In Baker v. Carr (1962), the US Supreme Court held that the reapportionment of state legislative districts is not a political question, and thus is justiciable by the federal courts. In Reynolds v. Sims (1964) The Supreme Court struck down state senate inequality in Alabama, basing their decision on the principle of "one person, one vote." Hence, all states needed to comply with this ruling. The MI Constitution, drafted in the same year as Reynolds, complied with this ruling.

In 1997 the Michigan state legislature (of which the Republican Party had a large majority in both chambers) updated the 1964 Constitution by drafting MCL 3.61 to further guide legislative redistricting. MCL 3.61 establishes the following requirements. First, the principle of "least cost" holds throughout, and states that municipalities should be incorporated within districts if the population of a municipality is smaller than the size of an average Congressional District. Secondly, populations for Congressional districts must not fall outside of the 95% to 105% range of the average district size (MCL 3.63d). Finally, the preservation of municipal and county identity is encouraged, and district lines should be drawn on municipal or county boundaries (3.61g).

1. With Michigan losing population and in line to lose one congressional seat after the 2010 Census, the legislative (Senate and House) seats should have smaller populations. I wouldn't be surprised to see State House seats with constituencies of 75,000 to 80,000 verses the 90,000-100,000 that is found today.

2. With 110 seats, Michigan's lower chamber, the State House, is somewhat smaller than counterparts in other states. If one wanted to increase representation of smaller communities, a small increase in the number of seats could also be a solution.

3. Historically, the Michigan Legislature favored the counties and rural areas, which is why Republicans dominated both chambers with massive majorities from the Civil War to the 1960s. At one point in our state's history, each county was allocated a seat in the State House with the remainder of the seats allocated on a proportional basis per population. I personally believe this is best formula, though compromises would have to be made to adhere to the Supreme Court's decisions since the 1960s. (I believe these decisions were very unconstitutional. Why can't states give counties a seat in a legislative chamber if the states can each have two seats in the U.S. Senate?) For example, the law could provide for any county with a population over 25,000 to have a seat in the Legislature with the smaller counties forced into cross-county districts.

4. If representation and constituency boundaries is an issue, you could have multi-member legislative districts such as Maryland and other states. They have combined State Senate and House districts into single legislative districts into multi-member districts.

5. Part of the problem is the drawing of the map. The Republicans did a horrible job in redistricting in 2001 for legislative seats. They could have drew a map that favored Republicans much better. An example is the number of Democrats with seats in Northern Michigan.

6. I recommend anyone with an interest in this subject consult past "Michigan Manual" editions at your local library or consider buying them online. They are published every legislative session and date to statehood. They are a tremendous resource for information on past and present elected officials, congressional and legislative districts (and how they have evolved over time), election results, state government information and more.

If midlandrepublican is an intellectual, good! There might be some reasonable areas where he has a more left leaning bent then some may prefer. We can discuss in a non-threatening way.

"I'm a Republican. I voted for McCain, Bush, Bush, Dole, Bush, Bush, Reagan, and Reagan. I'm just saying that I understand how so folks moving into Northern Michigan could support a Democrat over the local Republican. When I retire to Northern Michigan in May, I plan to start attending the GOP meetings at my place and will hopefully be a force for change within the party. As I said earlier, the only Republican elected official with a college degree in the party is the prosecutor. Call me an intellectual snob or whatever you want, but this is an issue for some people. I don't hunt, I prefer wine over beer, I drive a sedan and not a pick-up truck, and I wear chinos not jeans. It's a cultural thing, which is why the Republican Party is gaining more Joe the Plumbers and not enough Roberts the CEO."

Personally, I mostly agree with this. If I were Joe the Plumber I'd say, 'thanks for having the gonads to say it'.

OTOH, I'm very partial to J the P. I'm partial to Palin as well.  I've voted the same as our resident intellectual though. We're clearly on the same side, so far. Let us take some much needed criticism. He has touched on some areas that weigh heavy in my mind.

We should take a measured and patient approach and not insist all our little "plumber" eggs be put in one basket, all at one time no less. This 'all or nothing' approach has been a huge problem for us.

This patient approach extremely for the other side, I beg you to notice. It is brilliantly used by Communists.  These are people and groups with a plan.  They won't be thrown by making concessions and not getting their way, therefore cutting the nose to spite. They just go incremental. Why do we let others use what works? Does not even the Bible say, "precept by precept?" Go back, read his stuff again, take out what ya don't like, most will remain intact.

But 'Oh hell no' not us Joe's. A Joe will even vote for the 'other' guy just because he isn't getting his one or several pet issues.  Look, that isn't working!  It's in fact stupid. I say, keep the intellectual, he has some very good (ouch though) points.  Elsewhere, we can argue with him but treat him as a known allied force, we won't take these out with 'friendly fire'.

Plenty of Anarchy to go around with Libertarians as well. A bit too chaotic for my taste and I'm not into their Dem leanings.