Analyses, Non-Partisan Experts Say GOP Submission is Partisan, Gerrymandered
HARRISBURG – Gov. Tom Wolf today told the Pennsylvania Supreme Court that he will not accept the proposed map Republican legislative leaders submitted because it, too, is a partisan gerrymander that does not comply with the court’s order or Pennsylvania’s Constitution.
“Partisan gerrymandering weakens citizen power, promotes gridlock and stifles meaningful reform,” Wolf said.
“As non-partisan analysts have already said, their map maintains a similar partisan advantage by employing many of the same unconstitutional tactics present in their 2011 map.
“The analysis by my team shows that, like the 2011 map, the map submitted to my office by Republican leaders is still a gerrymander.
“Their map clearly seeks to benefit one political party, which is the essence of why the court found the current map to be unconstitutional.”
Read a statement from Professor Moon Duchin on her analysis here.
The analysis by Wolf’s team confirms the universal analysis of various non-partisan experts that say the Republican leaders’ submission is another partisan gerrymander.
- Princeton University professor Sam Wang said bluntly that “a prettier map can still conceal ill intent” and “it appears that Republicans are not dealing in good faith with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s order.”
- A Washington Post data expert concluded, “Pennsylvania Republicans have drawn a new congressional map that is just as gerrymandered as the old one.”
- The New York Times found the submitted map would extract the same partisan advantage for Republicans as the current one.
- Brian Amos, a redistricting expert at the University of Florida, said, “…There was still a strong Republican bias, which is why the congressional and State Senate plans were struck down for being gerrymanders.”
