Wismer Pounds Novstrup with Straight Talk on Gerrymandering

Senator Al Novstrup needs to learn when not to play his word games. Teaching him that lesson last night was Representative Susan Wismer.

At the League of Women Voters’ redistricting forum, Tom Black the audience question period to invite Novstrup and his fellow Republican District 3 candidates in the audience to discuss whether they see gerrymandering in South Dakota’s current Legislative map, whether they see gerrymandering as a problem, and whether they would commit to correcting any errors that have been committed in our redistricting process.

The simple answers to those questions are Yes, Yes, and Yes.

Novstrup let his fellow Republican candidates Drew Dennert and Carl Perry answer first, because, I imagine, it sometimes takes Al time to compose his word games. Far be it from me to begrudge a public speaker a few minutes of prep time. But when Al finally grumbled to life, he spun this non-responsive hypothetical:

Al said he’d like to test the current system versus the “political science and geography people” like Dr. Erin Fouberg and other professors speaking at these LWV forums who have expressed an interest in taking a crack at drawing model Legislative maps. Al said he’d like to try a two-step process in which a committee would agree on goals before looking at any maps, like respecting political boundaries and the federal requirements of racial equity (notice that Al didn’t phrase an interest in racial equity itself, just in satisfying the federal mandates). With those goals established, the two groups, academics and legislators, could start drawing. Al said it would be “interesting” to compare the “theoretical” work of the political scientists and the maps the Legislature would produce.

With that vague hand-waving over, Al finally turned directly to Tom’s question and said there was no attempt to place a thumb on the scale in the 2011 redistricting. He turned to Rep. Wismer, still sitting at the front of the room in a panelist’s chair, and asked her if there was any discussion in the redistricting committee of thumbing that scale.

Rep. Wismer replied immediately: that discussion is never had in public.

Undeterred (a word whose syllables I enjoy dividing), Senator Novstrup decided to follow one failed question with another: he asked Rep. Wismer how many districts she would approve of and how many she would disagree with.

Again, without hesitation, Rep. Wismer responded: “1, 2, 3, 15….” She mentioned a couple districts in Rapid City where Native American voters were split up.

“Interesting,” said Novstrup, clearly not interested in Wismer’s continuing a response he did not expect.

Nevertheless, she persisted. Rep. Wismer cited District 13 in Sioux Falls, District 19 and the Kloucek-targeted division of Bon Homme County.

“Thank you,” said Novstrup, clearly not grateful for Wismer’s sharp and ready response, a more direct response to the questions Tom Black directed at his Senator than anything his Senator said.

Wismer’s answers to Black’s questions were clearly the same as mine. Novstrup’s answers are impossible to pin down in the mud of hypotheticals and attempts to put Wismer on the spot, but since Al has trouble using words with meaning in general, I’ll suggest the translation of his responses to Black differ from Wismer’s and mine:

Question	Wismer	Novstrup
Do you see gerrymandering in South Dakota’s current Legislative map?	Yes	It’s—you’re asking about, you know, gerrymandering. I don’t know. Have you?
Do you see gerrymandering as a problem?	Yes	I don’t have a gerrymandering problem; theoretical academics do.
Would you commit to correcting any errors that have been committed in our redistricting process?	Yes	I can’t even commit to answering a question. Asked and answered.

.