Shorts archives

Colin Asher, Ben Greenberg and Sara Mayeux blog about Delaware's end to prison-based gerrymandering.

by Peter Wagner, July 9, 2010

The exciting news that Delaware has become the second state to pass a law to count incarcerated people at their home addresses for redistricting is generating some great coverage on the blogs. Samples include:


Progressive States Network blogs about Delaware victory on prison-based gerrymandering.

by Peter Wagner, July 8, 2010

Cristina Francisco-McGuire at the Progressive States Network blogs that Delaware becomes 2nd state to end prison-based gerrymandering, citing Prison Policy Initiative and Demos press releases and research.

In September, the Progressive States Network published a detailed article that was a great introduction to prison-based gerrymandering and what states can do: Prisoners of the Census: How the incarcerated are counted distorts our politics.


Newsweek uses our research to highlight prison-based gerrymandering in New York.

by Aleks Kajstura, July 1, 2010

Do Rural Prisons Benefit Locals?,” in the July 1 issue of Newsweek, uses our research to highlight prison-based gerrymandering in New York, putting it in the larger context of economic and demographic shifts in the state.

Although the piece notes that “the New York proposal [to end prison-based gerrymandering], like the new law in Maryland, would affect only legislative redistricting, not state funding for social services,” some politicians are still focused on money rather than democracy.

Predictably, Senator Griffo complains:

“Upstate communities accepted prisons for the economic benefit … but there’s also other impacts, both positive and negative. The fire department, police department, and hospitals all have to respond to the prison and the inmates.”

The Senator is right in part: prisons cost money. The state pays the actual cost of incarceration, although sometimes communities do not recover the indirect costs of hosting a tax-exempt institution. If those communities are not billing the Department of Correction for these services, they should look to recover those costs in-kind, and not by gaming the electoral system.


Great radio interview with Senator Schneiderman and Charlie Albanetti. Senator Griffo is quoted repeating the same long-debunked myths and objections to reform.

by Peter Wagner, June 30, 2010

David Lucas on WAMC’s Legislative Gazette in Albany interviews Sen. Eric Schneiderman and Charlie Albanetti of Citizen Action about legislative proposals to end prison-based gerrymandering in New York State. The practice of using prison counts to draw legislative districts inflates the political representation of some communities and dilutes the representation of others.

Senator Griffo is also interviewed about his opposition to reform. He concedes that it’s ok for 13 rural counties to reject the prison counts when drawing districts, but he argues that changing the state redistricting data is somehow going to affect federal funding based on federal Census data. That’s just wrong. Don’t take my word or Charlie Albanetti’s word for it. Even the editorial board of Senator Griffo’s hometown paper supports ending prison-based gerrymandering in New York.

The segment starts at 13:40 and runs until 16:55.


by Peter Wagner, June 28, 2010

article thumbnailThe New York Times says it is time for Albany to end the practice of prison-based gerrymandering, in which people in prison are counted as “residents” to inflate some election districts at the expense of all other districts.

A Chance for a Fairer Count, June 28, 2010.


LDF issues new report on prison-based gerrymandering.

by Aleks Kajstura, June 10, 2010

Dale Ho, of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. (LDF) writes about the LDF’s new prison-based gerrymandering report on the American Constitution Society (ACS )blog. The piece explains that prison-based gerrymandering “undermines the integrity of our political process.”


Pennsylvania-focused op-ed argues that voting power should be based on actual residents, not prison populations.

by Aleks Kajstura, June 10, 2010

In a recent op-ed on Philly.com, Daniel Denvir argues that voting power should be based on actual residents, not prison populations. The piece includes examples of legislators voting contrary to the interests of high incarceration communities while claiming incarcerated members of those communities as constituents.


The Honolulu Advertiser highlights how the Census Bureau's decision to credit Hawaiian prisoners to mainland prisons hurts the Hawaiian count.

by Peter Wagner, May 17, 2010

Michael Tsai has a lengthy article in the Honolulu Advertiser that Hawaii prisoners held on Mainland skew census results. I’m quoted, as is Momi Fernandez, director of the Data and Information/Census Information Center at the Native Hawaiian advocacy group Papa Ola Lōkahi.

The article draws some research from the Hawaii section of our 50-state report Fixing prison-based gerrymandering after the 2010 Census.

Close readers of this blog may be surprised by the article’s emphasis on a funding impact from where people in prison are counted. Normally, we argue the Census Bureau’s prison miscount has very little impact on funding. Most federal aid is block grants to states, and most people in prison are incarcerated in their home state. Hawaii is a bit of an exception because it ships so many people to other states, so it does lose some Medicaid and Highway funding.

From my perspective, though, the largest impact is probably the effect on the redistricting process.

Given the concentration of Native Hawaiians in that state’s criminal justice system, accurately counting Hawaii’s prison population is critical for electoral fairness and statistical planning. Because the Census Bureau does not collect the necessary data, I don’t know exactly where the state’s incarcerated people are from and I can’t predict exactly how the prison miscount hurts Native Hawaiians in that state. But I can show the harm caused at the other end of the prison count, as the article explains:

Census reform advocates also argue that large concentrations of prisoners — particularly in the small, rural communities where prisons-for-rent have proliferated in recent years — compromise the integrity of census data and raise threat of gerrymandering during district reapportionment.

In the 2000 census, prisoners from Hawai’i unknowingly played a part in just such a scenario.

According to census data, Native Hawaiians accounted for roughly half of the resident population of Appleton township in Swift County, Minn. — because of a contract between the state of Hawai’i and the Corrections Corporation of America, which operated the district’s Prairie Correctional Facility.

Peter Wagner, founder of the Massachusetts-based Prison Policy Initiative, said counting Hawai’i prisoners as residents of the district surrounding the prison artifically inflated the area’s population profile for redistricting purposes and unfairly weighted the influence of district voters in county governance.


Editorials and articles explain how the state's new counting method will improve democracy.

by Elena Lavarreda, May 7, 2010

Last week, both The Capital and the Baltimore Sun published excellent pieces on a new Maryland law. The first-in-nation law will improve fairness and accuracy of the Census data used for redistricting purposes.

Both pieces (one article, one editorial), point out an important part of what this bill seeks to rectify—the fact that Somerset County, which is 42% African-American, has yet to elect an African-American County Commissioner in its history.

Previous to a 1986 lawsuit that intended to correct a vote dilution problem in Somerset County, the county had “at-large” voting, meaning that there were no districts. Despite having a large population of African-Americans, Somerset County was unable to elect a Black commissioner, because the voting power of the African-American community was essentially diluted by the majority-white voters.

The lawsuit was settled, and Somerset County was divided into districts, yet still not one African-American commissioner was elected. Why? Because shortly after the lawsuit was settled, a new prison opened in what was intended to be the majority African-American district, splitting the actual African-American population into two districts. Again African-Americans were unable to draw an effective majority-African American district. The passing of this bill will finally make it possible for Somerset County to elect its first African-American commissioner.

While some legislators with prisons in their districts opposed the bill, fearful of the shifts it might cause, some legislators with prisons in their districts supported it.

The Capital reports:

[Joseline] Pena-Melnyk and other District 21 state representatives – Del. Ben Barnes, Del. Barbara Frush and Sen. Jim Rosapepe, all Democrats who voted for the bill, too – conceivably could lose ground because their district includes Jessup [Correctional Facility] as well.

Pena-Melnyk believes the importance of equity overrides any parochial interest.:

“It doesn’t matter,” she said. “To me, it is just a fair way to count.”


The NAACP LDF announces support for ending prison-based gerrymandering in Rhode Island, and the major opponents of reform change positions.

by Peter Wagner, May 6, 2010

John Hill reports in the Providence Journal that:

CRANSTON — The city has eased up on its resistance to a bill that would change the way state prison inmates are counted for state and local election purposes, as long as the bill doesn’t weaken the city’s position when it seeks population-based grants or other benefits, a city official said Wednesday.

The bill would not affect funding formulas, so this removes a major political obstacle to Census reform in Rhode Island!

In related exciting news, the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund has sent statements of support of the bill to the Senate and the House.

Previous blog coverage of the effort to end prison-based gerrymandering in Rhode Island:




Stay Informed


Get the latest updates:



Share on 𝕏 Donate