Home >  Local News >  Elections

Tuesday, April 09, 2002

By James O'Toole, Politics Editor, Post-Gazette

In a ruling that casts a net of confusion over 19 U.S. House races, a federal court panel has thrown out Pennsylvania's congressional redistricting map.

The three-judge panel found that the plan's deviation of 19 persons between the populations of the largest and smallest of the new districts violated the Constitution's one-man, one-vote principle.

With the May 21 primary election just six weeks off, the judges gave the Republican-controlled Legislature three weeks to come up with a new map with districts as nearly equal in size as possible.

Republican leaders in Harrisburg, who were still studying the ruling last night, said that they expected to appeal it to the U.S. Supreme Court. Across the commonwealth, volleys of questions were assailing candidates, lawmakers and county elections officials. Among them:

How long might it take for a court-approved plan to be put in place?

Will the high court accept an appeal, and if so, how long will it take to rule on it?

If an appeal is not successful, will the Legislature merely tweak the contours of the map before the court, or would wholesale changes be needed?

Would current candidates have to circulate new nominating petitions in the new districts?

Would new candidates be permitted to enter races that have already been under way for months?

Can all of the questions be resolved in time for the congressional election to go on as scheduled on May 21, or will the state have to deal with the expense and logistical headaches of conducting congressional primaries on a separate election day?

"I have a lot to think about tonight," said Mark Wolosik, who heads Allegheny County's election division.

Rep. Frank Mascara, D-Charleroi, is scheduled to appear at a series of campaign kickoff events today in the new 12th District that he shares with Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Johnstown. After yesterday's ruling, he has no way of being sure he's campaigning in the right communities.

"It's bizarre," said Brad Clemenson, Murtha's press secretary. "We're looking at it and we just don't know enough to comment."

Senate Majority Leader David "Chip" Brightbill, R-Lebanon, said that while an appeal goes forward, legislative staffers may try to fine-tune the existing map. But, he warned, "We believe that re-writing [the map] has a whole host of problems. It opens up a Pandora's box."

"Nineteen is .00003 percent deviation," Brightbill added. "I was a little surprised."

The court's majority acknowledged that the population difference that prompted the ruling was small but argued that no variance from completely equal districts was permissible unless it served other interests, such as making the districts more compact, respecting municipal boundaries or avoiding contests between incumbents. The court found that in the plan produced by the Republican Legislature, the population differences, however small, had not been shown to further any of those interests.

One member of the panel, Judge William H. Yohn Jr., disagreed with his two colleagues.

Yesterday's ruling took many politicians by surprise, but it was in keeping with the controversial and contentious course that the redistricting process has followed in the state.

In November of 2000, as the decennial Census that drives redistricting was nearing its completion, Pennsylvania Republicans held off a Democratic attempt to recapture the majority in the state House. Combined with the party's big majority in the state Senate and hold on the governor's mansion, the 2000 state House elections ensured that the party would have a free hand to enact a GOP-friendly redistricting plan.

The result was an aggressive Republican map. Currently, Pennsylvania's House delegation includes 11 Republicans and 10 Democrats. The state lost two seats in the national reapportionment of House seats. The lines of the new map are designed to reduce Democratic strength to as few as five or six Pennsylvania members in the next Congress.

In the Pittsburgh region, for example, the map combined two Democratic districts based in the city and the Mon Valley, while creating new districts to the north and south of the city designed to be hospitable to Republican candidates. One is the 4th District, now held by Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Bradford Woods. The other, the new 18th District, was tailor-made for state Sen. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair.

The map, first passed in the state Senate, was so ambitious that some Republicans feared that the party was overplaying its hand -- risking safe GOP seats in order to create as many competitive seats as possible.

Democrats howled that the map was a blatant exercise in gerrymandering but their protests failed to convince a majority of the state Supreme Court, which upheld the plan last month. Yesterday's ruling, while decided on narrow grounds, was hailed by Democrats.

"We always had hope," said Lou Lignelli, an aide to Mascara. "We've been saying all along that this map was outrageous ."

Post-Gazette Harrisburg Correspondent John M.R. Bull and The Associated Press contributed to this report.