Congressional redistricting was partisanship at its worst

Congressional redistricting was partisanship at its worst

Jan. 29, 2001

I was not surprised that the district court judge in Denver released his redistricting plan Friday morning. It was clear that a compromise would not be reached in the legislature by the end of the day. The House sent two maps to the Senate for their consideration. One of the maps reflected the last boundaries 1982 Karsten court decision. The second map was offered by Rep. Keith King (R-Colorado Springs). King's map was much more acceptable from a Western Slope perspective and was an excellent starting point in the redistricting debate.

What did come as a surprise was the Senate Democrats’ absolute refusal to consider either of the maps. They also refused to send any maps over to the House for our consideration. The lip service the Senate leadership continually blathered claiming that "the legislature should decide the redistricting issue" was never substantiated by their actions. After the court’s decision was released, it quickly became apparent why. The court map was a gerrymandering masterpiece obviously partisan and defying sound community of interest reasoning. The 3rd Congressional District and the Western Slope were handed a bitter pill none of us will soon forget. It is clear that the Senate Democrats could care less about rural, Western Slope communities despite all of their politically alluring rhetoric. The Senate's actions in refusing to consider or offer redistricting legislation should deeply concern the citizens of Colorado.

This turn of events will certainly have ongoing implications upon an already divisive second regular session. I hope that readers will stay abreast of what transpires in the legislature from this point on. The killing of otherwise worthy bills will often not reflect the legislation's quality as much as who is carrying it and how difficult a race that legislator may have in the next election. All too often I am hearing (on both sides of the aisle and in both houses) that certain legislator's bills will not pass solely because of who they are, regardless of the quality of the issue or the importance of that legislation to the state. Is it any wonder that citizens become so jaded to this process? I have promised my constituents before and make that promise again that I will vote for a particular issue solely on the merit of the legislation and how that legislation impacts my district. I refuse to vote on a bill based on the bill sponsor's political agenda. I will be calling on all my colleagues to do the same. Readers need to follow their legislator's votes and question any time that a vote is counter to their thinking. If I cannot give you a clear reason for my position, I will have to re-think my vote.

While I attempt to be straightforward in my articles, I truly hope that I am challenging you to be involved, not causing you to give up. Colorado's and your future are much too important to leave up to the lobbyists, staff and political pundits. I am simply a small business owner who decided to run for office because I felt I could represent our district well. The 59th House District is a community that shares many core values and common interests regardless of party affiliation. While we do have our squabbles, we at least talk them through and try to reach common ground. I genuinely did not anticipate the extreme partisanship that redistricting has provoked. After I was elected, the party affiliation distinction was much less pronounced as I then recognized the larger interest of the combined "Party of Southwestern Colorado." I still think that is the way it should be.

Mark Larson (R-Cortez) represents the 59th District, which includes Cortez, in the state House of Representatives. Reach him at the Capitol by phone, (303) 866-2914 or by fax (303)-866-2218; at home by phone (970) 564-0999 or by fax (970) 564-9236; or by e-mail at marklarson@qwest.net .