2012 Legislative Maps

The Government Information Service has done us a great service by showing pairings for incumbent legislators.

House pairings:

http://www.gis.leg.mn/redist2010/Legislative/L2012/reports/house/incumbents.pdf

Senate pairings:

http://www.gis.leg.mn/redist2010/Legislative/L2012/reports/senate/incumbents.pdf

Here is the Court ruling:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Final_Order_Adopting_A_Legislative_Redistricting_Plan.pdf

Here is the Legislative statewide map:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_State_Legislative_Districts_Statewide.pdf

Here is the Legislative metropolitan map:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_State_Legislative_Districts_Metropolitan_Area.pdf

Here is a map concentrated on regional center communities:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_State_House_Districts_C.pdf

Here is a map continuing the concentration on regional centers:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_State_House_Districts_2.pdf

The three judge Redistricting panel appointed by the State Supreme Court has just released it maps for the Congressional and state Legislative Districts. The biggest surprise is the redistricting of
Congresswoman Betty McCollum (D-MN4) and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R-MN6) into the same district, but because federal Representatives are not required to live in their districts we expect Bachmann will move into the new 6th. That district is ideologically suited to her because it retains the more conservative elements of Benton, Sherburne, Stearns and Wright Counties.

Here is the ruling:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Final_Order_Adopting_A_Congressional_Redistricting_Plan.pdf

Interestingly, there now is a significant shift, which has been reinforced from the maps people had to consider only twenty years ago. The 1st, a portion of the 2nd and the 7th Congressional Districts made up an area referred to as the Republican L because it bordered the state on the western and southern sides making an L. Now this is the DFL L, because Congressman Tim Walz (D-MN1) and Congressman Collin Peterson (D-MN7) make up this composition.

There are some interesting items to look at from the offerings by the court; they have provided comparative maps from the previous districts so one can basically overlay the new map over the old.   

Here is the state wide map:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_Congressional_Districts_Statewide.pdf

Here is the 2012-2002 comparison:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_Congressional_Districts_2012_and_2002_Comparison.pdf   

Congressman John Kline (R-MN2) does get the opportunity to reconstitute the old Bill Frenzel (R) district in the 2nd and Congressman Erik Paulson (R-MN3) does have a more competitive district. Congressman Keith Ellison,(D-MN5) Has the most solid DFL district in the state and his reelection numbers should approach 70%, and Congressman Chip Craavak (R-MN8) will have a tough time during reelection because his district changed the least and was a DFL stronghold until Craavak beat Jim Oberstar in 2010.

Here is the Metropolitan area:

 http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_Congressional_Districts_Metropolitan_Area.pdf

Here is the 2012-2002 comparison:

http://www.mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Court_Information_Office/Redistricting2011Final/Minnesota_Congressional_Districts_2012_and_2002_Comparison_M.pdf

The Senate Republican Caucus has stepped over the line with the literature piece they provided caucus attendees on February 7th.  The reason this document changed from being an informational piece to becoming a campaign item is simply due to the last item on the page http://mnsrc.org. (We hyperlinked it to show you where it goes) Granted people would have to type it into their computers, but if you click on this link it will take you to the Senate Republican Caucus campaign site.

Here you are greeted with the following:

Dear Friends,

On behalf of the new Senate Republican Majority Caucus, I’d like to welcome you to our website. 2010 was an historic year for Minnesota Senate Republicans, and more importantly for the people of Minnesota who just want a good, responsible government to do what is best for them. Our candidates ran on a message of creating jobs and limiting the growth of government and on Election Day the people spoke loudly, some say “roared” and entrusted us with the opportunity to serve in the Majority of the Minnesota Senate. Senate Republicans take this responsibility very seriously and are committed to making Minnesota a better place live, work and raise our families for all citizens.

On January 4th, thirty-seven Republican Senators were sworn into the Minnesota Senate, including twenty-one freshmen. With a new outlook and a set of original ideas, we ran on a platform that innovative reform is essential to putting Minnesota back on the right track. Now as the Majority Senate Caucus, we know that we must create an entrepreneurial environment in our great state that allows people to take risks, create jobs and grow our economy for the benefit of all.

Our thirty-seven senators are up to that challenge!

We have hit the ground running.

This is only just the beginning. Please stay tuned for future announcements from the Senate Republican Caucus. In the meantime, please follow us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/mnsrc or Twitter at @mnsrc.

Sincerely,

Senate Majority Leader Amy Koch

Additionally, you can contribute to the MNSRC in its reelection and campaign efforts. This is clearly a violation of the firewall which is to exist between the legislative and campaign activity.

Ironically, when Michael Brodkorb led the Senate Republican Communications Department and was the Deputy Chair of the Republican Party nothing like this happened under his watch, but this is now added to the issues surrounding the new Communications Department head former House SPeaker Steve Sviggum.

The fundamental argument opponents to Photo Id are making is everyone should have equal access to the ballot. Minnesota, a state with the most open and accessible system for voting, in spite of there being no evidence to the contrary, as shown negligible instances of voter fraud or illegal voting, but is a target for electoral change.

Because of the closeness of the last two statewide elections, Al Franken (D) for U.S. Senate 2008 and Mark Dayton (DFL) for Governor 2010, people interested in different outcomes are pushing for structural reform to our electoral system. They make the unfounded claim because people are not required to show any form of Photo Identification at the polls the system is rife with fraud and election manipulation must be occurring. Because there is not any evidence of this occurring doesn’t stop the claims. Truth cannot overcome irrationality.    

If we commence a system of showing an Id at the polls, then who actually votes the person or the Id? If it is the person, then there is no guarantee the Id is not fraudulent either. The only way to ensure the person voting is who they say they are is by a provision of something hard to manipulate. We suggest either a fingerprint or some type of DNA would be a serviceable answer.

People have argued you need a Photo Id to cash a check, but often this is not enough, banks require a thumbprint as well. So why don’t we shortcut the process and go right to a fingerprint. Granted, a fingerprint doesn’t show where a person resides, but if it is tied to the state’s public safety database election judges can learn where a person’s last residence is in the system.

This will mean we can have integrity in the system since people are by nature dishonest, which is what the call for Photo Id presumes.