Home

The Colorado Supreme Court's ruling Monday is a warning to both political parties that their efforts are better spent trying to serve, rather than manipulate, the state's voters.

The court ruled that a congressional redistricting map approved by the Republican-controlled Legislature near the end of the session last spring was unconstitutional. Essentially, the court said redistricting should occur once every 10 years in conjunction with the U.S. Census and that there is a limited window of opportunity to redraw those boundaries. As part of the ruling, the court mandated that the 2004 elections use a 2002, court-ordered redistricting map.

Republicans hold a 5-2 advantage in Colorado's congressional seats. The plan would have increased the percentage of Republicans in District 7, which Rep. Bob Beauprez won by just 121 votes last year, and in District 3, which includes Routt County and will elect a new congressman next year. (U.S. Rep. Scott McInnis has said he won't seek re-election.)

Obviously, Republicans were trying to solidify the party's hold on Colorado's congressional seats. There are 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Republicans hold a slim, 12-seat advantage, and every seat is crucial.

Under the 2002 court-ordered plan, Democrats have a better shot at winning in Districts 3 and 7. Under the plan shot down Monday, Republicans had a greater advantage in each district.

Let's be clear -- this isn't just about the Republicans. No doubt Democrats would have attempted to manipulate the districts in their favor had that party controlled the Legislature. In fact, a Democratic-controlled legislative reapportionment commission tried to gerrymander state senate seats in 2002. That plan also was shot down by the state Supreme Court.

The simple fact is that when it comes to redistricting, voters too often are used as pawns in a partisan chess match. Party affiliation and minority headcounts carry too much influence. Geographic sensibility, regional similarities and equitable population distribution don't carry enough.

There is some sentiment that the Republicans might appeal the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. They shouldn't. The high court is unlikely to overturn a ruling based on state law, and too much time and money already has been expended on this.

Beauprez, the Republican congressman with the most to lose in Monday's decision, had perhaps the best response. "My focus will remain on stimulating the economy to create jobs, supporting the war on terror and improving the quality of life for Colorado's families," Beauprez said in a statement. "Today's Supreme Court ruling will not affect my commitment to these goals in any way."

When it comes to redistricting, both parties would do well to take heed of what Beauprez said. His statement indicates that Beauprez understands that elections should be decided by candidates and voters, not partisan political maneuvering.