IBJOpinion

MARCUS: Redistricting key to economic policy

Morton Marcus
December 18, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Morton Marcus

In a few weeks, the federal government will release the first data from the 2010 census. These numbers will tell us the official population of each state, county, city and town in the nation. It might be the last time Indiana gets township population numbers. These data will be used to draw the maps for Indiana’s congressional seats, plus for the 50 state senators and 100 state representatives.

The key factor determining the change in a county’s representation in the Legislature is the change in its share of the state’s population. Based on the latest estimates released by the Census Bureau, the big winner will be Hamilton County, whose share of the state’s population grew from 3.0 percent in 2000 to 4.3 percent in 2009.

Change in share of population depends on two things: the relative percentage change in population and the initial size of the population. A high growth rate in a county with a small population will have little effect on that county’s share of the state. Thus, Warrick County, with 52,400 people in 2000, had only a 0.5-percent increase in its share of Indiana’s population, despite an 11.7-percent growth rate, twice as fast as the state’s 5.6 percent. 

Hamilton County had nearly 183,000 people in 2000 and grew an incredible 52.8 percent. That was almost 10 times the rate of growth for the entire state. By contrast, neighboring Marion County had an increase of 30,000, with a 3.5-percent growth rate (29th in the state), sufficiently below the state average to leave Marion with the largest loss of share at 0.28 percent.

What do these numbers mean for the new legislative maps to be drawn in early 2011? Hamilton County, since 2002, has been entitled to three seats in the House and 1-1/2 seats in the Senate. Now, Hamilton will be entitled to 4-1/3 seats in the House of Representatives, plus two full seats and part of another in the Senate elected in 2012.

Currently, five different senators represent Hamilton County, as well as parts of Grant, Hancock, Howard, Madison, Marion and Tipton counties. It is difficult to draw the maps using just the population criterion. Other factors must be considered. But, historically, the Indiana General Assembly has incumbency as its prime consideration. 

“Preserve the incumbents and let the lines fall where they may.” That banner might as well hang over the rotunda in the Statehouse. Of course, from time to time, a party will sacrifice an incumbent as part of a trade. “I’ll give you an environmentalist and a feminist in exchange for two bulldog conservatives and a Sunday sales advocate.”

Carving and slicing the electoral map to protect incumbents leads to safe districts carefully composed to favor the dominant party. The non-dominant party will avoid these districts, leaving voters without a meaningful choice. In 2010, the Republicans were sure they had a good chance to carry the Indiana House; they nominated 95 candidates for the 100 available seats. The dispirited Democrats held back; they nominated only 79 people for those 100 seats. That’s counted as political wisdom. No point in wasting effort and money on giving voice to important issues if you aren’t likely to win with a deck stacked against you. No reason to lose when there is no penalty for avoiding the processes of democratic choice.

With more and more economic decision-making resting in the hands of state politicians, the ways in which redistricting is manipulated become a dollar issue when the maps make no sense.•

__________

Marcus taught economics for more than 30 years at Indiana University and is the former director of IU’s Business Research Center. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at mmarcus@ibj.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

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. So as I read this the one question that continues to come to me to ask is. Didn't Indiana only have a couple of exchanges for people to opt into which were very high because we really didn't want to expect the plan. So was this study done during that time and if so then I can understand these numbers. I also understand that we have now opened up for more options for hoosiers to choose from. Please correct if I'm wrong and if I'm not why was this not part of the story so that true overview could be taken away and not just parts of it to continue this negative tone against the ACA. I look forward to the clarity.

  2. It's really very simple. All forms of transportation are subsidized. All of them. Your tax money already goes toward every single form of transportation in the state. It is not a bad thing to put tax money toward mass transit. The state spends over 1,000,000,000 (yes billion) on roadway expansions and maintenance every single year. If you want to cry foul over anything cry foul over the overbuilding of highways which only serve people who can afford their own automobile.

  3. So instead of subsidizing a project with a market-driven scope, you suggest we subsidize a project that is way out of line with anything that can be economically sustainable just so we can have a better-looking skyline?

  4. Downtowner, if Cummins isn't getting expedited permitting and tax breaks to "do what they do", then I'd be happy with letting the market decide. But that isn't the case, is it?

  5. Patty, this commuter line provides a way for workers (willing to work lower wages) to get from Marion county to Hamilton county. These people are running your restaurants, hotels, hospitals, and retail stores. I don't see a lot of residents of Carmel working these jobs.

ADVERTISEMENT