Why mid-decade redistricting is a problem
• Confuses voters about what district they are in and who represents them
• Disrupts elected leaders’ relationships with the communities they represent
• Requires legislators to adjust campaigns to changing districts
• Enables repeated gerrymandering to keep incumbents in power and stifle competition
Why it exists
• Although GA law requires State Legislative redistricting to follow the census, it does not specify a timeline for completion.
• GA law does not specify timing or use of census for Congressional redistricting.
• GA law has no explicit requirement to use completed redistricting plans in elections.
• GA case law1 allows any number of redistricting plans per decade. Since 2006, 71
districts have been altered in 4 major waves of mid-decade redistricting, all for partisan gain.
Constitutional amendment needed
• Require that redistricting take place in–and only in–the odd-numbered year after each U.S. decennial census.
• Require that the new redistricting plan be used in the next even-numbered year election and all those following until the next redistricting plan is adopted.
• In the event of a court-ordered mid-decade redistricting, require that changes be the minimum needed to comply with the order, defined as the fewest voters and districts affected.