting, where the district lines are drawn without partisan input or, at least in a way, where one party does not wield power over the other.

Del. Ken Plum, a Democrat from Northern Virginia, has introduced this legislation without success in the House for decades. In the state Senate, Democrats have unanimously supported this type of legislation for years.

Because the Democrats are in the majority in the Virginia Senate, the nonpartisan redistricting legislation has passed the Senate, without Republican approval, and gone to the House — where the Republican majority has killed it in committee, sparing their colleagues a public floor vote.

Many Virginians were very excited in 2009 when both candidates for governor endorsed nonpartisan redistricting. Senate Democrats eagerly anticipated the governor's help and support for their annual crusade for nonpartisan redistricting. Unfortunately, none of that materialized.

The governor did not exhort his colleagues to vote for this legislation; he made no public comments, took no position, and the bill suffered the same fate — death in the Republican-controlled House of Delegates.

In 2011 — the year redistricting actually happens — the very same process occurred. Senate Democrats provided unanimous support, the bill went to the House, and while the governor stood by idly, his colleagues defeated the legislation without even a full vote.

Belatedly, wanting it to appear that he kept his "promise," he formed a powerless redistricting commission. The governor was and is well aware that this commission has absolutely no real part in the process and that it exists simply to provide political cover for his broken campaign pledge.

This is not, in any way, to impugn the hard work of the redistricting commission nor of the college students who worked so diligently to produce a variety of maps and options.

Senate Democrats were impressed by their efforts, and our map has been improved not only by their good ideas but also by the myriad suggestions from the public obtained both from public hearings and from contacts with their individual senators.

However, notwithstanding all the political grandstanding by the governor and now by his political party, I believe the Senate map, especially the new Senate district in the Richmond area, is an asset. This new Senate district, which will be Senate District 8, truly represents our Richmond area's desire for regional cooperation.

This district, which covers parts of Chesterfield, Henrico and Richmond, presents another real opportunity, working with other Richmond-area legislators, to represent the region and to ensure that we all work together to provide for this area.

Until we recognize that the success of any part of the metropolitan area is dependent on the success of the entire region, we cannot progress. For far too long, we have acted as totally separate entities — at best with each locality ignoring the other and all too frequently with localities actually seeming to be in competition.

I am eager to work with our new senator to eliminate this destructive attitude and to lead the way to a stronger, more vital capital region, one that can truly be the centerpiece of the commonwealth.