by Amanda Holt, 6/6/12
With just two days until the final plan is unveiled and voted on, it seemed like an opportune moment to revisit the reasons the preliminary plan was so egregious and identify some quick clues that will strongly indicate whether or not this plan will abide by our constitution.
First, it is good to review why the 2011 Plan was remanded in the first place. Primarily, it was because of an excessive number of splits (evidence showed an over 50% reduction was possible). The Justices also noted three districts that were not compact — SD #3, #15, and #35.
Based on my statewide constitutional analysis, the Remanded 2012 Preliminary Plan fails to address the constitutional grievances noted in the remand.
Most prominent are the excessive number of splits that still remain, each of which serves to further dilute the voice of Pennsylvania residents. The chart to the right illustrates this….
keep reading at Amanda Holt