They've barely just begun, but some members of the state Legislature's commission to redraw Maine's two U.S. congressional districts are already playing partisan games.
That's discouraging but not unexpected.
Rather than following the clear guidance of U.S. and state courts, Republicans came out of the gate with a controversial proposal that drastically reorganizes how residents of Franklin, Oxford and Androscoggin counties would be represented in Congress.
Their proposal splits communities with similar industries, demographics and interests and lumps them in with communities of diverging interests while switching the congressional districts for nearly 360,000 Maine voters.
The Democratic plan pushes only 4,000 voters into a new district in one community in a county, Kennebec, that is already divided between congressional districts.
It is the least disruptive of the two plans and models closely the congressional redistricting plan enacted by the Maine supreme court in 2003.
It sets up two districts with nearly equal populations — with a difference of 11 voters between the two and keeps communities with similar interests together under the representation of a single lawmaker.
The Republican plan would create mathematically equal districts, but it would go through geographic and cultural gyrations to do so.
Under the GOP plan, geographically based industries, such as shipbuilding and papermaking, would lose the singular focus of one representative devoted to their cause. Instead of developing expertise in a particular field of business or industry, our congressional representatives would be torn between the competing interests of different industries in divergent geographical regions.
Since statehood, the tri-county region of Franklin, Oxford and Androscoggin have shared cultural and economic bonds. Little has changed. We are also far more connected culturally to the Franco-centric communities of northern Maine than we are to our cosmopolitan cousins in Cumberland and York counties.
Democrats on the panel are rightly charging Republicans with attempting to gerrymander the new districts and Republican justifications for pushing incumbent U.S. Rep. Chellie Pingree, a Democrat from her current district, ring hollow.
Panel member and state Sen. Debra Plowman, a Hampden Republican, said her GOP colleagues were blind to the political implications of their plan, which would place the homes of both incumbents into the 2nd District.
Really? We find that hard to believe and doubt that in this highly charged partisan atmosphere that starting with such an extreme proposal will allow this panel to have any better of a chance at finding an acceptable compromise than its predecessor had eight years ago.
That doesn't mean this new commission shouldn't try, but no one should be surprised if whatever plan emerges does not garner the two-thirds margin it needs to pass the full Legislature.
In 2003, a similar bipartisan panel was unable to reach agreement on new lines for both U.S. congressional districts and Maine State Senate districts.
While that panel did agree on a plan to rearrange Maine's House districts, it was, ultimately, the state's supreme court that redrew the lines for the state Senate and U.S. House districts in the current fashion.
The court did so in a way that seemed to satisfy partisans at the time, even though they really had no choice in the matter.
We appreciate the sentiments of the current commission's independent and non-partisan chairman, Mike Friedman, a Bangor attorney.
Friedman said he's optimistic an acceptable bi-partisan plan can be crafted by the Aug. 31 deadline.
"This is not an impossible task," he said.
We hope he's right but realize it's harder to get back to the middle when your starting point is the partisan fringe.
The opinions expressed in this column reflect the views of the ownership and editorial board.



Blue State
Maine is a Blue State and has been for a long time, nice to see Republicans having a voice again here. The current Republican resurgence came about because people weren't happy with the job Democrats were doing nationally. There was an upheaval nation wide in 2010 remember? It is still happening and we haven't seen anything yet. I'm sure 2012 will be an incredibly memorable election year nationally and locally.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Our congress people cann't handle a single issue
It appears the person writing this assumes the congress people involved can only handle a single industry. I suggest they can not handle a single industry or a single issue. I think we should do our best to separate by counties, not having towns in the same counties being represented by different reps. Is the real problem they could be splitting the union vote, which could cause a problem. I think that any current representative should be excluded from the residency requirement until they are voted out of office.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Finally, an end to the
Finally, an end to the apparently gerrymandered Maine's 2nd, US Congressional District! The proposed Republican plan eliminates the meandering borders of the previous districting. I look forward to approval in the Maine House and Senate and hope, once passed, it is not tampered with by Maine's judiciary. However, I will wait, along with the other voters in Maine, and see if it's politics as usual.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.yes!!
Agreed!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Republican plan for redistricting is far too radical
. Dumß question . Was Gerrymandering invented when Maine was still a part of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts ? /s, Dr. Dosh Hawai'i http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering 11.08.17 10:35 am - ish •
b t w - Virginia and Saipan are both Commonwealths.. . .
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Idiotic
The Republican plan is totally idiotic and based totally on the party's best interest and not the will of the people. Take Mike Michaud away from my district and I'll never vote again!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.The "Republican Plan"
Why use a Scalpel when an Ax will do.....
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I think the biggest reason
I think the biggest reason the republicans are trying to do this, is to get L-A and Rumford, mainly intelligent Democratic voters, out of the second district so they can try to win it. It's all part of their super plan to destroy American, limit the ability of people to vote, and redistrict to make their votes meaningless. thankfully this will need a 2/3rd majority to pass, then the Supreme Court of Maine will decide, and they're not partisan.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.... I don't even know how to
... I don't even know how to respond to this but I'll try. L/A & Rumford, mainly intelligent Democratic voters is in my opinion a mischaracterization. I typically encounter 3 types of Democrats, I'm not saying everyone fits or there aren't other motives etc. but I'll give it a shot.
Type(1)- People who are succesfull have reached Maslow's level of self-acualization and tend to be altruistic by nature or were raised on collectivism.
Type(2)- The Blue Dog democrats who are very conservative by nature, fiscal & social. Many of these folks vote Democrat because they are or were raised in a union family. The Democrat vote goes in support of their union agenda but if circumstances were different may vote Republican. You find these folks working in the Mills, factories, or public servants.
Type(3)- The individuals who either don't have the means or the will to provide for themselves so they vote Democrat to maintain a subsidized lifestyle.
I find that many of the folks in Mill towns(L/A, Rumford) are Union Blue Dogs. Good hardworking Mainer's but tend to vote in their own self interest. I wouldn't characterize this as intelligent nor un-intelligent but human nature.
In regard to the statement," It's all part of their super plan to destroy America" really Dan?? I'm not (R) but am an idepenent Conservative. Republicans have to live in this country too, why would they want to destroy it??? They may a different view of what should happen with their money than a guy like you. As much as wacky liberals drive me up a wall, I know they don't want to destroy America, they have a different idea of what America should be.
I've said this many times and I know it to be true. Conservatives think Liberals are naive & stupid. Liberals think conservatives are EVIL. Now I can try to make sense with a dummy but if you think (R) are truly evil...then I guess there is no need for a conversation. Problem is over 50% of the country is conservative.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Just look at the facts.
Just look at the facts. republicans were willing to let the US go into default instead of increasing revenues. And just to show their hypocrisy, the constantly preach a balance budget. They even want a constitutional amendment to do so. HOWEVER, in 2001, after being presented a balanced budget by President Clinton, did they keep the budget balanced. NOPE. They immediately put the budget in deficit. AND during they eight years that they had total control of the government, NEVER did they pass a balance budget amendment. So yes, Joe, I believe republicans do NOT want what's best for this country, only what's best for them.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Oh Dan
republicans( Democrats) were willing to let the US go into default instead of increasing( Decreasing) revenues( Spending)... I'm convinced Dan, let's go back to Clinton era spending levels. Gingrich's last budget before he resigned as Speaker had total unified expenditures, meaning including Social Security and Medicare, of $1.7 trillion. Adjusted for inflation, that would be $2.3 trillion today. As the Office of Management and Budget is estimating tax receipts of $2.5 trillion this fiscal year, we would produce a $200 billion surplus. Imagine that.... I don't argue to defend Republicans of the past, I don't care for most but I do argue for sanity today. Dan you present to many, who want to believe, a very convincing argument. Not because you present a strong argument, because you are very convincing. If you got your head on straight you could do a lot of good. Good day. p.s. Despite what Claire says, 15 Trillion and counting is a big problem...it's not going away...it's getting worse...your argument will become thinner, the further we slide.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Intelligent?
Marxist platform = Democratic platform = intelligent voters? No wonder we are in such trouble!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.I agree
I agree with that Jim. Democrats are full of themselves usually. For example they are so Green and have controlled this Blue State for decades AND ALL THE WATER IS POLLUTED. You can't eat the fish because of mercury posioning, the Androscoggin smells like Rumford from the papermills and THEY were in charge and then have the nads to point out Republican shortfalls on most issues. This state is so disgustingly blue that even the its Republicans voted for Obamacare.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.don't blame anyone in this
don't blame anyone in this state for the mercury poisoning of our lakes. The blame is the red states in the middle of America who burn coal to generate electricity and build their smoke stacks really high to avoid poisoning their area, instead leaving it up to the people east to live with it.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Red states?
Red states polluted our lakes and rivers with coal? really??? Red states like Vermont, Massachusetts, New York, New Hampshire, Maine? realllyyyy????
Coal hasn;t polluted one single river in THIS STATE. Paper mills do that who are regulated in A BLUE STATE BY BLUE LEGISLATORS.
Who regularly allow these companies to get away with it year after year because of the $$$ involved in hydro projects which harm the river as well as the papermill $$$. These liberals talk about corrupt Republicvans and it is the Democrats who have ruined this state's water.
That was my point. They were in charge .... it wasn;t coal from out of state. Most manufacturing occurred in New England period. Under BLUE rule.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.NO, the red states in the
NO, the red states in the midwest. Emissions from their coal fired plants are poured into the jet steam, to settle in the east. This is a proven fact.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Ehhhummmm
Also that does not explain the river pollution or hydro corruption in the state with lobbyists and bad representatives in elected office, not that what you said is correct anyway to the extent of actually ruining our lakes from there since most of industry is in the mid atlantic and on the EAST coast that caused it since the late 1800s. But ok I'll humor you.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Okeedokeee....
Believe what you wish, it's a free country.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Lewiston and Auburn Deserve Chellie Pingree
The "intelligent Democratic voters" of Lewiston and Auburn deserve Chellie. She votes for larger government, higher taxes and more government spending, all values of the intelligent Democrat. It will be a thrill to see her hubby's gaz guzzling corporate jet on final approach to the Auburn-Lewiston Municipal airport when she comes up to make a campaign stop in the Lew. Maybe she'll be able to bring more affordable housing to our fine cities.
You should thank those pesky Republicans for proposing to give you the chance to make an intelligent choice for an intelligent uber leftist. You'll love Obamacare, high inflation rates, the devalued dollar, soaring grocery prices, expensive gas and heating oil...all brought to you by Chellie and Barack.
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.Republican redistictingplan
Bravo, I'mglad some one else sawthru theB.S. I could't beleive a Ms. Plowman quoted in the article as actualy stating that sitting candidatescandidates+their districts are are nevertaken into account when the new districts are created, and then she continued to amaze, when she was quoted on page7,as stating thatcandidates do not even have to live in the districts they represent! Amazing!
- Permalink
- Is this comment inappropriate?
Would you like to respond? Login or create a new account. You'll need to verify your account before you can respond.