BEFORE LATFOR, FEBRUARY 9, 2012, SMITHTOWN, NY
My name is Brian Paul and I am the Research and Policy Coordinator at Common Cause NY. Thank you for the opportunity to testify here in Long Island today.
When we at Common Cause decided to draw model redistricting plans for New York State, our goal was to demonstrate what a non-partisan independent process – one that nearly every Legislator pledged to support back in 2010 – would look like in practice while following all the applicable Federal and State Constitutional laws.
There’s no question that redistricting is a complicated task with a complex web of laws that must be followed. But we’ve shown with the Common Cause Reform Plans that these laws are not a barrier to drawing fair districts based on communities of interest. They are not a barrier to following village and school district lines. They are not a barrier to keeping districts reasonably compact and they are not a barrier to maintaining lower population deviations.
It’s been frustrating to see some members of this panel blame politically gerrymandered lines on the Voting Rights Act or block-on-border when interacting with the media and the public. We don’t buy it and the public shouldn’t either. Our experience shows that these laws are no impediment to drawing fair districts.
Now to move on to specific analysis of these Long Island drafts. First, we are glad to see that the Assembly decided to return the 22nd Assembly District to Long Island. This is the correct apportionment according to the population. But as we’ve testified before, this district should have been moved into Long Island from New York City, not from Upstate New York.
According to the actual population of the state, there should be 64 districts upstate, 64 in New York City, and 22 on Long Island as drawn in the Common Cause Reform Plan, not 63 upstate, 65 New York City, and 22 Long Island as drawn in LATFOR’s draft.
We are also concerned by the Assembly’s partisan gerrymander of Huntington, Babylon, and Oyster Bay, specifically in ADs 9, 10, 12, and 13. In this draft, ADs 9, 10, and 12 have been radically redrawn as you can see on page 9 of this testimony. Districts 9 and 12 now form long slivers running from the Sound to the Bay in shapes that have nothing to do with local communities, villages, or school districts. Looking at party enrollment in the draft districts 9, 10, and 12 as we illustrate on page 10, these new districts appear to be an overt attempt to increase the chance of electing Democratic members.
In Nassau, AD 13 continues to maintain the looping horseshoe shape from Roslyn to Glen Cove to Plainview to Jericho in a game of “follow the Democratic voters.” (See page 10 of this testimony).
The Common Cause Reform Plan, which you can see on page 9 of this testimony, offers a clear alternative of how Long Island’s Assembly Districts could look if drawn based on communities of interest, village, and school district boundaries rather than partisan gamesmanship. These districts would keep distinct local communities together so they can effectively engage in civic life. As public servants this should be your goal in the redistricting process, not this apparent game of wringing out as many Democratic Assembly Members as possible.
Now to turn to the State Senate. We at Common Cause New York are very disappointed that LATFOR decided to completely ignore the testimonies of dozens of Long Islanders last fall and keep these districts almost exactly the same as the current lines.
Here in Suffolk, the lines between SD 3 and SD 4 continue to split the minority community of Brentwood directly in half, and the lines between SD 4 and SD 8 in Babylon continue to separate Wyandanch from North Amityville. Despite the fact that the Hispanic and Black communities in Suffolk grew by almost 49% since the last redistricting, the lines remain the same. Despite the fact that these areas of Suffolk share distinct socio-economic characteristics compared to surrounding areas, the lines remain the same.
The lines do not have to remain the same. The Common Cause Reform Plan, right here on page 5, clearly demonstrates that SD 4 can be redrawn to include these areas together in a reasonably compact district that respects village and school district lines. This district would become almost 48% Black and Hispanic, a near double in minority influence from any Suffolk district in LATFOR’s draft.
In Nassau, the gerrymandering is perhaps even more egregious. The minority community in Hempstead continues to be cracked between four Senate Districts: between SDs 6 and 8 at the Uniondale-Roosevelt border and between SDs 7 and 9 in Elmont. Like in Suffolk, this task force chose to keep those lines in place despite tremendous growth in the minority community, 32% growth.
Again, there’s no excuse. The Common Cause Reform Plan, right here on page 7, again shows that SD 6 can be redrawn to include these areas together in a reasonably compact district that respects village and school district lines. This district would become almost 63% Black and Hispanic, a true majority-minority coalition district with more than double the minority influence of any Nassau district in LATFOR’s draft.
Overall in Long Island the Black and Hispanic population now accounts for 22% of the Voting Age Population. There are 9 Senate Districts on Long Island. Adopting the Common Cause lines would allow minority communities a real opportunity to participate in 2 of the 9 districts. What’s 2 divided by 9? 22%. The demographic math here is undeniable.
On top of all this, the Senate Plan fails to follow the State Constitution’s clear mandate to minimize the division of counties. This plan crosses the Nassau-Suffolk border twice in SDs 5 and 8, while the Common Cause Reform Plan shows it is possible to only cross the county border once.
In fair redistricting, partisan politics is not allowed to trump communities’ interests or the State Constitution, and this is the key difference between these LATFOR proposals and the Common Cause Reform Plan.
I thank you for the opportunity to testify, and hope that you take the time to revisit the recommendations of the Common Cause Reform Plan for Long Island. I urge you to give New Yorkers the fair, nonpartisan voting districts they want and deserve.
The LATFOR Draft continues to “crack” the growing minority communities in Babylon and Islip between three Senate districts.
The Common Cause Reform Plan shows how these communities can be kept together while improving all the surrounding districts at the same time.
The LATFOR Draft continues to “crack” the growing minority communities in Hempstead between four Senate districts.
The Common Cause Reform Plan shows how these communities can be kept together while improving all the surrounding districts at the same time.
Assembly districts in Huntington, Babylon, and Oyster Bay have been redrawn in an attempt to increase the change of electing Democratic members. Districts 9 and 12 now form long slivers running from the Sound to the Bay in shapes that have nothing to do with local communities, villages, or school districts. District 13 maintains the looping horseshoe shape from Roslyn to Glen Cove to Plainview to Jericho in a game of “follow the Democratic voters.” The Common Cause Reform Plan, (which you can see in previous map), offers a clear alternative of how Long Island’s Assembly Districts could look if drawn based on communities of interest, village, and school district boundaries rather than partisan gamesmanship
LATFOR Senate Draft – Long Island
| DIST | POP | DEV | % DEV | %NHWhtVAP | %NHBlkVAP | %NHAsnVAP | %HspVAP |
| SD01 | 315,163 | 7,799 | 2.5% | 79.3% | 5.1% | 2.0% | 12.3% |
| SD02 | 315,164 | 7,800 | 2.5% | 83.5% | 3.0% | 5.6% | 7.0% |
| SD03 | 315,163 | 7,799 | 2.5% | 64.3% | 7.7% | 2.7% | 23.9% |
| SD04 | 315,163 | 7,799 | 2.5% | 70.1% | 8.8% | 3.0% | 16.7% |
| SD05 | 315,163 | 7,799 | 2.5% | 78.3% | 3.2% | 7.5% | 9.9% |
| SD06 | 315,163 | 7,799 | 2.5% | 62.5% | 14.5% | 5.1% | 16.5% |
| SD07 | 315,163 | 7,799 | 2.5% | 64.3% | 7.3% | 13.7% | 12.8% |
| SD08 | 315,163 | 7,799 | 2.5% | 65.5% | 14.9% | 2.4% | 15.9% |
| SD09 | 315,164 | 7,800 | 2.5% | 69.5% | 10.7% | 5.3% | 13.0% |
Common Cause Reform Plan Senate 63 – Long Island
| DIST | POP | DEV | % DEV | %NHWhtVAP | %NHBlkVAP | %NHAsnVAP | %HspVAP |
| 1 | 315,137 | 7,773 | 2.5% | 78.4% | 5.6% | 1.7% | 12.9% |
| 2 | 315,215 | 7,851 | 2.6% | 84.2% | 2.4% | 5.2% | 7.2% |
| 3 | 315,167 | 7,803 | 2.5% | 80.8% | 4.1% | 2.5% | 11.5% |
| 4 | 315,318 | 7,954 | 2.6% | 48.1% | 15.9% | 2.7% | 31.6% |
| 5 | 315,160 | 7,796 | 2.5% | 79.4% | 3.7% | 7.0% | 8.8% |
| 6 | 315,161 | 7,797 | 2.5% | 29.7% | 34.7% | 5.4% | 28.0% |
| 7 | 314,916 | 7,552 | 2.5% | 74.4% | 2.5% | 12.0% | 9.5% |
| 8 | 315,204 | 7,840 | 2.6% | 81.1% | 2.1% | 7.2% | 8.5% |
| 9 | 315,191 | 7,827 | 2.5% | 80.6% | 4.6% | 3.5% | 10.2% |
LATFOR Assembly Draft – Long Island
| DIST | POP | DEV | %DEV | %NHWhtVAP | %NHBlkVAP | %NHAsnVAP | %HspVAP |
| 001 | 128,929 | -160 | -0.12% | 77.9% | 3.9% | 1.1% | 15.5% |
| 002 | 128,934 | -155 | -0.12% | 84.9% | 3.9% | 2.0% | 8.1% |
| 003 | 128,931 | -158 | -0.12% | 73.4% | 7.4% | 2.5% | 15.0% |
| 004 | 128,933 | -156 | -0.12% | 76.2% | 6.1% | 7.1% | 9.3% |
| 005 | 128,927 | -162 | -0.13% | 83.4% | 1.9% | 4.5% | 9.2% |
| 006 | 128,933 | -156 | -0.12% | 22.8% | 16.3% | 2.9% | 56.2% |
| 007 | 128,931 | -158 | -0.12% | 83.3% | 3.3% | 1.8% | 10.5% |
| 008 | 128,926 | -163 | -0.13% | 89.4% | 1.2% | 3.8% | 4.9% |
| 009 | 128,929 | -160 | -0.12% | 85.5% | 3.3% | 3.0% | 7.4% |
| 010 | 128,932 | -157 | -0.12% | 72.3% | 6.7% | 6.3% | 13.3% |
| 011 | 128,932 | -157 | -0.12% | 55.6% | 21.9% | 2.2% | 18.6% |
| 012 | 128,932 | -157 | -0.12% | 84.0% | 3.0% | 3.0% | 9.0% |
| 013 | 128,931 | -158 | -0.12% | 66.1% | 8.4% | 9.0% | 15.3% |
| 014 | 128,933 | -156 | -0.12% | 84.2% | 4.5% | 3.4% | 7.2% |
| 015 | 128,927 | -162 | -0.13% | 74.5% | 2.2% | 12.0% | 10.0% |
| 016 | 128,928 | -161 | -0.12% | 72.2% | 2.1% | 16.3% | 7.6% |
| 017 | 128,930 | -159 | -0.12% | 83.1% | 1.6% | 5.8% | 8.6% |
| 018 | 128,929 | -160 | -0.12% | 13.7% | 46.6% | 1.7% | 35.9% |
| 019 | 128,930 | -159 | -0.12% | 75.9% | 2.7% | 10.4% | 9.6% |
| 020 | 128,931 | -158 | -0.12% | 80.2% | 4.2% | 3.0% | 11.6% |
| 021 | 128,930 | -159 | -0.12% | 69.3% | 10.7% | 3.6% | 15.0% |
| 022 | 128,931 | -158 | -0.12% | 46.9% | 23.5% | 10.4% | 16.7% |
Common Cause Reform Plan Assembly – Long Island
| DIST | POP | DEV | %DEV | %NHWhtVAP | %NHBlkVAP | %NHAsnVAP | %HspVAP |
| 1 | 128,931 | -158 | -0.12% | 76.0% | 4.5% | 1.3% | 16.4% |
| 2 | 128,945 | -144 | -0.11% | 83.7% | 4.8% | 1.6% | 8.7% |
| 3 | 128,942 | -147 | -0.11% | 71.6% | 8.1% | 2.1% | 16.6% |
| 4 | 128,964 | -125 | -0.10% | 79.5% | 3.9% | 7.3% | 8.2% |
| 5 | 128,951 | -138 | -0.11% | 82.5% | 2.2% | 4.3% | 9.9% |
| 6 | 128,908 | -181 | -0.14% | 20.9% | 17.2% | 2.9% | 57.2% |
| 7 | 128,934 | -155 | -0.12% | 89.1% | 1.3% | 3.8% | 5.0% |
| 8 | 128,904 | -185 | -0.14% | 86.6% | 2.5% | 2.2% | 7.8% |
| 9 | 128,918 | -171 | -0.13% | 83.3% | 3.9% | 5.9% | 5.8% |
| 10 | 128,940 | -149 | -0.12% | 85.8% | 2.4% | 2.4% | 8.4% |
| 11 | 128,941 | -148 | -0.11% | 51.6% | 23.2% | 3.1% | 20.2% |
| 12 | 128,955 | -134 | -0.10% | 89.0% | 2.2% | 2.3% | 5.7% |
| 13 | 128,915 | -174 | -0.13% | 75.8% | 3.5% | 7.5% | 12.2% |
| 14 | 128,938 | -151 | -0.12% | 70.7% | 9.4% | 3.1% | 15.5% |
| 15 | 128,935 | -154 | -0.12% | 77.4% | 1.1% | 11.0% | 9.2% |
| 16 | 128,908 | -181 | -0.14% | 74.4% | 3.8% | 8.8% | 11.6% |
| 17 | 128,925 | -164 | -0.13% | 65.1% | 10.2% | 7.3% | 16.0% |
| 18 | 128,930 | -159 | -0.12% | 8.7% | 50.5% | 1.6% | 37.1% |
| 19 | 128,868 | -221 | -0.17% | 85.9% | 1.3% | 4.8% | 7.2% |
| 20 | 128,931 | -158 | -0.12% | 78.6% | 4.8% | 3.6% | 12.0% |
| 21 | 128,951 | -138 | -0.11% | 47.2% | 23.0% | 10.8% | 16.4% |
| 45 | 128,935 | -154 | -0.12% | 71.0% | 1.8% | 17.6% | 7.8% |
