Iowa Legislature Public Hearings

Paul Uzel [General Public]

I in particular wish to protest the move of Dubuque County from the First Congressional District to the Second CD. Dubuque, while definitely NE of the rest of the First CD has much more in common with the First CD. This is particularly true for what Dubuque has in common with Linn and Johnson and Scott and the other Quad City counties. I see Dubuque as the north end of the central Mississippi River district rather than the south end of that area to its north. And while Blackhawk and Dubuque counties have commonness, stretching the reach from Dubuque to Story County seems a considerable 'stretch', and not even along Federal highway lines (Story on US 30 BUT also on I35, making it more of the Central Iowa scene.

Nancy Profit [General public]

We are praised for how we redistrict. Dont make it partisan as it will backfire.Please accept the first map.

Ramona Melendy [General Public]

I like this map and I think that it is fair to everyone in Iowa. Of course, Republicans don't like this map as it will help the minority (Democrats) win more seats, so representation will be more fair in Iowa.

Chad Brewbaker [Dallas County Libertarians]

This map violates Iowa Const. Art. I Sec. 6 equal protection, and Iowa Const. Art. I Sec. 20 freedom of assemblypetition. The attached calculation by Council Bluffs Libertarian Jack Holder shows he will need double the signatures to petition for ballot access.The Des Moines metro also looks gerrymandered by hand for House Minority Leader Konfrst and others. LSA needs to show it's work the map that was fairly drawn by computer algorithm and the hand edits to see who at LSA is gerrymandering.LSA seems to have concealed CVCV043016 (Dallas) instead of reported it to House oversight. Judge Huppert unlawfully dismissed a qui tam on Apple Inc.'s $100m tax bribe to Waukee without the written consent of the Attorney General or notice to LSA as required under the Iowa False Claims Act. Tom Miller was a noshow at last week's hearing on Apple's motion to dismiss he is complicit.

Garrett Arbuckle []

Concerns for the divide and split of my University campus.

Lauren Tiffany [General Public]

As usual, Iowa's redistricting process has resulted in a congressional district map that is fair, sensible, and efficient. I hope the legislature will respect the process, which is much admired nationally, and approve this map.

David G. Beeman []

Iowa has a rich history of being fair and egalitarian in ways other states should admire. One is the nonpartisan way in which legislative maps are drawn (e.g., no undemocratic gerrymandering). Please accept the first maps in the way in which they are drawn, and leave in place Iowa's nonpartisan approach to this important issue.

Theresa Johnson []

I have seen the redistricting map, and I think it is fair for all Iowans.

William Gerhard []

I think the Legislature should approve Map #1. We have wasted enough time waiting for the incompetent Trump Administration to handle the 2020 Census. it is time to move on

Joy Smith [General Public]

I support the redistricting map. Maintaining Iowa's nonpartisan and fair process of redistricting is of utmost importance. Both Republicans and Democrats have a responsibility to fairly assure that all Iowan's are represented in the democratic process. Supporting the recommendations of the Legislative Services Agency is the only way to assure evenhanded redistricting.

Katarina Rich []

I believe the process for creating this map has been done in a bipartisan manner and that the outcome is fair. I support the approval of the redistricting.

Nick Battles []

The nonpartisan process by which Iowa determines its Congressional districts is something to be admired and respected. Indeed, it is a model for all those advocating for fair and equitable redistricting. I urge the Iowa Legislature to accept the proposed maps that uphold our nonpartisan and democratic process.

Lissa Holloway [general public]

The redistricting map appears fair. Democrats have already spoken in favor of this map. Please Republicans, show that this process is not a partisan affair and vote yes on the map.Thank you.

Sherry Frizell [General Public]

I trust the LSA more than any of the legislators or political party currently in power. Pass this first one!

Anonymous []

From what I have read, I think this map the Legislative Services Agency has created seems fair based on population, contiguity, and compactness, which seem to me like reasonable standards for this process. Republicans' opposition strikes me as deeply dubious and selfinterested; this map was created by a nonpartisan group and I think that is important in keeping politicians accountable to the people they are supposed to be serving.

Andy Douglas []

This latest redistricting map looks very fair. The LSA is nonpartisan and did an objective, unbiased redistricting job. Please keep it as it is!

Robert Leonhard []

Please reject this redistricting map. Stand strong! The "nonpartisan" agency that drew up this map has a clear agenda. If the next map is unsuitable, reject that as well. Fight for a fair map that represents Iowans' best interests!

Anonymous [General public]

I urge the legislature to approved the redistricting maps introduced on Sept 16, 2021.

Susan Petra []

We have seen the recent information on the continued migration of Iowans from the rural areas to the more urban areas. Because of the three guidelines in determining Iowa's districts, Iowans have had pride in our bipartisan desire and willingness to uphold our fair and nonpartisan process. The 1st map does just that, cleanly. I firmly believe that the most determining factor of the guidelines the population movement has been drawn into fair Districts, with the smallest margin of difference possible. this is a very significant feat.Because the population migration has been so significant, my fear is that state legislators will be primarily concerned with how this affects their district and their own person. While this may be human nature, I implore our representatives to,instead, uphold Iowa's fair and NONpartisan process: vote for Map #1.

Evan Burger [General Public]

I will speak in favor of the proposed maps. As I wrote in the attached article, the LSA has done an excellent job of balancing population equality with both statutory measures of compactness.

Roy Birchard []

I support the proposed legislative maps as is. Please do not change them.

Kathy R Eastman []

Please use the first map to keep our districts and thus our election process, nonpartisan. Our process has been hailed as the best in the U.S. We don't need to drop our high standards just so one party or the other can gain an unfair advantage. And remember, today the Republicans are in power in Iowa, but that will not always be the case. Republicans should remember that when the Democrats are in power, the Republicans will want to be treated fairly, too.

Julia Rendon []

The LSA's map looks very fair. The districts are compact and comparable in terms of population. I see no good reason to change it. If it is changed, it will be because of political bias, and Iowa should be above that.

Barbara Klubal [General Public]

I support the first redistricting map and urge our legislators to do the same. This map meets the nonpartisan criteria that the LSA is charged with following such as contiguity and population balance.

Anonymous [General public]

I sincerely hope that the redistributing plan goes through with the first draft. We should be so proud of our process as a State. Please dont make this a partisan issue!

Brant Kassel []

These maps are fair and drawn in the nonpartisan way. The only party interested in muddying the waters is the Republicans who know they can only win by cheating because their ideas are awful and no one would vote for them if they didn't have an (R) next to their name. Iowa was once a proud independentminded state that has fallen. These maps provide fair representation to ALL Iowans, not just those that buy politicians for their own gain. These maps the what gives our minority and underrepresent neighborhoods a voice in the federal government. These maps are fair, drawn with representation in mind, not political gain or fortune. I ask that we approve these maps. Thank you.

Kim Hagemann [none]

My name is Kim Hagemann and I currently reside in state senate district 19 and state representative district 38. I urge the legislature to accept this redistricting map. I want Iowa to continue to be a leader against gerrymandering. Iowa has developed a model process that pullsout as much subjective partisanship as possible. No process will be perfect. No map will be perfect. Please move forward with the map as determined by the process. Thank you.

Alec Johnson (he/him) [Iowa Citizens for Communiity Improvement]

I want to applaud the Legislative Services Agency's (LSA)proposed redistricting plan. It seems eminently fair and just. As the saying goes, "Voters should select their Representatives and Representatives should not be allowed to select their voters." Gerrymandering assaults the very foundation of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. It must be completely opposed otherwise tyranny will surely follow. I add my voice to all those insisting that the LSA's proposal be accepted.Most emphatically,Alec Johnson

Matthew Covington []

given the stated objectives of the directions given to the LSA, i see no problems with the 1st draft map created for public and lawmaker consideration. it is reflective of our population, geographic diversity, and Iowa values. I urge lawmakers to accept this map

Jane Alderman [General Public]

The LSA has done a stellar job on redistricting and following the requirements of contiguity, population equity and compactness. The only reason to consider a new map would be if any of these could be improved while not impacting the other two criteria. Else, partisanship is entering the process, and that is not democracy. Please approve the 1st map and let's get on to dealing with other issues impacting Iowa and her citizens.

Ivy Schuster [General Public]

Iowa's redistricting process is considered the gold standard in the nation. Gerrymandering will not be tolerated in Iowa.

Linda and Tom Armitage [AAUW and General public]

I believe the new map as drawn is fair and seemsto reflect the changes in population our state has experienced since the last census.

Daniel McCue []

Thank you to the Legislative Services Agency for honoring a nonpartisan plan to apportion legislative districts. When I look at this map, I see that rural areas like Grinnell have been clustered with some farflung townships. Could someone speak to the decision process for this?

Jamie Nagel []

I urge lawmakers to accept this initial set of maps proposed by LSA. I have both learned and taught about Iowas redistricting process as a national model for drafting fair maps. LSA has strict guidelines for developing districts that are geographically contiguous and well balanced in population and they have done an excellent job. Please uphold our reputation that does redistricting in a fair and nonpartisan manner and accept these maps. Thank you for the consideration.

Marilyn Jean & Elaine Hagedorn [General Public]

As lifelong Iowans, we are grateful that for 40 years Iowa has had probably the best reapportionment system in the nation. Best, because it ensures fairness , using the most recent census data, and assigning to a neutral third party the drawing of new legislative and congressional boundaries. This nonpartisan process ensures ALL Iowans have a voice regardless of political affiliation. Partisan lawmakers do not draw the boundary lines, they merely vote on them.This first map for 2021 follows this goldstandard approach, reflecting the changes in Iowa's population according to the census while maintaining nonpartisanship with a goal of integrity and unity in our state. Map #1 gets our strong support! The honest work put forth by the Commission is to be applauded. We urge the Legislature to approve this first map and continue to make Iowa's reapportionment system a model for the nation.

Steve Gude [General Public]

Iowa has a decadeslong history of a fair reapportionment process following a national census. I hope you will continue this tradition by adhering to the guidelines set forth. Iowa's process is a model for the country and one that needs to be used once again this year. Please reject any political influence in the process and keep it nonpartisan as it has been for some many years. Thank you.

Curt H Moore []

Vote Yes on first map of redistricting

Tracy Meginnis []

I urge our legislators to adopt a nonpartisan map as has been done for over forty years now in Iowa. This is a process that works and for which Iowa is respected. I do not support introducing amendments to the map as it lets legislators pick and choose to suit their partisan political purposes.

Diane Pierce [General Public]

I approve of the new redistricting map!!!

Tom Blum []

It is incumbent upon the house and senate to simply preserve Iowa's nonpartisan redistricting system by adopting the first map, anything less is political chicanery and is obvious step towards ending our apolitical system of districting and the beginning of gerrymandering.

Nancy AntonJensen []

Thanks for the work on Plan 1! I hope the legislature will take the advice and vote for Plan1 so we can move forward as a states rather than make things more divisive.

Thomas R. O'Donnell []

I would like the commission to describe the impact of declining rural population on the proposed maps.I support the current maps. Legislators who oppose them, particularly Republicans, must ask if they realistically expect they will get a better option if the maps are redrawn. Iowa politicians face a hard reality: rural population is falling. As the party in power, with the most members from rural areas, it was inevitable that many Republican senators and representatives would find themselves lumped together in a single district. Less population means bigger districts. Bigger districts mean more legislators landing in the same ones.

Gary Capps [General Public]

I was disappointed in reviewing the first draft for Congressional redistricting. Although numerically consistent, it fails to consider the geographic challenge for two of the Representatives in servicing their constituents adequately. I strongly feel an Iowa Representative should be able to advocate for both urban and rural interests equally, and slight modifications to the existing districts will achieve those ends, while still providing a good, if not perfect, numerical balance. I have prepared a map to reflect the modifications, and would be happy to share it as a private citizen. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Anonymous []

I support the use of nonpartisan methods to determine voting district lines. Thank you for keeping the process fair and unbiased, and free from political influence.

Ellen Johnsen []

Theyve proposed new districts for CongressWith equal populations not more or lessThe team hit their goal,And has done well at the role. With their first draft, I hope youll not mess.This proposed map meets each requirement.Not just the letter, but the actual intent.Contiguous and compactSo its your turn to act.Keep politics out of this and give your consent.In our state, theres no room for partisan panderingEach districts border is just a bit meanderingBut theyre pretty compact,And I hope youll quickly actSo in Iowa, we can avoid gerrymandering.

Guillermo Morales []

I urge the legislature to reserve Iowa's nonpartisan redistricting system. This can be accomplished by adopting the first redistricting map.

Martin Paulsen [General Public]

The proposed redistricting looks ok to me.

Jane Nettleton [general public]

Iowa's plan for redistricting is a model for the country. Please DO NOT tinker with it by rejecting the first two proposals. That would only illustrate further how Iowa is slipping away from true democracy.This plan is a fair one, as it gives advantages to both parties in different areas. Even though incumbents will be pitted against one another in several races, it is time for a shakeup in the legislature anyway.

Caitlin McCleary []

Iowa has long been a leader in our fair and nonpartisan redistricting process, and we should remain that way. Let the commission draw nonpartisan maps, and approve them as they are drawn.

Anonymous []

It is such relief to have something in Iowa that remains nonpartisan! We have a fair and unbiased redistricting process that works well and can serve as a model for the rest of the country. Let's never let it go.Many thanks to the committee members for their hard work and their commitment to keeping this a nonpartisan process.

Josh Hughes [n/a]

I wish to speak in support of the first proposed map. I believe it fairly represents the current partisan and geographic balance of Iowa.As a geographic matter, the congressional map does a good job of connecting the corridor between Linn and Johnson counties, which is essentially, one metropolitan area. And the connection of Polk and Dallas with much of south central Iowa is also a good link, considering that the Des Moines metro is where many southern Iowans go (myself included) when we need to go "to town." With respect to the second district, which is admittadely unsually shaped, I think it's probably fair to say that the towns of Dubuque and Ottumwa have more in common together than Ottumwa and Iowa City, like under the current map. I think that the second district would fairly represent the interests of many eastcentral Iowans. With respect to partisanship: this is a map that was fairly and drawn in a nonpartisan manner that nevertheless favors the Republican party. At a high level, President Trump would have won three of the four districts in 2016 with a little more than 50% of the vote. In 2020, he won districts 4 and 2 handily and narrowly lost the 3rd while his vote share diminished slightly. So what we have is a map that functionally provides three Republican leaning seats compared to the state and national average. Considering Iowa's recent electoral trajectory, that's about right, and it aligns with other maps adopted in red states such as Indiana (which keeps a seat for Gary and Indianapolis) and Kentucky (which keeps a seat for Louisville). At the legislative level, the map is more favorable for Republicans. In 2020, President Trump would have won about 32 state senate seats and about 62 state house seats. That aligns pretty well with the general rule that the majority winner statewide should win their vote share + 57% more seats. So what we have is a map that pretty fairly represents the interests of Iowans. As someone who spends a lot of time drawing hypothetical legislative maps on Dave's Redistricting App, I also want to say this is a really well done map. It solves a lot of the population change problems in an effective and elegant manner, such as the excess population in many Dallas and Johnson county districts. Finally, as a matter of political legacy for legislators of both parties who may wish to roll the dice on a second map because they've been thrown in with another legislator or are unhappy with the map, I urge you to resist these insticts. I'm not the first person who logs on to wax poetic about our State's storied history of legislative redistricting. But I do wish to emphasize it because it truly is the best system in the nation. Tarnishing the reputation of Iowa itself is not worth shortterm political gain, and when the shoe is on the other foot, as it surely someday will be, we will all be thankful for the tempered, level headed, and rational precedent this Legislature set by approving the first map. Thank you.

Gerene Denning [General Public]

It is simple. Iowa uses a nonpartisan process to redistrict. Being nonpartisan, it seeks to be fair to ALL Iowans. Because fairness is essential to a healthy democracy, partisan efforts to gerrymander a map more favorable to one party go against the values we all claim to live by. Let us not take any more steps toward a less fair, less just, less respectful state. Vote to approve the current map.

Tony Andrys [General Public]

Iowa is the gold standard in redistricting for a reason. In Iowa, our representatives don't use their power in the legislative process to give themselves advantages in their next elections, and that's the way it should be nationwide. Iowans know that any amendment to the third map is gerrymandering. They know that the first politician to offer one will be the person who permanently ended forty years of fair nonpartisan redistricting in Iowa. Legislators should approve the first map because it's a fair plan that adequately accounts for population shifts over the last ten years. But if our representatives vote it down, they should approve the second or third map as the LSA draws it. No selfserving changes by politicians.

Karen Manning [General Public]

This redistricting plan is fair and coherent. I am proud of Iowa for adopting this nonpartisan system. I hope the legislature will approve this map and again demonstrate to ourselves and to other states that we are truly dedicated to the democratic process.

Craig Wilbanksâ?? []

Please accept the proposed map so that our process remains nonpartisan and fair.

Jamie []

Fremont and Mills County should not be tacked onto district 4. We will not be represented and our future/goals will not be heard.

Rachelle Baier []

The proposed redistricting maps released by the Legislative Services Agency meet the goals of Iowa's laws regarding redistricting based on new census data. The new districts are nearly equal in population count and are compact. Iowans will be fairly represented by whomever wins elections with these new political boundaries.I urge you to approve these maps. No "tweaking" is necessary. Don't make this a partisan fight. There is no objective reason to vote against these proposed maps. Any vote against the maps will be perceived as political and not in keeping with the intent of the law; ie, to keep politics out of the redistricting process.I urge the entire legislature to meet on October 5, approve the maps, and then adjourn the special session. This redistricting does not need to be a long and drawnout process.

Jennifer Smith [General Public]

I am proud of the LSA work on drawing a map. However, I do not think the first proposed map is compact in the drawing of the Congressional Districts. They are to be as compact and not irregularly shaped. None of the Congressional Districts appear to be following this requirement. Rejection of the first map is not a sign of being partisan and in favor of gerrymandering. Rejection of this current map is in the best interest of Iowans having a fair representation and following the requirements which have made us the gold standard for redistricting.

Anonymous [General Public]

Legislators, thank you for maintaining the democratic mapmaking system that has made Iowa a model for the rest of the nation. It is incredibly important that redistricting remains nonpartisan so that the true voice of the people can be heard in elections. I urge you to adopt this first round of maps that fulfill all legal requirements.Thank you.

Paula Balder []

I live in the 4th district and know that our population is declining, especially in small towns. As land ownership gets bigger, towns get smaller. The towns that have increased in our area are towns that welcome immigrants, who are good workers. I agree with the redistricting map I have seen with the 4th district increasing in size.Thank you for the bipartisan committee and allowing me to send my thoughts.

Mickaela Saner []

This projection of the redistricting is not in the best interest of the constituents of these counties. The larger cities will draw all the focus and attention and the small communities will get shoved aside and have to fight for even fewer resources.

Kathryn Hildebrand []

Iowa has a nonpartisan method of redistricting that should be a model for the entire country. Please pass the first maps.

Temple Hiatt []

I support the approval of Iowa redistricting Plan 1. Thanks! Temple Hiatt

Jane Alexander [General Public]

I am proud of Iowa's nonpartisan process of redistricting. The first effort of the LSA looks fair in terms of population and compactness guidelines and I encourage the legislature to accept it. I do nor want to see any partisan gerrymandering.

Anonymous []

Lets protect a fail and impartial districting system! Lets not follow the antidemocratic practices of other states where politicians choose their voters!

Mary C. McCarthy [Citizen who wants to understand - this is CIVICS 101]

What is the population number factored into the design of the districts? That may be part of the discussion. Thank you very much for having these sessions be virtual Mary C. McCarthy

David Davis []

I oppose this Map. To say it was done without partisanship is far from being truthful. Why would you flip Districts 1 and 2 for any reasonable reason except to swing the voting population heavily (ie District 1) from Republican to Democrat? This virtually guarantees the defeat of Hinson and MillerMeeks. Not bipartisan! Not acceptable! Not "Iowa Proud"! Why would you take the representation of Ashley Hinson away from the people that elected her and she has represented so well?! And take MillerMeeks away from her hometown and the folks that have enjoyed the benefit of electing her?! Iowa needs diverse and fair representation in Congress. We have had that. No need to stack the deck in favor of Democrats.

Tambi Heiter []

All Iowans deserve fair maps and I encourage lawmakers to keep our redistricting free from partisan influence.

Madalyn Anderson []

Please continue Iowas tradition of nonpartisan redistricting. I urge you to approve this proposed map.

Joey Norris []

Montgomery, Mills, and Fremont counties should remain in District 3.District 4 is unreasonably large, almost certainly resulting in poor representation to the extremities, such as SW Iowa.