Bill Overview
Title: End Prison Gerrymandering Act
Description: This bill requires the Department of Commerce, beginning with the 2030 decennial census, to attribute an individual incarcerated in a correctional center to the individual's last place of residence before incarceration. Further, a state must treat such an individual's last place of residence in the state before incarceration as the individual's place of residence for purposes of congressional redistricting.
Sponsors: Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2]
Target Audience
Population: People in the United States affected by congressional representation potentially changing due to the re-counting of incarcerated individuals
Estimated Size: 10000000
- The bill affects how the population of incarcerated individuals is counted for the purposes of the census and congressional redistricting.
- Incarcerated individuals will be counted in their home districts rather than where they are imprisoned.
- This will likely change the political representation and resources allocated to districts with high incarceration rates.
- Communities with high numbers of residents in prison will potentially gain representation and access to resources.
- Historically, prisoner populations have been counted in prison locations, which can skew representation towards rural areas where prisons are often located.
Reasoning
- The policy reallocates representation from prison districts to original residential districts of incarcerated individuals.
- It impacts urban communities with high numbers of incarcerated residents by potentially increasing their congressional representation and resources.
- Rural districts where prisons are often located might lose representation, affecting local political dynamics.
- The budget allows for administrative implementation and adjustments needed for counting incarcerated populations differently.
- The policy budget covers logistical and administrative overhead over the span of ten years.
Simulated Interviews
Construction Worker (New York City, NY)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the bill makes sense because it seems only fair for my brother to be counted where he actually lived and will come back to.
- Our community needs more representation, and this might help.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Prison Guard (Rural Kentucky)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have concerns about losing political clout in our rural area.
- Jobs here are already scarce; losing influence could affect the prison and our livelihood.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Community Organizer (Chicago, IL)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a step towards fairness as it recognizes the community's true constituents.
- It's vital for securing needed funds and representation for services and improvements.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Public School Teacher (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful this policy will eventually bring more educational funding to our schools.
- Representation matters for shaping a better future for our children.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Social Worker (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could be transformational for families I work with, as it's about justice in representation.
- I hope it leads to better services and community growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Formerly Incarcerated Individual (Houston, TX)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, they're doing something that actually recognizes us as part of our hometowns.
- This change could mean more support when we get back home.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 3 |
Retired Farmer (Rural Nevada)
Age: 64 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about the effects on local politics if we lose population counts.
- Not sure this benefits our rural community much.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
University Student (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy aligns with the principles of fair democratic representation.
- Understanding its long-term effects on urban communities is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Local Politician (Detroit, MI)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If managed well, this can adjust the imbalances in political representation.
- It reinforces the community's right to be accurately represented.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Tech Analyst (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 20/20
Statement of Opinion:
- From a data perspective, this makes sense to ensure representative demographics for electoral fairness.
- Curious to see how this changes the district maps in the long run.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $8000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $6000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $9000000)
Year 5: $3000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $4500000)
Year 10: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The ability of the Department of Commerce to integrate these changes effectively by the 2030 census deadline.
- The political implications for local regions, especially rural areas with high prison populations.
- Possible resistance or legal challenges from stakeholders benefiting from the current counting system.
- Public awareness and understanding of the benefits and rationale behind reallocating prison populations in census data.