In a
KUTV news story that just hit the wires, I learn that there is a bill in the US House of Representatives which would (among other things) give Utah the much-wished-for fourth congressional seat — but would leave it as an at-large seat until the next redistricting (which I assume means 2010, after the next census... though if Texas is taken as a harbinger of things-to-come, that doesn't necessarily hold-true).
At any rate, the article is short on details — including an HR number — so I have little to say.
My gut reaction is four-fold: it's about time that DC gets a representative; it's about time that Utah gets a fourth seat; something doesn't feel right about this, and it may be filled with nasties; and I don't know whether this will pass constitutional muster.
Comments?
(Does anyone have the HR number, so this can be read in-full?)Thanks to Last Lemming for getting the HR number... here's the text of
HR 2043.
2 comments:
It appears to be HR 2043. It does not explicitly mention Utah. It merely defines the District of Columbia as a Congressional district, temporarily increases the size of the House by 2 and orders a reapportionment. Unofficial simulations indicate that Utah would get the other seat. The legislation says nothing about whether the winning state must elect its new representative at-large or create a new district.
Ah.
Looks like you're right: the seat for Utah is assumed, and the reapportionment is the national reapportionment of seats done after the census (wherein seats of congress are re-assigned among the states based on the new findings).
Hm.
Post a Comment