IBJNews

Indiana Senate panel backs GOP redistricting plan

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A Republican-led Indiana Senate committee on Thursday approved a plan for new Senate election districts that Democrats maintain unfairly dilutes black and Hispanic voting strength.

House Democrats, meanwhile, offered a redistricting plan that they say would create 26 closely contested districts among the 100 House seats, up from the 14 in the proposal from majority Republicans.

The Senate Elections Committee voted 6-2 on party lines to send to the full Senate the Senate redistricting plan and proposed new districts for Indiana's nine congressional seats.

The committee modified several Senate districts from the plan Republican released on Monday, with the greatest changes in the districts covering the area southeast of Indianapolis to the Ohio state line.

Democratic Sen. Tim Lanane of Anderson said the changes did nothing to address his belief that the Republican plan packs minority voters into two Senate districts in Indianapolis, while splitting minority voters among three districts in Fort Wayne.

"We could pass maps that would allow for much more significant minority participation," Lanane said. "That's still an issue."

Republicans have a 37-13 majority in the Senate and Democrats say their analysis of the GOP-proposed districts show that at most 17 of the districts having enough Democratic voting strength to match their party's statewide average in recent elections.

Republicans said the Indianapolis districts preserve minority representation and that their plans complies with voting rights laws.

"We did not pack those districts," said elections committee Chairwoman Sue Landske, R-Cedar Lake. "We feel confident that they are fair."

The House elections committee is set to vote Friday on advancing the redistricting plan for that chamber.

Outnumbered Democrats on Thursday presented proposed districts that they said would have 10 more tightly contested districts than the GOP plan based on voting patterns over the past decade.

Republicans haven't released information on the political trends of their proposed districts, saying that wasn't taken into consideration while drawing the maps.

Rep. David Niezgodski, D-South Bend, said greater competition would mean more voter participation in elections.

"We're going to shut people out of the process," Niezgodski said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Two faced Democrats
    Democrats want everyone treated equally, thus desegregation. But they want Black and Hispanic voting districts, thus segregation. Make up your minds!
  • Get the job done already...
    Take a map of the State of Indiana and a straight-edged ruler... Draw lines equal distance top to bottom and then left to right.... This takes at least 10 minutes and the districts are drawn with each district having a few people from each party and maybe even a few wayward 3rd Party advocates.
  • Please Change My District
    Please, oh please, change my district so that I could have a Congressman other than Dan Burton. He'll keel over on a golf course and these idiots will vote his corpse back into office. Of course, truthfully, we won't notice any substantive difference before or after that...
  • Bauer and the Boys
    Ten years ago Bauer and the Boys (and Girls) ignored these very same arguments and drew their maps as they saw fit. Elections have consequences. Let's see if they run off to Illinois again!
  • about time
    It is about time these voting districts were drawn fairly. The libs always cry foul unless it helps them. Maybe they run back to IL and stale the vote again.
  • Well Surprize, Surprize, Surprize
    Gee, a GOP panel backs a GOP Senate.... Go Figure!!

    I guess the only thing I can do is VOTE!!!!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Aaron is my fav!

  2. Let's see... $25M construction cost, they get $7.5M back from federal taxpayers, they're exempt from business property tax and use tax so that's about $2.5M PER YEAR they don't have to pay, permitting fees are cut in half for such projects, IPL will give them $4K under an incentive program, and under IPL's VFIT they'll be selling the power to IPL at 20 cents / kwh, nearly triple what a gas plant gets, about $6M / year for the 150-acre combined farms, and all of which is passed on to IPL customers. No jobs will be created either other than an handful of installers for a few weeks. Now here's the fun part...the panels (from CHINA) only cost about $5M on Alibaba, so where's the rest of the $25M going? Are they marking up the price to drive up the federal rebate? Indy Airport Solar Partners II LLC is owned by local firms Johnson-Melloh Solutions and Telemon Corp. They'll gross $6M / year in triple-rate power revenue, get another $12M next year from taxpayers for this new farm, on top of the $12M they got from taxpayers this year for the first farm, and have only laid out about $10-12M in materials plus installation labor for both farms combined, and $500K / year in annual land lease for both farms (est.). Over 15 years, that's over $70M net profit on a $12M investment, all from our wallets. What a boondoggle. It's time to wise up and give Thorium Energy your serious consideration. See http://energyfromthorium.com to learn more.

  3. Markus, I don't think a $2 Billion dollar surplus qualifies as saying we are out of money. Privatization does work. The government should only do what private industry can't or won't. What is proven is that any time the government tries to do something it costs more, comes in late and usually is lower quality.

  4. Some of the licenses that were added during Daniels' administration, such as requiring waiter/waitresses to be licensed to serve alcohol, are simply a way to generate revenue. At $35/server every 3 years, the state is generating millions of dollars on the backs of people who really need/want to work.

  5. I always giggle when I read comments from people complaining that a market is "too saturated" with one thing or another. What does that even mean? If someone is able to open and sustain a new business, whether you think there is room enough for them or not, more power to them. Personally, I love visiting as many of the new local breweries as possible. You do realize that most of these establishments include a dining component and therefore are pretty similar to restaurants, right? When was the last time I heard someone say "You know, I think we have too many locally owned restaurants"? Um, never...

ADVERTISEMENT