Kate Harper and Redistricting Reform

In an ideal democratic system, legislators are chosen by popular vote, rather than placed into office by virtue of districts designed to limit equal participation, disenfranchise, or suppress the will of eligible voters due to party, race, or other considerations. Unfortunately, Pennsylvania and Maryland are the poster children for partisan gerrymandering. This undemocratic practice engaged in by both parties, undermines voter participation and democratic outcomes.

I live in the oddly shaped 12th State Senate and 61st State House district. I also live in the judicially established 4th congressional district, the outcome of failure on the part of the legislature to create a transparent non-partisan process. Unlike my state legislative districts, the 4th congressional district attempts to follow existing municipal and geographic boundaries - but it is no substitute for comprehensive reform.

The failure of the Pennsylvania Legislature to act on redistricting leaves all Pennsylvanians subject to a deeply flawed process that negatively impacts the accountability of our elected officials and the level of voter engagement. The right to vote is the most sacred institution in a democracy and must be preserved over the interests of any party or candidate.

During the last three years, I met with more than 30 Congressional offices, my Pennsylvania Senator and Representative, testified before the local school board, Township Commissioners, the Philadelphia City Council, and collaborated with local Police organizations on a number of civil rights issues. These opportunities facilitated constructive discussions with elected officials and civil servants - creating opportunities to improve public policy.

It is with great disappointment that I must note one exception. I met my local State Representative Kate Harper in the company of other constituents a few months ago. We were there to advocate for an independent and non-partisan redistricting commission to ensure democracy would prevail in Pennsylvania. Unfortunately, Representative Kate Harper believes the current system of drawing our Congressional and state legislative district boundaries suits the needs of her constituents.

There are issues on which I concur with Representative Harper’s voting record and there are issues where we have profound disagreements. Although some policy differences are to be expected, it was her attitude toward us as constituents that I found deeply disturbing. After constructive meetings with Congressional staffers of both parties, local elected officials, staffers and civil servants, I was taken aback by Representative Harper’s approach to dealing with those she is supposed to represent.

I found Representative Harper to be profoundly dismissive. To her, we were no more than a group of partisans pursuing questionable political objectives. She fundamentally disagreed with the proposal to establish an independent non-partisan body of citizens to determine future legislative district boundaries. She went so far as to describe her constituents as “a bunch of unemployed PhDs who split their tickets” indicating in her opinion, support from a broad swath of constituents.

Representative Harper fails to appreciate an important characteristic about voters across Pennsylvania – under the current system legislators choose their voters rather than voters choosing their legislators. When districts are designed to re-elect members of one party at the expense of another despite the views, concerns, and interests of those who live in close proximity to one another, voters are discouraged, and others are suppressed.

Despite the nature of the meeting, I found it inspiring. Representative Harper lost my vote on that day, but she turned me into an advocate for change. I examined her voting record in detail and saw that she is neither the moderate she claims to be, nor the protector of civil we need.

Representative Harper is counting on the complacency of voters. Over 10,000 eligible voters in the 61st state house district failed to vote in 2016. She believes we are satisfied with her performance as our legislator in maintaining the status quo on redistricting, enforcing voter suppression through Voter ID laws, maintaining mandatory minimums and restricting public access to law enforcement body cam footage, supporting a national lobby in its goal to prevent local ordinances on public safety, and legislating the right to discriminate for religious institutions and businesses. However, she is mistaken. What I and my neighbors want are legislators who will defend the right of all citizens to vote; who will protect civil rights without exception; legislators who will compromise, legislate, and pass budgets in a timely and effective manner. We do not have that in Pennsylvania today, will we have it tomorrow?

Anne Montgomery

Lansdale, PA