Calling it one of the most blatant political power grabs on record, Senator Christopher J. Connors, Assemblyman Brian E. Rumpf and Assemblywoman DiAnne C. Gove oppose and will vote against a legislative effort to rig the State’s Legislative redistricting process.
Calling it one of the most blatant political power grabs on record, District 9 lawmakers said they oppose and will vote against a legislative effort to rig the State’s Legislative redistricting process. (©iStock)
As proposed, the companion Resolutions, SCR-152 and ACR-205, would have amended the State Constitution, setting new standards for how legislative districts are redrawn. The calculations that would be used to establish legislative districts would have been based on federal and gubernatorial elections results, as opposed to legislative election results, in order to give the State Democrat party a massive advantage, according to a number of nonpartisan groups and election experts.
“As intended, the proposed state constitutional amendment was a deceptive, overt partisan power grab being pushed by establishment players under the false pretense that this about reform, when in reality – it was anything but.
“Bottom line: the gerrymandering that would be authorized under the proposed amendment would have deprived New Jersey voters of fair representation in government, regardless of their political affiliation, further eroding trust in government.
“Supporters of the proposed amendment seriously miscalculated the level of vehement opposition, which is substantial, organized, bipartisan, and on the right side of the issue.
“Arrogant even by Trenton’s standards, the proposed rigging of the redistricting process clearly crossed a line that even the most highly partisan actors are unwilling to accept. This has gone beyond politics. This is clearly a moral issue that threatens our democratic process.
“With certain exceptions, our Delegation generally supports putting ballot questions before the people so they can decide. However, this proposed constitutional amendment was deceptive to its very core, by virtue of being politically-motivated.
“Seeing it for what it is – another attempt to rig the system that already fails too many people – our Delegation will vote NO if and when the proposed amendment is voted on by our respective Houses.
“Interestingly, the proposal was scheduled to be voted on by both Houses on December 17, but was pulled by the Legislative Leadership in the face of intensifying opposition. The vote, however, can still be rescheduled and we certainly wouldn’t be surprised if it was, given how Trenton operates.
“Ultimately, voters would be able to decide if this constitutional amendment serves their best interests. If and when the proposed amendment is placed on the ballot, it will provide the people with a unique and rare opportunity to directly challenge the Trenton establishment and send a clear message of reform – by voting no.”