Politico: Cuomo pledged to end partisan gerrymandering. His plan just failed its biggest test.

Politico: Cuomo pledged to end partisan gerrymandering. His plan just failed its biggest test.

“It wasn’t an independent commission … The entire way it was set up was problematic from the beginning,” said Susan Lerner of Common Cause New York. Lerner, the executive director of the civic activist group, won a 2014 lawsuit asking a court to block the appearance of the word “independent” on the ballot when the constitutional amendment went to voters as a referendum, arguing it was misleading to give the commission that label.

ALBANY, N.Y. — Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s signature structural change to state government during his first term was an overhaul of political mapmaking in New York. A new “Independent Redistricting Commission” would “permanently reform the redistricting process in New York to once and for all end self-interested partisan gerrymandering,” he promised.

That bipartisan commission flunked its biggest test on Monday, with its 10 members deadlocking 5-5 on a pair of competing proposals. …

While it didn’t go as far as Cuomo had initially promised, the amendment did leave some safeguards against one-party gerrymandering in place.

Much to the chagrin of other Democrats, Cuomo’s amendment effectively said that if the party ever won control of the state Senate, new lines would need two-thirds supermajorities in both that chamber and the Assembly, which Democrats have dominated since Watergate. At the time, the notion of Democrats winning 42 of the state Senate’s 63 seats was considered highly unlikely. Then came Donald Trump and an ensuing blue wave election in 2018. Democrats now have 43 seats in the Senate.

The amendment also allowed for the possibility that the commission could actually reach an agreement. In that scenario, with Democratic and Republican commissioners coming together around one set of lines, legislators might have faced intense pressure to go along with the maps.

But Monday’s vote calls into question whether a commission with five members allied with Democrats and five with Republicans, most of whom are appointed by legislative leaders, can ever work as advertised.

“It wasn’t an independent commission … The entire way it was set up was problematic from the beginning,” said Susan Lerner of Common Cause New York. Lerner, the executive director of the civic activist group, won a 2014 lawsuit asking a court to block the appearance of the word “independent” on the ballot when the constitutional amendment went to voters as a referendum, arguing it was misleading to give the commission that label.

Assuming commissioners don’t find a way to strike a deal when they draw a second set of maps later this month, there are only a couple of roadblocks preventing a mapmaking process dominated by Democrats.

For one, they’ll need to remain unified. Democrats have the necessary two-thirds majorities in both chambers. But they don’t have a lot of breathing room in either. If any blocs of members — such as the handful of socialists in each house — make demands that are unacceptable to their colleagues, then the majorities might need to start looking for some Republican votes, which would certainly complicate things.

But what if they find the votes? The only thing saving Republicans from being redistricted into oblivion could well be anti-gerrymandering language in the amendment, such as a prohibition on drawing lines “to discourage competition.”

Language like that is “far from adequate,” Lerner said. Several attorneys have argued over the years that the only hope for winning a court case on such a phrase would involve Democrats being foolish enough to leave a paper trail in which they explicitly say they’re gerrymandering a district. But it’s enough to guarantee that Republicans aren’t going to surrender anytime soon.