MyDistricting | MONTANA
Enterprise Redistricting Software & Services by Citygate GIS
CP12
Provide your comments for consideration in the 2021 Redistricting process
Loading geometries...
District 1
District 2
Census Legend
Labels visible at zoom level 10.
Labels visible at zoom level 13.
Labels visible at zoom level 17.
Current Map Zoom: 8
Population and Geography based on 2020 Census Redistricting Data File
Loading...
Christian Black
Dividing Park and Gallatin is not right.
Kyle Meakins
CP 12 is uncompetitive and nearsighted, with only one obvious purpose of ensuring one party maintains ultimate control over our state for the next decade. The commission should not be making a partisan decision based on a hunch that a "well qualified" democrat could possibly win in the western district in certain conditions. The commission SHOULD be looking at trends and population shifts and paying attention to bedroom communities and where people reside compared to where they make their money. They should also consider the fact that not one other National Park in the country is split into multiple congressional districts when in the same state. Montana contains thousands of acres of YNP, as well as the gateway to park headquarters and the busiest gate by visitor numbers, West Yellowstone. It would be incredibly ignorant to not consider the impacts of splitting these two communities into two congressional districts, unless the commission simply doesn't value public lands and the amount of money YNP brings into Montana. The tourism economy is sustainable and ever increasing, and splitting up the park would only hinder the states ability to fully tap into this resource. Grouping Park and Gallatin Counties into the western district is logical and common sense. The commission must amend the map to do so.
Brandon Prior
Mathematically this map divides the State similarly to CP-11; however in this case, CP-12 separates communities of interest, and does not provide those connected in industry and/or lifestyle-geography with adequate representation. Why consider CP-12 not CP-11 if not but for the insistence of a political party to be most advantageous?
Laura Langdon
Map 12 is not competitive. It does not meet the criteria our state needs to have fair elections. It unduly favors one political party. I do not support this map.
James M Conard
Eastern Montana Counties in fairness to low population areas should receive equal Representation in Our State due to size not just population #'s. Vote For Map 13 please.
Audrey Glendenning
CP12 is uncompetitive and strategically separates voters in a way that ensures they have no voice.
Gail Waldby
The Commission asked the public to weigh in on CP 12, and Montanans overwhelmingly disapproved of it. The Commission ignored the voices of Tribes in moving an uncompetitive map forward. CP 12 gives Republicans a massive electoral advantage and all but ensures that no Democrat has a chance to hold either seat for the next decade. Please find a compromise on Tuesday to make CP 12 more competitive so everyone has a voice in our democracy.
Linda Lasko
Districts should be drawn so they represent the majority of voters within them to ensure their interests are represented. That is true democracy. Moving Helena to the eastern district is unacceptable.
Ahren Cornelius
CP12 does not meet the Congressional Map Criteria or Goals. It foremost is placing too much advantage for Republicans in both districts. The Western district at the very least needs to be competitive. Secondly Helena and Lewis and Clark County will not be fairly or equally represented if they are in the Eastern District. They both need to be in the Western District. This map is nod to Republicans and stinks of gerrymandering. I am asking you to either heavily tweak this map or discard it in favor of CP11.
Bonita K Vonderhaar
More concessions/tweaks need to be made before deciding on an exact final map. CP12 (put forth by the Republicans on the Commission) creates districts that are not competitive. Intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican Party violates the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission's goal of not unduly favoring any one political party. This plan also slices Park County off from Gallatin County. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and Park County’s interests run a great risk of being ignored if placed in the Eastern District. Putting Lewis & Clark County in the Eastern District (when it has historically been in the West) will disenfranchise many voters in Western Montana, as CP12 will not allow them a fair shot at their vote being heard.
Nate Wold
These districts do not fairly group the geographical characteristics that the voting district should be trying to represent.
Micah Sewell
I do not support CP12 at all, and think it is a poor choice for our final map. Not only because it does not create a competitive district, but because it splits Helena from the western district, as well as areas surrounding Butte and Bozeman (Jefferson and Park Counties).
Rebecca Schmitz
I oppose CP 12. It does not create political competition in Montana. By severing the economic, population, and cultural ties between Helena and Lewis and Clark Country from Western Montana as a whole, Jefferson County from Butte-Silver Bow, and Park County and Livingston from Bozeman and Gallatin County, it gives advantage to the Republican Party in both Congressional Districts. We have a constitutionally-mandated neutral Congressional District Commission for a reason, and Map 12 reflects the kind of bad faith political machinations that everyone hates about gerrymandering. In no reality in Montana is Helena in Eastern Montana. Map 12 should be voted down by the Chair and other members of the Commission.
Bradley Dunn-meier
This map unfairly gerrymanders Montana to advantage Republicans. Specifically, the splitting of Livingston from the Bozeman area in Gallatin County is splitting a community of interest that should be kept together. Many people live in Livingston but drive to and work in Bozeman. Livingston and its surrounding areas should included with Bozeman and Gallatin County. To even out the population shift, Powell County should be shifted to the Eastern District - it has more in common with those areas than it does with the other areas in the Western District.
Mary Ann Wellbank Smietanka
As stated on the Commission’s website, “Each and every Montanan is entitled to an equal voice in the halls of the U.S. Congress and under the dome of the state Capitol in Helena. This is where that promise is kept.” However, Proposal 12, does not keep that promise. In fact, it assures that Montana will continue to be dominated by Republican perspectives and lawmakers. I live in Clancy Montana, just south of Helena. Clancy, like Helena, suddenly finds itself in the Eastern District, although we are located in the western portion of the state and have more in common with other western communities. An examination of voting patterns over the last decade shows that the proposed split would favor Republicans, defying the Commission’s objective of not unduly favoring a political party. On the other hand, Proposal 13 more fairly splits the districts and promotes competition between the parties. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to comment. I urge you to reconsider the Commission’s preference for Proposal 12 and instead adopt Proposal 13, a much more impartial apportionment of the districts that would promote, rather than impede, competition and provide better options and fair elections for all Montanans.
Zak Smith
I oppose Map CP12 and urge an alternative that provides a realistic possibility of a different outcome than a guaranteed Republican seat for the next decade. Map CP12 is not competitive and will assuredly deliver a guaranteed Republican Representative for more than a decade in a state that historically and based on current demographics is not solidly Republican. We should be choosing a map that at least provides some kind of realistic pathway for people embracing popular ideas like expanding health care, supporting workers rights, investing in education and the environment, and addressing income inequality to have a representative that supports those policies. Map CP12 locks in disenfranchisement for these people for at least a decade in a manner that is unjustified by historical or current voting preferences. Any map picked should support the possibility of maintaining Montana as a "purple" state, which aligns with the reality of our populace which collectively does not find itself solidly in either camp.
Kyle Dean
With the most updated version of CP12 which has been announced to be the front runner for the redistricting, you have chosen to not only split pondera county, but the rural addresses of Valier MT, which is a very small farming community. You have included North of Valier in District 2 where you have included Valier itself and a few miles around it in district 1. This essentially strips away those few farming and ranching families away from our communities representation. I believe that the better socio-economic and geographic choice would be to have district 1 stay to the east of town where it turns south at the junction of the Valier Highway and the Belgium hill road to also continue North to the Natural Boundary of the Marias river, yes it will leave the districts not evenly split on population, but please don't rip apart our small town. An alternative would also be to continue north along frontier road which is a natural socioeconomic and geographic border between Valier and Conrad in our local identities and politics.
Hannah Lang
CP 12 is inherently flawed - it does not provide two competitive districts, and splits communities of interest, such as Park County and Gallatin County. It does not follow the criteria set forth by the commission earlier in the year. I fervently oppose CP 12.
Kimberly Dudik
This map unfairly gerrymanders Montana to advantage Republicans. Specifically, the splitting of Livingston from the Bozeman area in Gallatin County is splitting a community of interest that should be kept together. Many people live in Livingston but drive to and work in Bozeman. Livingston and its surrounding areas should included with Bozeman and Gallatin County. To even out the population shift, Powell County should be shifted to the Eastern District - it has more in common with those areas than it does with the other areas in the Western District.
Crystal Kobayashi
CP12 is a map that still heavily favors Republicans and does not create a competitive district. The majority of people supported CP11. Why choose the more unpopular redistricting map unless you are trying to work for Republican interests? Helena should not be in the Eastern district and this map takes away the voices of the people who live there. Please reconsider.
Jeanie Thiel
This map dilutes the rural vote and does not keep like communities together. It is ridiculous that Helena is not in the West district. Jefferson county has very little industry - we work in Helena or Butte. Neither district is competitive. Does it really matter if the population difference is a couple thousand but keeps like communities together?
Kyle meakins
Besides the commonsense argument of putting park co in the same district as gallatin county for economic/bedroom community purposes, they should also be in the same district because these two counties are the only counties in montana that contain a portion of Yellowstone national park, a vital ecosystem and one of the largest remaining intact ecosystem in lower 48. Montana’s Yellowstone deserves to have 1 representative that can provide one unified voice to advocate for the park in Washington DC. There are many issues facing the park and surrounding public lands, and conflicting views from a divided congress would only hurt a park that brings in billions of dollars a year to the local economy. Please reconsider amending the plan to include park county into the western district, to ensure protection of our greatest national park, the incredible resources there, and bolster the economies that depend on those resources.
Justin Brown
This map is a travesty, and violates the guidelines of the commission. Hot mess disenfranchises large swaths of the population and creates two completely uncompetitive districts, ensuring at least another decade of tyrannical one-party rule. Park County should be in the Western District with Gallatin.
Linda Ramirez
This map is unfairly balanced to support one party. Those who are pushing for this are afraid they will lose an election, not because they care what the majority of Montanans want. I will fight harder to make our democracy equal for all peoples after seeing the games politicians are playing to stay in power.
Arden Hoffman
This plan creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Republicans won every single statewide election in both of these districts in the most recent election. There were 8 statewide races in 2020 and Republicans won all of them in both districts. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal. This plan separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. This plan intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. This plan slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. This plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Gingermay Miller
Map 12 is not a true representative of this area and is unfair to rural voters.
Jen Scanlon
This map is not at all competitive and does not do justice to the diversity of our state. This map is biased to favor one political party which leaves many of us without a voice in our government. Additionally, separating Park county from Gallatin county is, frankly, absurd. Finally, this map is really unbalanced with regard to our Native American population.
Nancy Cornwell
The persistence in carving out portions of the new district to insure there is not political competition just keeps rearing its head. This map is like the others that gerrymander the new district so there is NO chance of political competition and disenfranchises the voices of democrats in the state of MT. A properly drawn map provide a competitive district as the committee was directed. Please do not choose this map!
Jill Balanda
I'm opposed to this map. Park county need to be in the same district as Gallatin county. A large portion of the people that live in Park, work in Gallatin county.
Ben Kestner
This plan slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Galaltin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2.
Lisa Pavlock
This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Shane Majszak
Map 12 does not create equally represented, competitive districts and represents blatant favoritism to one of the two major parties.
Andrea Getts
We want a competitive map to represent all Montanans and give everyone a chance to be elected each cycle no matter what party they are in. This map is not it and needs to be revised to provide more competitive districts.
Ben Diveley
I strongly urge you to reject this map. There is no way the towns of Sidney and Helena should be in the same district. Helena and Lewis and Clark County in it's entirety should be in the West. This process needs to be fair, unbiased, and equally competitive in each district. Map #12 is none of these things. Please reset and let's get this right for the people of Montana.
Brooke Flynn
Splitting Park and Gallatin counties does not support competitive redistricting. I oppose this map CP12 as it would not be representative or fair.
Dawn Gandalf
UNACCEPTABLE. I REJECT YOUR BIAS. THIS IS HEAVILY WEIGHTED WITH REPUBS. THIS IS NOT EQUITIBLE. YOU HAVE PURPOSEFULLY CONFUSED THE PUBLIC BY ALL THESE LAST 2 "MAPS" AND YOUR LAST MINUTE GAMES. I SUPPORT CT13 THAT!!! IS MORE EQUITABLE. SHAME ON YOU.
Jude Waerig
Park and Gallatin Counties are codependent on one another from an economic and civic perspective. Splitting Park from the Western District discounts the connection.
Kyle Meakins
I oppose splitting Park county and gallatin county in the strongest possible terms. Map 12 is a gerrymandered joke of a map intended to keep the radical Republican right in power for generations. Park county is a major bedroom community of Bozeman, and both heavily rely on the other economically. Furthermore, Yellowstone national park and its gateway communities deserve to have the same representation in congress. We need the same person fighting for all communities and for natural resources. Park county has much more in common with gallatin county and the western district than we do with glendive, miles city, or Billings. You must revise this map to include park county in the western district or else we are doomed to a decade or more of ultra partisan animosity and division. Please do the right thing. Thank you.
Shelley Freese
I am opposed to Map 12 because Republicans have consistently won these districts in the past, and it also is not competitive regarding the native vote. Please consider that Map 12 does not meet the stated guidelines for competitiveness.
Brooks McCartney
I am against Map 12 because the way it is drawn heavily favors the Republican Party and is not competitive. Everyone should get a fair vote of who they want to represent them regardless of their political party.
T F JOhnson
12 and 13 are both OK, but I it seems to me that there'd be more compactness with L&C/Jeffco in the West, and Gallatin 100% in the East. I think 'fair' is best captured by compactness. I do not think it 'fair' to gerrymander in pursuit of 'competitive races'. After 240+ years, Americans are sick of gerrymandering, especially when the winning side defines 'competitive races' then uses that definition to define 'fair'.
Kathleen P McLaughlin
CP 12 separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every day. It makes no sense at all to separate the two communities.
Dan Fenn
Map 12 unduly favors one political party and will result in a uncompetitive district, which degrades the representation Montanans will receive in Congress
Eric scranton
CP12 unduly favors one political party over another, directly violating the criteria set forth by the Montana Districting & Apportionment Commission. Montana needs congressional lines drawn that are competitive and do not favor just one political party. Cmon Commission, cowboy/cowgirl up and fulfill your stated obligation to all the people of Montana.
Amy Gallagher
I dislike Map 12 primarily because it does not create a competitive district.
Jason Krumbeck
I oppose this map as it is less competitive than the other proposal. Helena was also historically considered part of the Western district.
ANDREW DUNN
CP12 prioritizes county boundaries over the shared interests of the people who live in them and results in a map that favors a single party.
Berit Hansen
CP12 unduly favors one political party over another, directly violation the criterion set forth in the Montana Districting & Appointment Commission. Montana needs congressional lines drawn that are fair and just to each political party.
Kristi DuBois
I oppose this map because it does not appear to create one district that might be competitive. Having at least one district that's competitive is very important to keep people interested in voting. This is one of the most important goals of the commission. The western district created by this map still appears to lean Republican, to the point where it might disenfranchise a lot of Montana voters in Western Montana.
Scott Eric Weaver
Considering about half of Montanans lean Democrat and half Republican, this redistricting should not heavily favor one (Republican) party, which map 12 does; therefore I oppose it.
Kierstin Schmitt
I live in Rural MT & I dislike Map 12 because it's clearly biased in the direction of Republicans it ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district.
Alexander Shaffer
I strongly oppose this map because it is not competitive. Montana desperately needs good ideas from both parties.
Alan Collins
Map 12 is clearly flawed - an obvious gerymander - because both the Helena area and the Bozeman area are divided in such a way as to deprive those voters of representative government. I support either map 11, or map 13.
Hannah L Nash
I am concerned about the balance of urban to rural spaces in Map 12. When rural spaces are not given a loud enough voice, candidates are not incentivized to BE in rural spaces and listen to constituents there. Our district 1 and 2 breakdown should not marginalize rural voters.
Whitner Chase
I oppose CP12, as I believe that the issues that matter most to citizens of Helena and Lewis&Clark County are more closely aligned with what other western Montana cities and counties view as their most important issues. It makes sense for Lewis and Clark County to be represented by the same person that will tackle these important issues for the rest of western Montana.
Suzanne Aboulfadl
I oppose CP 12 because it does not follow the guidelines that require a district to be competitive, that is, not favor one party. This one clearly favors the Republican Party. A congressional district should not favor any party--in other words should avoid gerrymandering.
Inese Wheeler
Map 12 is not fair to a two-party system.
Gerald Wheeler
#12 is not a fair option if we want to hear all the votes equally.
Robert Hjelm
I think splitting the county between two districts limits the collective thoughts of the constituents and their ability to be represented as a whole. I do not support CP12
Dan Cohn
I don't support this map. It is not competitive and it splits communities that should have the same representation: Bozeman/Livingston, Helena/Western Montana.
Derek Ivester
I oppose map 12. This map is drawn to eliminate the threat of competition. To espouse Montana values and respect the state constitution, all citizens must at least have a chance for representation. Map 12 removes even the chance of a voice for nearly half of all Montanans for at least 10 years. It intentionally divides working class Montana votes by splitting union communities. Right to Work was rejected by working class Montana and this map ensures workers cannot collectively use their again. I do not like that Gallatin is split in map 13 but it does make a compromise that would give all Montanans a chance at representation. I like map 11 better than map 13 but realize a compromise is necessary.
Mary Margaret M Smith
As a citizen of Gallatin county and the city of Bozeman, I am opposed to map CP 12. It creates non-competitive areas and political bias. As a commission you all unanimously agreed to avoid both of these issues yet this map is still on the table. I urge you to select map CP 11 as an alternative. It is an unbiased, competitive map that better represents our state and will also accommodate for the growth our communities are experiencing.
Hunter Simpkins
I oppose Map CP 12.
Francesca diStefano
I do not support Map 12 as it creats two heavily Republican districts. This violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
BOB LEE
There should be a fairer way to redistrict. Regardless of any party affiliation, the two districts should be made equal in voters of both parties. We need to get back to civilized open debate about the issues that matter to all voters of our State and redistricting should not be a chance to cement any parties power.
Nike G Stevens
I am opposed to map 12 because it divides communities in Gallatin county and creates 2 noncompetitive districts. Therefore it fails to meet criteria set by the commission. I urge you to adopt map 11 - which creates 1 competitive district and that does not favor one political party over another.
Joanne Berry
I oppose this map because it does not meet the criteria for competitiveness that the Commission unanimously set. This map creates two noncompetatives districts.
Leah Berry
I dislike this map because it doesn't meet the competitive district's criteria that the commission unanimously approved. This district makes elected officials less accessible and accountable to all of their constituents.
Gabrielle Eklund Rowley
This map is not competitive.
Caroline Pharr
This map separated communities of interest and is not competitive. This map will not hold elected officials accountable or give every Montanan a voice.
Grace Hodges
I oppose map 12 and support map 11. Map 12 gerrymanders ours state to create two non-competitive districts. This Commission has a mandate to not unduly favor one political party. Please honor that mandate. The GOP plan puts Helena in the deeply Republican eastern district with no hope of electing someone who shares your values. Their plan separates Butte from Jefferson County, even though people commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day. Their plan intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. Their plan slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. Their plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Betsy Swartz
I am opposed to Map 12.
Sharon S Patton-Griffin
Map 12, in reality, disenfranchises one political party in Montana. With no chance to have a member of its party representing it, that party has no vote. It has no voice. And, it is not necessary. There are other maps, like Map 13, which maintain the rights of the minority by giving them at least a chance to have a voice in Montana's Congressional delegation. Our democracy is founded on minority rights. Please preserve the minority voice.
Arica Crootof
I oppose map 12, this plan splits a small rural county, weakening the voice of rural communities. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan ensures that rural voices are weakened against urban voices. To more fairly represent Montanans, I support Map 11.
Wendy Pierce
I oppose map 12 and support map 11. Map 12 favors one political party over the other.
Fran Penner-Ray
I oppose map 12 which fails to meet the equitable and competitive criteria. Helena should be included in the western district.
Ahren Cornelius
This map is a poor choice. CP12 gives the most undue political favor to one party over another. CP 12 does not meet the Criteria and Goals because of the lack of competitiveness. Please reject this map CP 12 as a poor choice. Thank you.
Kathryn W Schmidt
Map CP12 is not competitive.
Anthony Schmidt
CP12 is not a competitive map.
JoLynn S Yenne
Redistricting Commission, This web site is very confusing to use. I had sent a comment yesterday, but I don't know if it was received! I am concerned that the designated districts be competitive across party lines and will be for years to come. This is what the Montana 1972 Constitution writers had in mind when they created the Redistricting process. Map #12 is not competitive for fair and balanced voting opportunities and representations in the Montana government. Please make sure that DEMOCRACY stated in our Montana Constitution be followed. Remember the days of the Copper Kings! That power grab is not for Montana now and in the future.
Amy Harvey
This map creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections in the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other districts. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Elaine Eidum
I encourage you to adopt map 11 which will be more competitive.
Donna Fraser
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. A stated goal of the Commission is to draw competitive districts. CP12, in my opinion, goes against that stated goal. Please reject CP12.
CAROL MITCH
Map 12 shows a high degree of partisanship which makes a mockery of the Commission's duty to create districts that create balance. For the good of our hard-won republic, we need a map that respects the voices of diverse viewpoints.
Zach Angstead
This map highly favors one political party and creates two districts which are non competitive. Montana is a purple state and deserves one competitive district. It is important districts are not gerrymandered into two safe districts for one political party. Please keep Lewis and Clark County in the Western District.
Marilyn Marler
Map 12 is unfairly biased toward one party.
Janet S.Blackler
Map 12 is not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Kim Lapp
I dislike this map because it does not represent Montana as a whole state and fractures us in too many ways
Linda Lasko
As drawn, this plan is not competitive, violating the commission’s goal of a competitive district. It also separates communities that rely on each other and will lead to smaller communities being ignored.
Eric Edlund
A natural geographical fit would put Helena in the western district, keeping its affinity with western areas like Butte and Missoula. Other proposals show more respect for Montana's geography.
James Conner
Map 13's western district achieves a higher degree of partisan balance, and thus competitiveness. Montana is ≈ 57% R, 43% D, so there should be at least one district where the parties are evenly matched.
Eileen J Carney
This district is not representative.
DP Kastner
Dear Honorable Committee Members, I commend you on your considerable efforts during this process. Montana is growing, changing, evolving and we need as much balance as possible in order to not disenfranchise any community in this great state. As an INDEPENDANT resident of Montana I've taken a close look at both redistricting maps. I see a lot of cut and paste reasoning with arguments from both sides and I've read their reasoning which has been informative. What concerns me is the constant partisanship in this process, which is expected. However, I'd like to see the committee remain unbiased and I'd like to see a map that equally favors ALL Montana residents and ALSO doesn't favor EITHER political party. This map is no different than drawing a straight line down the state like Map 1. For these reasons this map is not favorable to me. I like the equilibrium offered by Proposal #13 to represent all Montana residents in Washington. Thank you!
Ethan Seiler
This map is unworkable because it is clearly designed to bias the GOP and is designed to make both districts uncompetitive. This map is a sham and a mockery of democracy. Do better.
Jame S. Rodich
Cp12 is unfair for many reasons posted over and over again. Cp13 is much more in line with fair voting districts for both parties.
Rebecca Cox
Again, it seems the republican contingent of the Commission has tried to stack the deck in favor of themselves. CP12, district 2 is NOT a bit competitive. It heavily favors Republicans. Our present Congressman does not listen or represent those Montanans who disagree with him. I deserve to be represented and this district map does not even allow the possibility of a Democrat getting elected. Montana has two parties, both of which should have the chance to be represented in the U.S. Congress, and CP12 districts are not competitive.
Kelly Murphy
I oppose map #12. It splits the ethnic votes so that they are displaced between the two districts and therefore have an insignificant voice.
Lori Yurga
I don’t think CP12 is a fair or equitable choice for Montana.
Gordon Ash
Thank you for the privilege to comment. With the flurry of finalizing on a Congressional District map, trying to keep pace of and understand where District lines are, this process has been challenging. I am in support of the newly established proposal # 13. Following is my rationale; please observe the criteria, standards and goals established by the Commission through Constitutional law, National Voting Rights Act and public input at the beginning of this important process. 1- It is population equal. 2- This plan includes and keeps the Confederated Salish- Kootenai and Blackfeet Nations in a competitive district. 3- This plan does not unduly favor any political party because it establishes a truly competitive district. 4- This plan keeps Flathead County whole, and is a major move toward consensus, which has taken a lot of give and take on both sides. 5- This plan follows the historical precedent of the 1980's congressional map, keeping intact as many historical communities of interest as possible while achieving perfect population equality that acknowledges where Montanans live today. 6- This plan recognizes the importance of county integrity, city limits, and communities of interest. It splits no cities or towns and achieves population equality by acknowledging community of interest concerns in Flathead, Jefferson, Lewis & Clark and Gallatin Counties. 7- The tourism economies centered on Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks are both included in the western district, keeping a bipartisan recognized community of interest intact. 8- The Canadian interface has representation in both districts, which addresses a concern raised by citizens along the border. 9- Both districts include sections of the Empire Builder Amtrak line, meaning both Representatives will have to advocate for funding for the train line. 10- This plan ensures District 2 has strong rural voices. 11- This plan largely maintains union continuity and representation. For my response against the republican Proposal 12, following: • There is a blatant lack of recognition for parity and meeting a Commission goal of not unduly favoring a political party. • There is no competitiveness acknowledged in drawing map 12. • This plan separates Butte, in Silverbow County, from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. • This plan intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. • This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. Thank you for this opportunity Gordon Ash, Flathead Valley
Karin Kirk
I oppose this map (CP12). One of the goals that the commission agreed to is that the districts should be competitive. This is similar to another rule for the process, that the map should not favor one political party. Those are sensible rules that aim to build voter trust and engagement, and to make sure that our Congressperson is responsive to all their constituents, not just half of them. This map favors one political party - the GOP. The western district is not competitive. This is why Helena is cleaved off to the eastern district - to dilute the votes of Democrats. Please do not select this unfair map. CP 13 is the most competitive of the current options, so that's the best choice!
Tom Livers
I oppose CP-12. It is a gerrymandered construct designed to render both districts noncompetitive by pretending Helena does not belong in western Montana.
Danette Seiler
This map violates the one of the main conditions, which is to create two competitive districts. Neither of these are competitive. This map also splits communities, such as Gallatin/Park counties, and Butte/Anaconda/Deer Lodge. These maps keep getting worse than the original maps!
Cammie Edgar
I oppose map 12 because it does not meet the criteria for competitiveness set by the Commission.
Amy Sowers
I oppose this map because it does not meet the competitive criteria set by the commission.
Robin Pleninger
I oppose map 12 because it does not meet the criteria for competitiveness set by the Commission.
Sara Walsh
Map 12 would ensure that neither district had even a chance of being competitive, and that minority voices would have no representation. I oppose Map 12 & urge the Commission to reject it.
Alice Padgham
I oppose map 12 - this map unduly favors Republicans by splitting communities of interest including a small rural county. As Montanans, we deserve some competitiveness in our political landscape - it will make our state a better place for all its residents.
Gary Shaw
I think a Congressional map should be more competitive. Please reject this map. My choice is Map #13. Thank you for all your hard work.
Janette M Rosman
This map is makes it impossible for rural voices can nevery carry any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts meaning rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. The splits of neighboring counties Park from Galaltin, Butte from Jefferson who have a fair amount in common. And separating Helena union workers from Bute, Anaconda and Deer Lodge is not right and fair. This is not a good map.
Jane Grochowski
I am opposed to Map 12 because it does not meet the agreed criteria. Some of the boundaries illogically split communities of interest and it is clearly drawn to favor one party.
Nicholas Stevens
We want competitive maps. This is not competitive at all. This is not democratic or what our founding fathers wanted.
Annie Peretz
We want a competitive map, and this map is absolutely not competitive.
Rhayn Ransier
We want a competitive map! This is not!
Baird Linke
I want a competitive map that represents all Montanans and this isn’t it.
Molly Verseput
I want a competitive map and this is not a competitive map!
Katie Jacobsen
i want a competitive map- this is not a competitive map. it’s very disappointing.
James Melstad
NO! Leave Helena and L&C County in the west. Neutralizing Helena and L&C County by hijacking them to a distinctly different District does not provide for voter representation. It takes western Montana political traditions and completely neutralizes them to maintain right-wing power in Montana for at least 10 more years. Our severe COVID situation is a prime example of where this road has taken us already.
Christina K. Granrud
I have sent my comments to each member of the Redistricting Commission by email. Map 12 IS gerrymandering, and favors the Republican Party. Map 12 does NOT keep communities of interest intact. Map 12 PREVENTS rural parts of Montana from having a voice in Congress. Map 12 allows urban areas to overpower rural areas, thereby taking away their voice.
Mary McNally
This map does not meet the Commission's objective of creating competitive districts. I live in Billings, and as a democrat I do not believe my voice will be heard in District 2. I get that, but as an elected legislative representative and senator for the past 12 years it is important to realize that democratic voices and values are out here, and independents as well. This map creates a second district that strongly favors the GOP, in spite of a solid democratic presence in sections of Western Montana. I strongly believe that at least one Congressional district should be competitive, giving a fighting chance to good candidates from either party. This map does not come close to doing that. Senator Mary McNally
Molly Magestro
This version of the congressional map ensures that rural voices across Montana will never be fully heard. It's not competitive and doesn't fully represent the voices of all Montanans.
Randy Peterson
I oppose map 12 on the grounds that we need more fair and competitive elections. Map 12 gives the party with no new ideas and advantage by default.
Robyn Lauster
This is not a competitive map. Reject it.
Charles W Wheeler
This is a terrible option, clearly favoring one party. It also ensures that rural voters will never have a say in national politics from the House of Representatives by splitting the largest metropolitan areas.
Susan Jean Peterson
I oppose Map 12 because it favors Republicans and is not a competitive district.
JoLynn Yenne
Map #12 is not for Montana! The writers of the Montana Constitution wanted all of our citizens to have the same opportunity to participate in our government. That meant, the right to vote would be free and equal, without pressure to follow a specific party line. Map#12 does not allow the voters in the districts to be competitive.
Bill Janus
Hooray for one-party rule!! Gerrymandering gone wild!! I'm teaching about European fascism in the 20s and 30s right now in my class. Fascists also hated democracy, and in their book, all was fair in love and war in order to end democracy and establish a one-party dictatorship. Your map proposal will accomplish this goal. Well played Republican Party, well played, I am impressed by your Machiavellianism!!
Katie Scherfig
Plain and simple--this map is not competitive! Do not pick this one!
Tim Miles
Another attempt to control the vote by controlling the voters. This continues to suppress progressive voters in Montana
Lee Richardson
I dislike this map because I will probably never see a democrat congressman in district 2. With very little chance of a democrat being elected in the west with this map, I will never have anyone to represent my views.
Lyda Adair
I oppose Plan #12. It separates 2 important communities of interest with Gallatin/Park and Butte/Jefferson County. It also provides no chance at competitiveness.
Sandra Watkins Smith
I feel that counties should not be split, but kept together as a whole. There are many outside the major city that work and shop in the city. Their needs are the same as those living in the city. Keep Lewis & Clare, Gallatin, and Silver Bow counties as a whole.
Amy Talcott
I oppose CP12, which violates the commission’s duty to create at least one competitive district that does not unduly favor either political party. CP12 has a Cook PVI score outside the range of competitiveness and was clearly drawn specifically to favor the Republican Party by nonsensically placing Lewis and Clark County in the eastern district and dividing Park and Gallatin Counties. Helena has little in common with the rural eastern part of the state, and as a resident of Livingston for nearly a decade, I oppose the division of Gallatin and Park Counties, which are inextricably intertwined economically, socially, and culturally.
Amy Cilimburg
I oppose Map 12 and urge the commissioners to do the same. It clearly does not meet the goal of competitive districts. The State is best served by competitive districts and by not dividing communities in Jefferson County/ Butte and Park County/ Gallatin. Thank You.
Simia Ranieri
I oppose Map #12. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Bob Carter
I oppose this map.
Elaine Snyder
I am opposed to Map #12. The 2 Congressional Districts need to be competitive and fair. Map 12 is not. I prefer MAP 13.
Richard Misplon
I am opposed to Map 12. This map has no competitive districts and favors the republican party. That means that voters who are not in favor of the republican agenda are not going to be represented at all. If at least one of the districts is competitive, a winning candidate will need to be supported by at least some of the opposing party or at least a significant number of the independent voters. A competitive district will be more likely to produce representatives that give all Montanans representation. Isn't that what this is all about?
Alexander Newby
This map does not meet the criteria originally agreed upon. Map 12 unfairly supports one party. Let's stop pandering to the elephant in the room.
catriona j simms
I oppose CP12 because it creates districts where one party has won over 75% of the votes in the past eight years in one district and 100% of the vote in the other district over the past 8 years in the other district. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission adopted as a goal.
Kevin Bristol Vahlbusch
I do not support CP 12 as it does not create competitive districts. Population equality does not meet the goal of being competitive.
Robert Ross Frazier
This map does not offer competitive districts, and also divides communities of interest. Please oppose it and support maps 11 or 13.
Tom Javins
CP12 does not work for Montana values. Let's focus on being competitive and working together politically.
Lucretia Olson
I oppose Map 12. This map is clearly not competitive, as measured by the Cook PVI score. The clearly stated objectives set by YOUR redistricting commission prior to the process was that the chosen map be population equal and competitive. This map is NOT competitive. Therefore, this map must be rejected or you must admit that this committee is hypocritical, biased, and pandering to one political party.
Gloria Curdy
CP 12 does not meet the Commission's criteria of creating competitive districts.
Minh-Ha Trieu
Map #12 is clearly partisan and unfair. It obviously favors one party by splitting up Helena and Butte. It also splits up a small, rural county. Rural counties will not have a voice under this map. Please do not choose this map.
Candace Jerke
This map is not competitive for both parties. You should not divide Lewis & Clark county
Deborah L Hanson
I think Map 12 has a very low score on the Cook competitiveness score. As a longtime Miles City resident and historic eastern District voter, we know we must have competitiveness for a representative to even give us the time of day. Vote no on 12 and Vote for Map 13.
Mary Langenderfer
I think this Map 12 is unfair and not according to the comission's guidelines for a competitive district.
Frances Tucker
I oppose CP 12, as not competitive, dividing Lewis and Clark county. I vote for CP 11
Rachael Simpson
Map 12 is unfair and not competitive.
sue silverberg
I oppose CP-12 because it unfairly favors Republicans and gives little power to rural voters.
Nancy Sendler
Map 12 does not meet the goal of competitive districts written by the commission. Helena should be in Western Montana and the Bozeman area shouldn't be split.
Mary Catherine Dunphy
Why bother to have an election with such an uncompetitive map as Map 12 -- This plan creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Map 12 is the epitome of gerrymandering in favor of the Republican Party.
sue silverberg
I oppose CP-12 because it unfairly favors Republican voters and lessens the voice of rural people in MT.
Ashley South
This plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest. Large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically. This would ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan ensures that rural voices will never carry a day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. Please consider rural communities when making these decisions as they are impacted greatly.
Keith W Blaylock
CP12 Is NOT fair!! This process is supposed to be fair, impartial, apolitical, etc., etc. Please make this process equitable. CP12 is not equitable at this time.
Jon Reny
I support 11 or 13
Jim Hamilton
Map 12 is the worst of the remaining maps, all of which suffer from too tight of a definition on "equal population".
Diane Lanning
I oppose CP12 and urge the commissioners to follow their agreed-on goal of drawing one competitive district. CP12 favors one political party over the other in both districts, it cracks Montana's union vote, divides communities of interest in Jefferson County/ Butte and Park County/ Gallatin. CP12 distributes all of Montana's cities in both districts so that rural Montana will never have its own say in electing either congressperson. I urge a fair map that follows our constitution and all applicable laws. I support map 11.
Sen. Chris Pope
In your final consideration of an optimal set of congressional districts for the voters of Montana, I ask that you embrace a fundamental nonpartisan axiom of our representative form of government: that the association of voting groups into districts allow as much as possible for a fair and even playing field such that voters of all stripes feel that they have a voice and a reason to participate, and that the election outcome be not determined by inadequate or unfair election design. We know that the State currently has a diverse voting public, and that those voters represent a shifting partisan demographic that breaks naturally into majority and minority camps. The Commission’s difficult role is to honor this uneven electoral landscape with a district construct that upholds and celebrates the inherent democratic values promoting balanced bipartisan civic debate and voter participation. Most importantly, the design must ensure that elections be not predetermined due tof inadequacies or biases of fundamental election mechanics, including district mapping. No outcome will be perfect, but after much reflection I would ask the Commission to consider Map 11 as the most balanced of the choices, where the tilt of the electoral playing field is dramatic, and where electoral outcomes are less at risk for being pre-determined. In contrast, adoption of Map 12, whether intended or not, will introduce a significant structural imbalance to Montana elections that will favor one party over the other, an outcome that must be avoided at all costs. Please oppose Map 12.
Keegan Medrano
I do not like proposal 12, this map does not meet the criteria that the Commission decided on to allow for equal representation of voters
Noah Marion
I oppose map 12 because it does not meeting the stated goal of competitiveness in at least one district. No districts in CP12 are competitive based on national standards for defining competition. Because of this, CP 12 clearly favors a political party by almost certainly guaranteeing an outcome before an election has begun. This will lead to less responsive and more extreme candidates and a less healthy democracy. I also oppose having Helena and Lewis and Clark county in the eastern district. I live in Helena every other winter and I also travel for work in eastern Montana frequently. Based on that experience, I believe Helena clearly shares more communities of interest with the western half of the state. Please reject CP12
Ashley Moon
I do not support CP12.
Ann Kieffaber
CP 12 does not meet the objectives of the commission as I understand them. Communities of interest in the Gallatin/Park Counties area share economic, transportation, education, and healthcare interests in a high growth area that will need strong support by our representative. Butte and Jefferson County are also part of a key community of interest. This map also perpetuates political interests of one party over another. Montana is unique in that it has a commission that is charged with getting as close to a non-partisan solution as possible. Map 12 does not achieve that objective.
Lynn Stanley
I oppose Map 12. It ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. Please choose Map 13. It has the potential to let everyone's voice be heard, it respects your criteria, Montana law, and the Montana Constitution. Reject #12 which unduly favors one political party. Thank you.
Katherine Whitlock
I urge you to vote against CP12; it is an example of egregious gerrymandering to favor conservative voters by realigning districts so that they are not competitive. The votes of Native peoples will be diluted.
Denise M Silva
That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Linda Young
Map 12 is clearly inferior in meeting the goals set by the redistricting commission. CP 12 is not competitive, so that the Republicans would not have to compete in either district, and this map deprives the minority party of the ability to compete, and this outcome is not what our democracy is based on. Competition ensures that candidates have to appeal to the vast majority of voters instead of extreme views in either party, and so there is more chance of a return to compromise and moderation, which would be good for us. Competition brings out votes, it encourages them to participate in their democracy. CP 12 is drawn to eliminate the threat of the competition of ideas and service, and to ensure that one party dominates.
Chelsey Murphy
I do not support the structure of this map or its design. It clearly segregates parties and misrepresents the people, their needs, and values.
Constance Moss
I’m opposed to map #12 because it puts Helena in the eastern district where it has little in common with other communities. This is clearly an attempt to weaken the power of public sector unions and give Republican candidates an advantage in both districts!
Patricia A Thums
CP 12 does not create a competitive district. This violates the commissions goal to avoid partisan gerrymandering. This plan favors a political party. CP 12 needs to be rejected.
Beth Judy
I'd like a map that keeps Park and Gallatin Cties together, creating at least 1 competitive district. CP 12 splits a small rural county. That means its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. I really don't like that, with CP 12, rural voices will never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. Thank you.
Lon Withrow
CP 12 does not provide a representative district.
Dale Sexton
A stated goal of the Commission is to draw competitive districts. CP12, in my opinion, goes against that stated goal. Please reject CP12.
Lily J Clarke
I urge you to drop CP12. CP12 is clearly a gerrymandering endeavor made to separate shared interests in more liberal communities in Montana. The offensive obviousness of this is beyond what I can fathom for a state that I have been proud to be a part of. Vote no on CP12.
Terri Roach
I think map 12 is a poor voter split for the state. Frankly, I agree with comments submitted by Ray Gross. Map 12 is not equitable or competitive. It loads the statewide vote in favor of Republicans, splits Butte and Helena to separate the union votes, and splits Park County from Livingston, to which it is economically tied. Please do not divide the state this way.
Alix Irvine
This map does not make any competitive districts for when it comes to state elections. While others are commenting that it is good that Native American reservations are split up, all it does is weaken their voices across the state. On top of that, Park County and Gallatin County are so close to each other in growth and community that they should be represented in the same district. Just looking at the larger cities in those two counties, Bozeman and Livingston have both experienced a large boom since the last census and people frequently drive/work between the two cities. Not only does this map aim to weaken and split up common voices, it also lacks one of the main criterion that the committee chair has been looking for: at least one competitive district.
Mark Thane
Map CP12 creates two districts which unduly favor one political party, effectively disenfranchising a large portion of the state population including the voices of our tribal nations.
Shannon B Heath
I oppose CP-12.
Kathleen Hadley
I don't like this map. It is not competitive at all and it divides communities of interest.
Linda Beischel
I strongly oppose CP-12. This plan creates District 1 (western) where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years and District 2 (eastern) where Republicans have won 100% of elections over the last 8 years. The Commission’s discretionary criteria based on traditional redistricting principles include “No plan may be drawn to unduly favor a political party”. CP-12 runs directly counter to that goal since it overwhelmingly favors Republican candidates. CP-12 splits communities that have similar interests. For example, my city of Helena shares strong support for Union goals of fair worker representation with Butte, Deer Lodge, and Anaconda. The map proposals from the Democratic Commissioners certainly do not unduly favor their party. Instead, CP-11 and CP-13 recognize that in a Montana with TWO congressional districts, at least one district should give voters across the political spectrum a fighting chance to elect a representative responsive to their views. Call that “competitiveness” or call it simple justice, I see it as the Montana way. I hope the Commission will agree and reject CP-12. Thank you.
Chloe S. Fessler
CP12 truly is a mess. It separates too many communities of interests and it does not create a competitive district. It clearly is gerrymandered to produce a second guaranteed Republican Congressional district in Montana. I once had great faith that Montana would have at least one competitive district because the Commission unanimously adopted criteria that "No plan may be drawn to unduly favor a political party." Yet that is EXACTLY what Map CP12 has done. As things stand right now in our state, our sole Congressional rep has no reason to ever listen to any voice that disagrees with him, and he does not listen. Map CP12 has been drawn to now unduly favor one political party in two districts, which guarantees we'll now have two representatives who can safely ignore constituent voices they don't want to hear. Map CP12 insures a significant number of Montanans will continue to not have representative government. The nonpartisan Cook Report gives Map CP12's District One a Partisan Voter Index score that is outside the competitive range. Map CP12 should be rejected for this reason alone. In addition, Map CP12 puts Helena in the Eastern District when it clearly belongs in the Western District. Helena has common interests with, and is tied economically to Silver Bow, Deer Lodge and Missoula counties. CP12 also foolishly separates Butte from Jefferson County and separates Park County from Gallatin County, in both cases, dividing communities with essential economic ties and common interests. Furthermore, Park County is not like the counties in the Eastern District in any way given it's growing recreation-based economy and ties to other recreation-based communities in the Western District. Lewis and Clark, Silver Bow and Jefferson Counties must be in the same District, as must be Gallatin and Park Counties. These communities all have common interests that can best be served by the same Representative rather than Representatives from two different Districts. Separating these communities of vital common interests is reason enough to reject Map CP12. Finding the perfect map may be impossible, but Map CP11 was far superior to Map CP12. Ideally, we would not have to divide counties. But if we do need to divide counties to balance the population of each District, then county splits must respect communities of interest. Large counties such as Flathead County have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically than a smaller county. Map CP11 took that into consideration where as Map CP12 does not. I urge you to reject Map CP12. It separates too many communities of interests and creates a new district that has no chance of being completive. Map CP11 was just barely competitive and it likely would also favor the Republican Party; but at least it had the possibility of being competitive. CP12 clearly, and I believe, intentionally, does not. I urge you to review the Commission's goals and criteria and to act in a responsible and nonpartisan manner. Please reject MP CP12. Thank you for your service and thank you for considering my comments.
Daniel C Thums
CP12 obviously favors republicans, and violates the goal of the commission, which is to avoid a partisan gerrymander. Park and Gallatin counties are linked in interest and should not be split. Map 11 represents a more equitable scenario.
Leslie Jo Newhall
I believe we need engagement and representation from and for all Montana citizens. This is best done by holding to the standard of having competitive districts. Proposal 12 will minimize the voice and representation of close to half of Montana's population. I want to be fairly represented by our representatives! Thank you!
Paul Miller
I do not like proposal 12, this map does not meet the criteria that the Commission decided on to allow for equal representation of voters
Mary Swanson
We live in Park County and are bonded tightly with Gallatin County. We have doctors in Bozeman, shop in Bozeman, recreate in Gallatin County and many Livingston and Park County residents work in Gallatin County every single day! We are urban areas that are strongly interconnected these days and by splitting off Park County our interests will be totally ignored. Where is the competition in that?
Peter Murray
These are not competitive districts !!
Kathleen Kennedy
This map is not at all competitive. You have a responsibility to create districts that are competitive so that ALL Montanans might be represented. Of the choices left, only 11 does that.
Katherine Smith
This plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan also ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Sara Novak
First I would like to thank you all for all the work you have put into this. Second, I would like to share that I am not in favor of Map 12. I feel that we as Montanans are a mix of parties and values. Map 12 does not indicate that mix and doesn't seem competitive. With that, I do favor both maps 11 and 13. Thank you!
Denver Henderson
Maps 12 fails to meet the goal of respecting communities of similar interest by putting Lewis and Clark County into the eastern district. In contrast, CP 11 keeps historically union-dense communities like Butte and Helena intact in a district that does not unduly favor a single political party.
Joan Vetter Ehrenberg
I do not like proposal 12 as it creates a GOP stronghold, with 75% of the statewide elections on the last 8 years in one district, and 100%, yes, 100% of elections in the last 8 years in the other, so Conservative Republicans will completely undermine any other voice.
Thompson Smith
This map is similar to map 13 but it omits Helena from the western District, even though many residents of Helena have expressed their strong identity, affinity, and economic ties to the communities just west of the Divide, including Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge. I prefer map 13.
Paul Miller
I do not like proposal 12, this map does not meet the criteria that the Commission decided on to allow for equal representation of voters
Nathan Kosted
As a lifelong Montana resident I have grave concerns with CP-12, and cannot support it, nor do I believe it would withstand judicial scrutiny. I grew up in Bozeman, graduated as student body president of Bozeman High School and have always considered Livingston a key portion of the greater Bozeman area, both economically and culturally. It shares writers, painters, and artisans who sell their work in the bi-county area at fairs, festivals, bookstores, and art galleries from Big Sky to Gardiner, Four Corners to Emigrant, and in Bozeman and Livingston. Currently, I'm a resident and voter of Lewis and Clark County. The county seat, Helena, is a strong union town with the public employees being the backbone of the community and sharing the work ethic and blue collar mentality aligning closely with the Gibraltar of unionism in Montana and America, Butte, and Anaconda. Please oppose CP 12. This map is not competitive, and it clearly attempts to split the union vote by separating the voices of workers in Helena from their brothers and sisters in Butte and Anaconda. Lewis and Clark County should be in the western district, and I urge the commission to move forward a map that more accurately represents the interests of our county, and state.
Hannah Pate
This map does not meet the criteria that the Commission decided on. It unduly favors a political party in one of the districts. The Commission should own the criteria that they decided upon and choose a map that best adheres to the criteria.
Raymond Gross
I dislike Proposal 12. This plan creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Republicans won every single statewide election in both of these districts in the most recent election. There were 8 statewide races in 2020 and Republicans won all of them in both districts. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal. This plan separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. This plan intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. This plan slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Galaltin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. This plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Catherine Wiechmann
I would like to live in a competitive district, and maps 10 and 12 do not include competitive districts.
Raymond Gross
I oppose Proposal 12. This plan creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Republicans won every single statewide election in both of these districts in the most recent election. There were 8 statewide races in 2020 and Republicans won all of them in both districts. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal. This plan separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. This plan intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. This plan slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Galaltin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. This plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Cecily Ryan
This redistributing does not allow for equal representation of all voters.
Charles K Brewer
CP12 does not support the Montana tradition of a competitive district that is responsive to diverse Montana values. My family has been here in Montana for five generations and while we have not always been in agreement with the congressional delegations it is only recently that we feel that our voices are ignored completely. Competitive districts are the only way to insure responsive representation.
Willis Curdy
Dear Member of the Commission, Thank you for your work in drawing the two congressional districts. You have put in long hours and I appreciate that. That said, I am strongly opposed to CP 12. This past summer the Commission established several criteria for drawing the map. One of the critical criteria was to draw a map creating competitive districts. CP 12 does not meet that established criteria. In addition, CP 12 puts Helena in the Eastern District. Those of us who have been around a while know that when we previously had two congressional districts, Helena was always in the Western District due to Helena residents being economically tied to Silver Bow, Deer Lodge and Missoula counties as well as with other Western Montana counties. Oppose CP 12, let's keep those parts of Montana which have common interests together.
Tonia Dyas
All you Democrats who oppose this map crack me up. The Republicans have made a huge concession here! You're getting what you wanted in this map. You're getting Missoula & Gallatin counties both in the same district ! I don't know how you think you're going to get a larger advantage than this in a state that splits 56.4% Rep vs 43.6 Dem and still abide by the no-gerrymandering rules. I put forward a map that doesn't split any counties and gives a population deviation of +/- 50 ppl [ https://districtr.org/plan/45763 ] which I believe is the best map, but if I have to choose between CP 12 & CP 13, then I choose CP 12 because it only splits 1 low-population county and it puts 2 Native American lands into District 1. The thing I don't like about this map is that it puts the fastest growing counties all in the same district (#1) which will create a huge population imbalance in a very short period of time...but Democrats should love this!
Barbara J Lodman
Please reject Map 12. Lewis and Clark county has always been part of western Montana. This map will result in the Republicans having much greater chance of winning both districts all the time.
Valan Anthos
Helena belongs in the Western district objectively, this map in unfairly drawn to favor Republican control
Connie Keogh
Thank you for your hard work on the commission. Your service is appreciated. On July 9, 2021, criteria were established by you to keep district populations as equal as possible to ensure districts are compact and contiguous and to protect minority voter rights. In addition, you have heard much public comment about the importance of keeping this new district competitive. The value of not heavily favoring one party I important to give a voice to all. While time consuming and exhausting to you, it is difficult for those of us watching the process to understand the reasoning behind CP 12 which guarantees two Republican Representatives for 10 years. This is not outcome that you agreed upon as you began this process. Montana’s demographics are changing as I write this. Splitting Park County at this time is inappropriate with it’s ongoing growth and vital economy. Splitting Helena and Butte is only designed to split the union vote. CP12 heavily favors the Republican Party and is against the criteria you have been working so hard to value. It violates the commissions intent to not unduly favor a political party. Please do not choose CP 12. CP 12 is a serious threat to our state and our values. Thank you.
John Lewis
I am totally opposed to map 12. Helena belongs in western Montana, not east. That's common sense.
Cynthia F Parry
This map goes against the stated goals of the commission by unduly favoring one party. It does not respect historic ties between Helena and Butte and disenfranchises thousands of voters by placing them in a district which is not remotely competitive. Please help to establish districts that allow all of us to have a voice on a level playing field.
April Barnes
I oppose Map 12. This map places Lewis & Clark County into the Eastern District. The county should be in the Western District where it aligns with similar geographic, economic and political leanings. This map will result in 2 Republican Districts for the State of Montana. There are many pressing issues facing our state and one party does not have the answer to them all. All voices of Montanans need to be heard and represented in government.
David Lehnherr
Our democracy is in danger. It is vital we uphold a Montana tradition of competitive democracy. Map 12 does not favor competition or democracy.
Joseph M. Cleary
Map #12 was drawn with a misguided objective, putting the maintenance of county boundaries as a priority over competitive districting. Creating competitive districts, not avoiding the splitting of a few counties, is the bedrock of the political process in our democratic republic.
Katharin Kelker
CP12 provides the opposite of fairness and competitiveness. This plan is designed to separate Butte from Jefferson County, Helena from Butte, Anaconda and Deer Lodge; and Park County from Gallatin. These splits destroy common interests in those areas. This plan in its entirety creates districts the Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. Thousands of Montanans would be disenfranchised by CP12 with no chance of their candidates of choice winning elections.
Peter Guynn
I do not like Districting 12 as it has less conformance to the topography (agricultural), does not have competitive districts and bears less resemblance to the older districting than Districting 11
Katie Catlett
This map does not represent Montana's traditional values in election of political parties. The western district needs a closer split to represent Montanans historically choosing a balance of political parties. Rarely do we have a sweep of one party. The western district need to reflect that tradition and not unduly favor one party. Choose Map 11 over Map 12.
Alaina Hardie
I oppose map 12. It does not create competitive districts.
James Robertson
CP12 does not meet the goals adopted by the commission. I oppose CP12.
Pamela Willison
Map 12 does not offer a fair and competitive voting district.
Sheila Shapiro
I would like map 12 to be rejected as it is not fair in its distribution of voters from both parties, but rather favors the Republican Party. The Reservations need to be kept intact. Please do not vote for this map. It does not follow the criteria.
Bonita Reishus
Vote against CP 12. CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Ryan Kennedy
Vote no on CP12. Helena belongs in the Western part of the state, not the Eastern. This map is solely for political purposes People before party!
James Prime
I want competitive politics in Montana. I do not believe Map 12 does this. Therefore, I dislike Map 12.
Virjeana Brown
I oppose Map 12 and ask you to choose Map 11. If Map 12 is selected, it pretty much guarantees two Republican Representatives for 10 years. This does not represent the changing demographics of Montana. The GOP across the country is doing everything they can to seize and maintain power at the expense of democracy. Our country is changing right before our eyes and if we are not extremely careful, we will be in a authoritarian state. Please choose Map 11.
Pam Meissner
Map 12 does not create any competitive district by having Lewis and Clark in the east. Therefore this map does not follow the agreed upon criteria.
Kay McOmber
I oppose map 12 and favor map 11. Lewis and Clark county should not be divided.
Ellen J Feaver
Map 12 puts Lewis and Clark County in the Eastern part of the state. Our interests will be totally ignored if this is the result of redistricting. We will be no better represented or listened to than we are today. Please do not approve Map 12.
Pam Meissner
Map 12 does not create any competitive district by having Lewis and Clark in the east. Therefore without being competitive it does not follow the agreed upon criteria.
Kathy Robins
Map 12 creates 2 non-competitive districts and is wrong for a truly representative government. I favor Map 11 in that it creates a competitive district which does not favor one party. Only 1 county is split but no communities are split. It keeps tribal reservations whole, and keeps Gallatin and Lewis and Clark counties in the Western District, in alignment with local interests.
Jesse A. Logan
Another blatant attempt to unfairly repress the democratic voice of the people of Montana.
Robyn Driscoll
I am strongly opposed to CP 12. When Republicans have won over 75% of the races in this map, it shows just what the intentions of the Republican Commissioners are. Fair, competitive districts will make our candidates and electeds more responsive to their constituents. Please do not support CP 12. Thanks to all--the Commissioners, the Chairwoman, and legislative staff for all of your hard work.
Robert Barta
I prefer any map other than 12, I expect if 12 is chosen their will be a court battle - Lets eliminate that probability and go with a fair map.
Lance Fourstar
Chair Smith, Good morning. My name is Lance Fourstar, I am the Vice Chairman of the Fort Peck Democratic Tribal Committee and the Treasurer for the Montana Democratic Party. The purpose of this letter is to request that you stand strong on the principle that gerrymandering is not good for Montanans, the key feature of Republican Proposal 12. I join other Montanans in the stance that the Republicans are attempting to intimidate and bully you specifically to gerrymander this state for the next 10 years. I implore you not to give in to these tactics. I’ve included key points of Republican Proposal 12 and why it is not good for Montana for the next ten years. This plan creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Republicans won every single statewide election in both of these districts in the most recent election. There were 8 statewide races in 2020 and Republicans won all of them in both districts. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal. This plan separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. This plan intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. This plan slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Galatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. This plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congress people. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. I thank you for your attention to this matter, I would have driven to Helena to say this all myself, it is a long drive from Wolf Point. Please take these key points into consideration in opposition to Republican Proposal 12. Thank you for keeping Montana the last great place. Lance Fourstar
Kathy Braunberger
I OPPOSE MAP #12. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Margaret Cordell
CP12 unduly favors one political party over another - is it not enough that one of the two MT districts is not competitive? Further, my real issue with CP12 is the way it was introduced on the last day of public comment to counter the potential adoption of CP11 as the final redistricting map. Some of the arguments/comments about splitting counties are disingenuous. Basically Flathead county residents are saying, "Don't split our county, but go ahead and split several others in order to leave ours intact." (NIMBY) If "having two representatives serving Pondera Co. is a good thing,' then maybe it's good for Flathead Co., too.
Nicholas P Maffei
This plan creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Kristin Aus
Map 12 is not a fair distribution. You are supposed to draw unbiased districts and this map is Republican gerrymandering at it's very best. It also splits trade areas and assures that rural voters are always out voted by city voters. Please reject Map 12.
Catherine P. Logan
I oppose redistricting map CP 12. It does not offer competitive options for many of us citizens who live in more rural parts of our counties, but need to commute in order to work in our more urban, neighboring towns. CP 12 is partisan to the Republican Party and would be an undemocratic redistricting choice! Please do better for all Montanans. Thank you.
Sharon Lamar
I do not favor map 12 because it favors one political party over the other.
ALLEN SMITH JR
CP 12 relegates Lewis & Clark to the east, significantly reducing the competiveness of the west district.
KATHERINE HUSO
CP12 violates the commission's own criteria because it is not competitive and unduly favors a political party.
Veronica Whitaker
I do not believe Map 12 is a fair and equitable map. I believe it favors one party over the other and I believe Lewis and Clark County should be in the Western District!
Mark Dirstine
I support Map 13
Rachel Severson
The commission's unanimously adopted criterion and goals specifies that "No plan may be drawn to unduly favor a political party." CP12 would violate the commission's own criteria. I support CP11 as it would result in a competitive district. Thank you.
Kristin Newgard
I'm opposed to Map 12 because it is not competitive. I prefer Map 13.
Sandy Darrah
Against Proposed map 12
Jay Forsyth
This is a clear attempt at gerrymandering. Why does one political party have such a fear of letting every vote count equally??
Doris Fischer
CP 12 ignores the longstanding economic ties between Butte and Jefferson County, and Bozeman and Park County. Both Jefferson and Park Counties have much more in common with western Montana, than with eastern Montana. On its face, CP 12 looks like a deliberate attempt to render the new western district noncompetitive and create two strongly Republican districts.
Dennis LaBonty
I oppose map 12 because it separates Park and Gallatin County and it also separates Helena and Butte. These communities should not be separated. Helena should be in the western district.
Logan J
CP 12 creates non-competitive districts. Montana deserves competition, not locked up districts. Do better.
Albert Pendergrass
I disapprove of CP12 for two reasons. One is because it splits Park and Gallatin counties into separate districts. These two counties are deeply interconnected socially and economically, sharing many challenges and goals. Secondly, this map is a blatant attempt to make both districts non-competitive, flying in the face of the stated goals of the commission.
Bonnie Ayre
Please be fair. I taught social studies, so I understand the temptation to rig the future elections.
Jamie L Isaly
CP 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. CP 12 ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. This is the intent and that is dishonest and sad.
elaine l caton
I don't like this map because it is gerrymandered--it is made to favor one political party over another. It divides many communities of interest. It doesn't even meet the basic criteria of the Commission itself.
Karen L Hinman
No on this map. It is a non competitive map that doesn’t keep communities of interest together.
Donald H Bauder
No on CP-12. CP-11 is the only fair map, only one county and no cities split.
Carol Buchheit
I have commented on other proposals and will reiterate here. If you adopt this map, there will be no point in Democrats voting for the foreseeable future. Why would you do that, other than to award naked power to one party over another. Please follow your own adopted guidelines and keep like interests together while balancing population in the state. This proposal does not accomplish that.
James Amonette
I do not like this map because it has a Cook PVI score that is outside the competitive range.
Tom Lewis
This map separates vital community interests. Livingston is split from Bozeman, Butte from Jefferson county. It is not competitive which was a main goal of the commission. The new districts should represent the new areas of growth and allow for opportunities for both parties to win elections.
Geoff Stephens
No on Map 12: it would create two republican disctricts and effectively disenfranchise democrats. The western district needs to be competititive; fairness, decency and the Montana way should guide you to map 11.
Andrew Scott
Besides being politically uncompetitive, this map divides Park and Gallatin counties. This could, potentially, disenfranchise many voters given the Republican targeting of early and absentee voting, as thousands of residents of Bozeman and Livingston live in one county but spend their days working in another. Also, the social, economic, cultural and recreational ties between the two counties are uniquely strong and unlike any other in the state.
Mike O'Connell
This map is not competitive.
andrew burns
This map violates the commissions own criteria. It is not competitive. It divides linked communities and silences rural and union voters. Also it does not make sense to put Helena in the east. Please reject this map.
Ruth Kopec
I oppose Map 12 as the choice for creating the new congressional districts in Montana. One of the stated goals of the commission is to create no map that favors one political party over another. Map 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. Obviously, this map favors the Republican party over the Democratic party and does not meet the basic definition of competitiveness for at least one district. The plan also separates Park County from Gallatin County. Livingston has become a bedroom community to Bozeman, like it or not. Thus, the two cities are facing common problems generated by the unusual growth occurring in both areas. Moreover, these two communities are access points to Yellowstone National Park, thus having mutual interests in how to provide services to the park. They also face mutual problems created by such proximity that may well need to be addressed by a single member of Congress. By creating divided representation, Map 12 enhances the possibility, and even the probability, of competing interests when addressing such problems. This same situation exists due to the separation of Butte from Jefferson County. Again, these two communities are linked by the availability of living accommodations in Jefferson County for the workforce in Butte. Thus, the interests of those people living in Jefferson County and working in Butte are similar if not identical to those residents of Butte. For these reasons, I oppose Map 12.
John Ryan
I oppose CP12. Also I don't know what putting a pin on the map is supposed to mean. I selected dislike although I very much like the place on the map I clicked on. So???
Doug Dellwo
I Oppose CP12. How does it work that we do not keep the trading areas together? How does it work that we do not listen to the tribal councils? It is bad politics plan and simple. We had a map that split no counties, no cities but it was to fair?
Judy Lewis
CP 12 is not competitive, favors one party over another and does not give just representation to new growth in the urban areas. It separates communities of interest, like Livingston and Bozeman. Splitting the urban areas weakens the rural voice. This is not a fair map.
Sheri Burden
Map #12 is not a good one if you are trying to create a competitive voting district. We do not want two representatives from our state that have been pre-determined to be from the same party. Our representation in DC should represent all Montanans... not just one party.
Michael Enk
I'm opposed to Map 12 because it essentially precludes any competition for the District 1 seat while also guaranteeing that District 2 will be held by a Republican. Montana's growing and diverse population deserves a map that provides for fair competition and representation in the new Western District.
Katrina Thorness
I oppose Map CP12.
Linda Mahr
Map CP12 is NOT an improvement over CP11 as there is little balance of populations of ethnicities nor political interests. The notion of encouraging competitiveness and representation would be thrown out the window with this one!
Deana DeWire
No on cp12! Create one competitive district and listen to tribal comments to adopt cp11.
Mat willey
CP 12 is not a competitive district and unduly favors one political party. It's an unacceptable map and goes against the independent spirit Montana has long prided itself in displaying when it comes to picking political leaders. Additionally, this plan splits a rural county which makes it easier for those voters to be more easily ignored by whoever is elected. If counties need to be split, those counties be larger counties that share mutual interests and ties so the citizens can more easily communicate their needs.
Linda Barnsley
I strongly oppose map CP12 because it favors one party over the other and separates Park and Gallatin counties. Livingston and Bozeman are very connected economically and socially and should not be separated.
Nathan Turner
Separating the mountainous counties and pushing some into the district with the plains counties pulls apart the ideals of Western MT versus Eastern MT. Separating Livingston from Bozeman also pulls apart the two interlinked economies and thus political landscapes.
Josh Rassi
Map #12 is classic gerrymandering, intentionally splitting Helena & Butte, Park & Gallatin County from one another. In addition, these populations will not remain equal for long as the west is growing far quicker than the east. Why do we continue to stall this process, listen to the people! Remain committed to a nonpartisan effort!
Candice Stewart
Map CP-12 is all wrong for Montana's communities that are being split down the line of political gains. This map has no moral back-bone to support the rural voters. I give this map a Big Fat No.
Diane Bickenheuser
This map looks to be created to guarantee only republicans will ever be elected: that is the definition of gerrymandering. Giving us a map that includes more democrats in a district does not guarantee that only democrats will win; it just gives both sides a chance to be heard. Give us a map that gives voters real options for a two-party choices.
Andrew Scott
This map is a transparent effort to gerrymander the two districts to favor one party. The district lines should be drawn to promote democratic competition, not suppress it.
URI N BARNEA
I simply believe that map # 11 is the most logical, most balanced, and the fairest of all the proposed maps.
Eva Bruce
Congressional districts should allow for political competitiveness. Montanans should be able to make their votes matter, regardless of which party they vote for. Map 12 clearly does not do this and aims to create two districts that will essentially render dissenting votes meaningless. If Montana seeks to continue its tradition of political independence, it should design congressional districts that reflect that.
John Dickson Smillie
This map favors one party.
Amy Chadwick
Please move a map forward that ensures that Park and Gallatin County are kept together, and create at least one competitive district. CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. The result is not competitive and is intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party, which violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Ella Krumm
CP 12 is not a good map and does not accurately represent Montana
Amy Chadwick
This map ignores the close ties between Park County and Gallatin County, and other western Montana counties. This map does not align with the standards and commitments the Commission agreed to, and would hinder fair elections.
Sue Beland
Map 12 promotes 1 party rule in both districts. This leads to a dictatorship. Montanans have long voted for the best person to do a job. Why have Montanans elected people to offices which pass laws directing them how to work and live that they would not hire to work in their business? We all need the chance to evaluate the candidates that have so much control over our lives. Just because someone is likeable or a good party members does not mean they should hold public office. The days of electing the best person to do the job needs to return to Montana. Map 12 separates working people’s votes by dividing Helena and Jefferson County from Butte. This map will only lead to deeper partisanship and disenfranchise voters especially when Park and Gallatin county are also separated. Park and Gallatin are closely tied together because of medicine, education, work, housing, recreation, banking, and so on. Historically Park and Gallatin were in the western district and both should remain in the western district. Please don't gerrymander Helena, Butte, and Park from Gallatin Counties for another 10 years so that the voters cannot have their voices heard at the poles.
Elsie Harrington
Helena should not be separated from its Western neighbors.
Liz Barnea
This map favors one political party. The Commission unanimously agreed that competitiveness is a goal of redistricting. Please honor your word by rejecting this map.
Aubree Roth
Please move a map forward that ensures that Park and Gallatin County are kept together, and create at least one competitive district.
Amelia H-D
I do not think this map creates fair competitive districts.
Mark Van Alstyne
As much as I appreciate and respect Eastern Montana, Helena is not a part of Eastern Montana. Please leave Helena in the western district. I do not support Map CP 12.
Will Swearingen
I dislike Map 12. It creates two solidly Republican districts, violating the principle of not unduly favoring one political party. In addition, it severs Gallatin County from Park County, two counties having a strong shared community of interest economically and culturally for over 100 years. Many residents of Livingston commute daily to Bozeman to work, and the southern ends of the two counties are the principal gateways to Yellowstone Park. Map 12 also breaks up the union labor vote, separating Helena workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte and Anaconda, which violates the principle of keeping communities of interest intact.
Emma Sihler
This is a partisan map that does not consider the long-term population distribution due to community growth in the West. I would support a fair map that represents the actual distribution of beliefs in Montana
Peter Saunders
I dislike this map since it obviously is slanted toward a republication win.
Jan Clinard
Putting all the fastest growing communities in the West will make map #12 less and less unbalanced as time goes on. Population projections should be considered.
Louden Maureen
This is not a good choice because it favors one party. Everyone in the state of Montana deserves to have an equal chance for representation.
Sawyer J Connelly
I support a fair and competitive map that doesn't favor one part.
Laura Wagner
It looks like all the fastest growing cities are in one district. In 10 years, the number of people will be very uneven.
Patricia Simmons
Map 12 is totally unfair and does not meet the regulations for setting up this new congressional district. The map gives the Republicans a better chance to win election so it is not competitive. Choose Map 11 which is competitive. If you don't do this, you prove you are political instead of a non-political breaker of a tie.
Patricia Simmons
Map 12 is totally unfair and does not meet the regulations for setting up this new congressional district. The map gives the Republicans a better chance to win election so it is not competitive. Choose Map 11 which is competitive. If you don't do this, you prove you are political instead of a non-political breaker of a tie.
Sarah Hamblock
CP 12 does not create competitive districts and would misrepresent Montana.
Karen Myers
The map fails to meet the criteria set by the Commission by unduly favoring one political party over the other. It it divides communities of common interest. I am against map CP 12
Gordon Craker
I appose CP-12 because it intentionally separates communities
James F Bennett
It is critically important for democracy to be as fair as possible to allow the voices of the people to be heard. CP 11 is the most fair map thus far, and includes more diversity. CP 12 should not be finalized as it is clearly problematic and would not fairly represent our state. Montana has a long history of tolerance and moderation, with many citizens evaluating who the best candidate is and splitting ballots between parties. This works best with fair maps. I strongly encourage the adoption of CP 11.
Karen Booker
I dislike map #12. It puts Lewis & Clark County in the East, thereby creating two non-competitive districts, which is against the commission’s stated goals.
Jock Conyngham
Montanans should not be asked to accept a map that favors just one party—any party.
Mary Craigle
I object to this map because of the very large disparity in population between District 1 and District in population in a difference of about 20,000 currently - but that difference will grow to District 1 having almost 70,000 more people by 2030 which is the next time these maps can be drawn. That is hugely unfair to the voters in Eastern Montana. I urge the Commission to consider these forecasts in making the decision. Thank you, Mary Craigle
Karen Booker
I dislike map #12. It puts Lewis & Clark County in the East, thereby creating two non-competitive districts, which is against the commission’s stated goals.
Charles Janson
I dislike CP12, as it highly noncompetitive. Unlike the claims in some other comments here, it does not keep communities intact any better than CP11 (both split one county), and CP12 places some communities (Lewis and Clark, Pondera) into districts with little historical or current cultural shared values.
Kirsten Gerbatsch
Please move a map forward that ensures that Park and Gallatin County are kept together, and create at least one competitive district. CP 12 cuts off Park County from Gallatin County. As a Montana resident who calls Livingston home, I know that Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy - whether we like it or not, and our interests will be ignored in District 2. In this map, CP 12 splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both elected Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. 
 These maps should be competitive, yes. What is more important is that the maps provide two districts where the elected representatives must be and will be most responsive to their constituents. Finally, CP 12 is problematic and should not have the Commission's vote because CP 12 ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Andrea Olsen
I prefer #13 to #12 because #13 is more competitive districting, which is good for MT.
Whitney Tawney
Reject CP 12! This map is not competitive or fair - plan and simple. Please think about the future of Montana - our elected officials need to work for us.
Christine Mullaney
I oppose this map. It is not competitive and will dilute the rural vote. Drawing a map that is competitive will ensure that both parties put forth their best candidates. Montanan's want competitive districts that do not favor one party over the other!
Catherine Thompson
I do not support proposed redistricting option 12 because it divides communities with shared interests and is inconsistent with the stated goals of the commission.
Catherine Thompson
I do not support proposed redistricting option 12 because it divides communities with shared interests and is inconsistent with the stated goals of the commission.
William Hanley
CP12 does not make sense, as putting Helena in District 2 does not make sense. Simply viewing the amount of red pins around Helena shows the people of Helena agree.
Karla Ekblad
I am not in favor of Map 12 and I am supportive of Map 11. Helena belongs in the western district. Map 12 heavily favors one political party. Map 11 is less partisan and hopefully less divisive.
Alan Ekblad
It makes not sense to put Helena in the Eastern District when the other proposals have it in the West. This is a blatant attempt to marginalize the union worker vote. It breaks up the communities of Helena, Boulder, Butte, Deer Lodge and Anaconda which share a common history and interests. The map fails to meet the criteria set by the Commission by unduly favoring one political party over the other. This map looks like an attempt to make sure neither district is competitive and that only one party can win.
Lane McKoy
clearly not competitive enough
James Szerwo
I do NOT support CP12. It favors one political party. In July 2021, the Commission unanimously adopted their criterion and goals for the Congressional mapping process. The goals adopted include both not unduly favoring either political party and considering competitiveness. A competitive district is one where no party is favored. CP 12 does not meet your own standards.
Alyson Mike
This map is a travesty in its design and gerrymandering 101. At what point, does the committee do what is in the best interest for Montana rather than the best interest of the GOP. 1. This map diminishes and disregards the rural vote of which I am one. 2. It separates counties arbitrarily in a way that is counterproductive to its residents. 3. Its simply unfair I am still not clear why this 11th hour map was added to the mix at such a late date. Please do what is right for Montana - and this map is not it.
Annika Nehring
None
Russell Lawrence
Map 12 dilutes my voice to the point it would never be heard. Adoption of this map would lead to lower voter participation, as it is not competitive and favors one party, contrary to the redistricting commission criteria.
William Campbell
CP-12 slices Park County from Gallatin County even though our issues are entwined.
Kaetlyn Cordingley
I oppose Map 12 since it doesn't meet the Commission-set criteria that a map should not unduly favor either political party.
Gabriella Weida
I do not like this map. All voices need to be allowed to be heard, not have one party take control.
Dorothy DeHart
I do not like CP 12 as it does not make a competitive district. This does not provide for individuals in the district to fully express their view regardless of political opinions.
Lucy Olivia Schindler
I don't like this map
John Wozniak
I am opposed to Map 12 as it does not support competitive districts.
Bonita Ball
I oppose map 12 as it is unfair, not competitive and intentionally draws both districts to heavily favor one party and slices and separates communities.
Sheila Ann Shapiro
I do not like this map. It appears to unfairly favor the ranking party. While it leaves Gallatin County intact, it is splitting up other counties that have more cohesiveness and would be well-served by Map 13(or 11). We need several districts that do not appear to lean into gerrymandering and provide all people with hope and a sense that democracy is being fairly served. Thanks for your humble efforts to make this redistricting as fair as possible.
Rachel Garwin
I strongly oppose CP-12. The Commission unanimously approved mandatory criteria and goals for the maps, including that no plan may be drawn to unduly favor a political party. CP-12 runs directly counter to that unanimously approved goal since it overwhelmingly favors Republican candidates and does show by splitting communities that have similar interests (e.g., Lewis & Clark County from Missoula County and Livingston / Park County from Bozeman / Gallatin County). Enacting this district would make it so that candidates and elected officials would not have to win a broad swath of support, but instead could appeal to only a small section of the population, leading to less responsive leaders, public policy, and leading to a less healthy democracy. As such, CP-12 does not uphold either the letter or the spirit of the Commission's adopted criteria and goals, and should be rejected. (Apologies if I have submitted a duplicate comment -- the interactive map comment feature was acting glitchy earlier.)
Jodi Medlar
Helena should not be in the Eastern District. We have more in common with with District 1 than we have with Eastern Montana.
Teresa Knutson
Please choose fair and competitive districts and not a map that favors one party like this map12.
Marye Wozniak
Map 12 is not representative of competitive and fair districts. Please listen to the will of the people and refrain from gerrymandering our districts.
Linda L Henderson
I do not support Map 12. It does not create a competitive district for Montana voters of any party. We need representation that seeks to meet all Montanan needs not just being bullied by Republicans who seem to be out of touch with everyday voters’ struggles. Choose Map 11.
Ren Evanoff
I definitely reject the choice of Map 12. CP 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatinand the regional economh\y, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. CP 12 also separates Butte from Jefferson. This makes no sense as people commute daily. It also splits a small rural county ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both congresspeople. CP12 ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our large urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. Please select a map that represents a fair representation of all Montanans. The future of our state in on the line. This should not be a partisan decision. I think Map 11 is a much fairer, nonpartisan option.
Daniel L Casey
Strongly disagree with this. Just another attempt to gain more power and silence the people of Montana>
Daniel Biehl
Map 12 does not result in one of the districts being competitive as both are strongly biased towards the party currently in power over the state. Thus there is no foothold for the minority to establish competitive candidates in either district.
Sherry L Milburn
I oppose this map. It does not represent a competitive district. It comprises a district that would provide an unfair advantage to the GOP in all elections.
Sharon Sweeney
I dislike Map 12, and strongly encourage the Commission to give us 2 districts that DO NOT favor 1 party over another. This "jerrymandering" of our districts needs to stop. Fair & Equal--that's what we Montanan's want!
Sharon Sweeney
I dislike Map 12, and strongly encourage the Commission to give us 2 districts that DO NOT favor 1 party over another. This "jerrymandering" of our districts needs to stop. Fair & Equal--that's what we Montanan's want!
Tammy L Minge
I oppose Map 12 because it does not support a competitive district and favors one political party. Competition is good for Montana. I think it is important to minimize splitting counties and communities. Map 11 is more competitive and fair and follows the rules set out by the committee.
GREGORY ZELL
Map CP-12 is not representative of competitive and fair districts.
David Parsons
I want to see Montana continue our proud tradition to vote for the individual and not whether a candidate has a D or R by their name. The best chance to do this is to have at least one of our districts be competitive, and thus forcing candidates to address issues and not hide behind their party leaders.
Lee-Roark Carol
Map 12 is not competitive.
Deborah Peters
This is not a fair Congressional map. Closely allied communities are split apart and both districts are non-competitive which weakens our democratic system.
Suzanne Trainor
This map does not meet the commission's goals of having a competitive district and it clearly unduly favors one party over another. Looking at all the election data since 2014, Republican candidates have won the eastern based district 100% of the time and the Western based district 75% percent of the time. When you factor non-incumbent Democratic candidates, the Republican candidate wins the western based district 86% of the time. Finally, as an R+7 this district would be more Republican than any district currently held by a Democratic member of Congress. Common sense tells us that a map where one party wins one district 100% of the time and another district 75% of the time is not competitive and would unduly favor one party over the other.
David Parsons
I want to see Montana continue our proud tradition to vote for the individual and not whether a candidate has a D or R by their name. The best chance to do this is to have at least one of our districts be competitive, and thus forcing candidates to address issues and not hide behind their party leaders.
Eva Hicks
As a person from Helena, I believe we should be on the western side.
Kathryn Schmidt
I oppose this map. It is not competitive.
Sarah Hubbart
I oppose Map 12 because it does not support a competitive district and favors one political party. Competition is good for Montana. Additionally, as a resident of Park County, I think it makes more sense for our area to be included in the western district. I also think it is important to minimize splitting counties and communities.
Susan Elliott
I oppose Map 12. It's time for a district that is competitve. Districts should not be drawn to favor one political party but to promote representation of the entire constituency. Oppose CP 12! It is not competitive.
Laurel Rhodes
Dear Mr. Lamson, I am a resident of Livingston and oppose Map 12. Bozeman and Livingston are closely connected economically and socially. The needs and concerns of Livingston are closely in tune with Bozeman and quite out sinc with district 2. If Park county is split off from Bozeman and pushed into district 2, I feel like our voices will be silenced. Please don't let that happen to us or other small county communities. It seems most equitable to me to keep all of Park and Gallatin in one district and put Yellowstone and most of Flathead in another. Over the next 10 years, these will be the fastest growing counties in the state. Map 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin county. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy and our interests will be ignored in District 2. I would like county splits to acknowledge and respect communities of interest
Laurel Rhodes
I oppose Map 12. It slices Park county off of Gallatin County. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy and our interests will be ignored in district 2. County splits should respect communities of interest.
SHIRLEY N ATKINS
Only 49% of Montanans identify as Republican, yet you insist on considering maps that only favor Republican representation. What about the other 51% of us? Make at least ONE district competitive. Go back to Map 11!
Nick Lawyer
Map 12 does not meet the objectives of the commission. It places Lewis and Clark county and eastern Montana which is not contiguous politically or geographically, additionally it does not create any competitive district in the state of Montana. This would have the effect of further encouraging political discord and extreme views within both parties. It is a critical importance to the political future of Montana at a local and state level that a competitive district be created. Map 12 does not create a competitive district. Maps 2,6,8, and 13 do the best jobs at creating a competitive district which will help encourage more centrist and civil political positions.
margaret williams
I support Map CP12 because: it keeps Flathead County in the Western District · It includes both the CSKT and Blackfeet Reservations in the Western District, allowing for a stronger voice for the tribes in the new western district· It keeps Lewis and Clark, Flathead, and Gallatin counties whole · it only splits 1 county · I don’t like CP11 because it puts most of Flathead County in the east. · CP11 is not in the best interest of Montanans. I don’t support it · CP13 splits too many counties · Keep Lewis and Clark county whole
Micah Sewell
CP12 separates Lewis and Clark County from the western district and creates no competitive districts, and I do not support it. I favor CP11.
Deborah Horning
I dislike this map because it does not follow the mandatory criteria adopted by the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission, July 2021
Molly M Miller
Map 12 is not competitive. I favor Map 11.
Sheryl Stansbury
This map deliberately divides areas with similar economic interests. It favors the party that drew the map and will disenfranchise many rural voters. We need a map that results in our voices being heard and this one does not do that.
Cynthia Di Francesco
Map 10 and 12 create 2 non competitive districts, creating political bias on the part of the commission which has been set up to AVOID this very thing. Can we be any more clear? We want districts that will allow a fair competitive election. Stop gerrymandering and realize that creating non competitive districts goes against the decision criteria stated by the commission!
Sarah
This map does not align with the stated goals of the Commission. Let's not divide communities even more than they already appear to be.
Katherine Nelson
Please do not select Map 12. Montanans value their independent streak. This is a state that benefits from a variety of perspectives but also manages to find a lot of common ground. Competitive districts ensure that government officials hear a variety of voices, seek out that common ground, and develop effective government that benefits a majority of Montanans. Please support Map 11 instead.
Dan Stone
This map is non-competitive and does not meet the goals and criteria adopted by the Montana Districting and Apportionment Commission in July, 2021.
Joyce J Bateman
L & C co in eastern district does not reflect voter majority leaning. Does not provide for competitive districts.
Jake Brown
This is a bad map. This makes it so only republicans will ever win.
Gloria Garceau-Glaser
Vote NO to Map 12! No way is it competitive and it violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party! It also intentionally cracks the union! In addition, the largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice. Just say NO to Prop 12!
John Brock
Map 12 creates two non-competitive congressions districts and divides contiguous populations. In both of these, it fails to meet the unanimously approved guidelines for redistricting.
Greg J Martin
My earlier positive comment was regarding map C11, not this map. I do not support C12 - it makes two non-competitive districts in a state that is more "purple" than "red." The districting should reflect the political character of the state.
Matthew Purcell
This map is uncompetitive and does not meet the criteria set forth by the commission
Eric Scranton
Support for MAP11 Based on the decision criteria stated by the Redistricting Commission MAP 11 is the only map which satisfies these. Any other choice shows political bias on the part of the commission. Enough is enough.
Eric Scranton
Support for MAP11 Based on the decision criteria stated by the Redistricting Commission MAP 11 is the only map which satisfies these. Any other choice shows political bias on the part of the commission. Enough is enough.
Sarah Sorensen
Support map #11 or #13
Jake Brown
This is a bad map.
Kristin Nell Smith
I support Map 11 or 13
Pam Meissner
Map 12 does not create any competitive district therefore not meeting the agreed upon criteria.
Stephanie Lindsay
Map 12 puts Lewis & Clark County in the east and does not create a competitive district.
Lorinda Bollwitt
Dislike Map 12. This map creates no competitive districts which I am in favor of. Also, Lewis and Clark county should be in the Western District.
Paul Grove
Rural votes MATTER especially in Montana.
Christian Black
This is not competitive. In July 2021, the Commission unanimously adopted criterion and goals that included adopting competitive districts when possible so as to not unduly favor a political party.
Lawrence Maxwell
I lived in Butte for 38 years. Many, many of my co-workers drove daily from Whitehall. It makes no sense to split them off into separate congressional districts!
Kyle Joyner
I oppose CP 12, which is little more than a blatant attempt to given republicans more favorability of control over both districts. Moreover, Helena/Lewis & Clark County belongs in the west not the eastern block.
Evora Glenn
I do not support Map 12 because it creates no competitive districts. Without competitive districts, politicians will have no incentive to consider the diversity of perspectives in Montana and many Montanans with be denied to opportunity to gain representation in their government.
Eric Scranton
I DO NOT SUPPORT Map 12. Map 12 does NOT create competitive districts which is a stated goal of the Commission ! The criteria set forth by the Commision state that a map should not unduly favor either political party. I ask that the commission maintain independence and evaluate the maps based on the criteria initially put forth. The prolonged comment periods and changing of map numbers is complicated and polarizing the process.
michele puiggari
I dont like map 12 be ayse it doesn't create a competitive district. I have just as much of a right to have my voice heard as others. I understand some people dont want their count split but I believe that pales to knowing that I can gave a chance at some representation. As of now my Congress person could care less what I say because I am in the minority in the state and they DON'T HAVE TO CARE. We deserve at least one competitive district.
Emma Nguyen
I oppose CP 12 because it creates non-competitive districts despite the Commission unanimously agreeing to include competitive districts in July 2021. Additionally, Gallatin and Park County communities are deeply intertwined and share common issues and should not be separated from one another.
Tandy Miles Riddle
I support Map#11. It keeps Bozeman and Livingston together in the Western district. That works both geographically and ideologically. I urge you to make that map the delineation of our districts.
Frances Tucker
By putting Lewis and Clark county in the East, this map creates NO competitive districts
Gloria Edwards
I dislike map 12 because it splits Gallatin County and is not competitive.
Maureen Byrne
It's not following MCA rules for redistricting to divide the YNP gateway communities of Park and Gallatin counties or Butte from Helena. These communities share economic and social interests that should not be divided. While Flathead County wants to be in the West, it is an agricultural area that share common economic interests with Eastern MT and should be included with the East.
Jennifer N Macy
I dislike Map 12 as it contains no competive districts and favors one political party. It violates the guidelines established by the Redistricting Committee. It is not fair to the citizens of Montana.
Karen L Morris
Map 12 fails to meet the standard of competitiveness that should be the goal. It splits communities that should remain together and, effectively, denies rural voices a chance to be heard.
Cynthia Williams
I support either Map 11 or 13. They most closely meet the stated goals of creating non-partisan districts. Map 12 creates 2 districts which have been shown to be be non-competitive, resulting in poor representation of a large portion of voters.
Kevin Ward
Do not support CP12 as it separates communities of interest.
Chris Cordingley
The map doesn't meet the Commission-set criteria that a map should not unduly favor either political party. I ask that the commission maintain independence and evaluate the maps based on the criteria initially put forth. The prolonged comment periods and changing of map numbers is complicated and polarizing the process.
Jane Maahs
Map12 is NOT competitive. I do NOT support CP12.
Edie Journey
I support either map 11 or 13!
Kristin Cordingley
I don't approve of Map 12. It does not meet the Commission-set criteria that a map should not unduly favor either political party. The Commission has been trusted with a very important process and I worry choosing Map 12 will carry consequences for generations, including losing this decision to the partisan legislature.
Caroline M Rehder
Even though I am a resident of Park County, I work part time in Gallatin County. As a result, I understand that Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy. CP 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin. Park County's interests will be ignored in District 2. The people of Park County should be included with Gallatin because the economy and social interests are more closely tied to Gallatin County than to eastern Montana.
Gail Waldby
My comment earlier today ended up mapped in South Dakota, so I'm repeating it, hopefully correctly mapping it to Livingston MT I oppose CP 12. CP 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Republicans won every single statewide election in both of these districts in CP 12 in the most recent election. There were 8 statewide races in 2020 and Republicans won all of them in both districts. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal. CP 12 separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. CP 12 intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. CP 12 splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. CP 12 ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Nicole Rosenleaf Ritter
Map 12 does not meet the standard of competitiveness that we need.
Marvin K Smith
I believe this proposal unduly favors the GOP. It's in no way competitive. This proposal doesn't align with the criterion put forth by the Commission. There are a lot of Democrats and Independents that wouldn't be represented fairly by our Representatives with this proposal.
Marc Dousset
Against CD-12 in favor of competitive districts.
Elizabeth Dove
Lewis and Clark County is a part of Western Montana, so I disagree with Map CP12. While it might be difficult for an outsider to look at a map of Montana and understand how to draw districting lines that are competitive, I appreciate that this commission is trying so hard with multiple iterations to achieve cohesiveness and competitiveness. Please reject maps such as CP12 that are partisan. Thank you for your hard work.
MARK EICHLER
I dislike having Lewis and Clark Co in the Eastern District...
Debra Hanneman
I'm against CP-12. Maps 11 and 13 give a fair representation to all Montana voters.
Anthea
Choosing Map 11 or 13 is a way to accomplish the mission of the commission which is to provide fair districting -not partial to either party. Map 12 is not a good choice as there are biases that favor one party over the other and this can disenfranchise some voters. I know your intention is to choose a map that is fair. I support Map 11 or 13.
Jessica Zephyrs
I am against CP-12.
Anthea
Maps 11 and 13 are more fairly divided between political parties and that is important to keep from disenfranchising voters. Please do not choose 12 as reflects a division that is not fairly divided and I know that is what the commission's intention is to accomplish
Representative Rabbi Ed Stafman
Map 12 is clearly not meeting the basic definition of competitiveness. It creates districts that are not competitive and intentionally draws both districts to heavily favor the Republican party which violates this Commission's goal. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. Because Map 12 virtually guarantees that both seats will be safe for Republicans, it will promote extremism by allowing Republicans to safely nominate the most extreme candidates in primaries, who can still win both districts, essentially leaving some 43% of Montanans unrepresented. Map 11 is a far better choice that achieves all of the Commission's goals, as is Map 13 (although Map 13 divides neighbors in Gallatin County, which, by the end of the 10 year period, could rival Yellowstone as MT's most populous county).
Kiah Abbey
The Commission set criteria and goals unanimously, including not unduly favoring either political party and considering competitiveness. This map unduly favors the GOP because it not competitive. If this map were adopted it would violate the Commission's own criterion and goals.
Sandra Carpenter
Not competitive
Joseph Swain
Helena needs to be in the west. It does not belong in the east. Putting it in the east is solely for political leverage.
Keith Losing
Lewis and Clark needs to be in the western district. This map seems to strongly favor single party control of both districts. Please support a competitive map.
Adam Clinch
Putting Helena in the same districts as Great Falls and Billings is nothing but a political power grab.
Cristina Mershon
I support Map CP12 because: · it keeps Flathead County in the Western District · It includes both the CSKT and Blackfeet Reservations in the Western District, allowing for a stronger voice for the tribes in the new western district · it keeps Lewis and Clark, Flathead and Gallatin counties whole · it only splits 1 county · I don’t like cp11 because it puts most of Flathead county in the east. · CP11 is not in the best interest of Montanans. I don’t support it · CP13 splits too many counties · keep Lewis and Clark county whole
Kenneth Grinde
This commission unanimously chose "competitiveness" as a benchmark for a successful re-drawing. This plan unduly favors Republican blocs and separates rural and unionized districts. This is not the one.
Joanne McBride
Strongly oppose CP12. Takes the voice away from rural citizens/communities and favors one party. It is against the competitive districts promised by the Commission. DO support #13.
LInda Lee
I am AGAINST CP12! We need competition in both districts and this map does not provide that opportunity. CP11 is the map that is the best so far. Please don't choose CP12. Thank you.
Wendy Colleen Fox
I do NOT support CP12. The districts here are not competitive. I am a Helena native and strongly believe Helena should remain in the western district where is has historically been (along with Butte). Thank you for considering my view.
Maddy Munson
I oppose map 12. First, I disagree with releasing additional maps after there had already been significant public comment on a different set of maps. Adding additional maps later in the process undermines public confidence in the redistricting process. Second, this map does not align with the criterion that the commission put forth. This map does not create a competitive district. This map would unduly favor a political party and divides communities of common interest. Lastly, the map should not split Lewis & Clark County. Map 11 is the only map that aligns with the commission's own criterion.
Kevin Hamm
There is no way anyone can read a map and see Helena in the East of Montana. Even East Helena is in the west of Montana, and this map separates us from the other communities we're similar to (Butte, Missoula) and puts us with communities we are not similar to (Billings‽‽) and that's just wrong. This is not a good choice, especially given that the others are so much clearer. Please don't choose this map.
Gwen O'Hair
I support CP12. Having read some of the comments, it is interesting that some perceive Bozeman and Livingston as similar communities. That is not correct in my opinion. Having lived here (Livingston)for nearly 60 years and although the counties have changed significantly, Bozeman and Livingston remain VERY distinct communities with their own "personalities". This decision should be based on what is best for the people living within that particular geographic area and not what is best for those who are merely interested in putting forth an idealogical based opinion. Thank you.
Steven G. Barkley
This map does not meet the commissions criteria mandate, there are better map choices, like #11
Rebecca Riedl
I am opposed map 12. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice
Elizabeth Madden
CP 12 is NOT competitive - please reject it. Please give us one competitive district, as in maps CP 11 or 13. Your Commission unanimously adopted criterion that included adopting competitive districts when possible so as to not unduly favor a political party. Please abide by this - it is the most important aspect of the districting.
Caitlin Piserchia
This map is not competitive, it does not meet the commission's own criteria, and it will not result in elected officials feeling like they need to listen to the concerns of various communities in order to earn their vote and keep it. I oppose this option.
Linda Kenoyer
I dislike this map because it divides communities (Butte and Helena). I have lived in a community in Idaho where the district dividing line ran through my neighborhood. It was confusing for the voters, even for the candidates sometimes. The people you worked with, the people you went to school with, the people in your morning coffee group, had different candidates to choose between, Shared issues were not represented by the same representative. It was frustrating and just plain wrong. Furthermore, I live in the mountains between Bozeman and Livingston and I know how much those communities share in terms of issues, workers, and residents. They should be in the same district.
Linda Kenoyer
I dislike this map because it divides communities (Butte and Helena). I have lived in a community in Idaho where the district dividing line ran through my neighborhood. It was confusing for the voters, even for the candidates sometimes. The people you worked with, the people you went to school with, the people in your morning coffee group, had different candidates to choose between, Shared issues were not represented by the same representative. It was frustrating and just plain wrong. Furthermore, I live in the mountains between Bozeman and Livingston and I know how much those communities share in terms of issues, workers, and residents. They should be in the same district.
ABBY KING
I oppose CP 12 as it does not fall within the Cook PVI range needed to keep our elections competitive between parties. Any party, Democrat or Republican, should not have the power to disenfranchise voters through biased redistricting. We should choose maps that allow for all voter's choices to be heard and counted fairly and CP 12 does not reflect that choice.
Heidi Schrock
According to the options. I am in favor of CP12. People live in certain regions and counties because of the lifestyle they enjoy and how the area reflects their preferred way of life. I wholly disagree with splitting the counties.
Michelle Saurey
The commission agreed to competitive districts....this is not. I support #11 at this time. What are the republicans afraid of that they want districts that only favor them without competition. The reality is that the mountain regions & the population & college centers are more purple than red & everyone of those residents deserves representation just as much as low density, agricultural conservative regions. Land mass does not equate to a vote being greater than another vote. While splitting counties may not be preferable, due to the population distribution in wierdly drawn counties, it is less important than making districts competitive in a closely split state. we are neither "red" nor "blue"....our house representatives should have to work for their votes.
Jacqueline Robin
I recognize how difficult this is. No community or county wants to be split. Keeping the population even, communities with like-minded intersts intact, fairness to the indigenous populations and competitive from a prospective voter pool is a near impossible task in our state. This map fails on several points including the fact it is completely non-competitive which is part of the a criteria for establishing the new district. I strongly oppose this option.
Alexander Blackmer
In addition to CP12's failure to provide a competitive district or properly consider communities of interest (most worryingly by putting Lewis and Clark County in the eastern district and much of Pondera County in the western district), it represents a failure of process. By introducing CP12 (and CP13) at the last minute after initially advancing only two finalists, the Commission has failed to give Montanans enough time to properly consider and respond to the new maps. In a process as critical as redistricting, maintaining public trust in the process is essential, and introducing new maps at the tail end will erode that public trust. For this reason, as well as its technical failings, CP12 should not be considered.
Bob Levitan
I do not prefer this map as it does not meet the commission’s adopted criteria of creating competitive districts
Nick Davis
Neither CP12 nor CP13 meet every requirement the committee must consider in creating two districts. Both split affinity groups and connected communities. The principal difference between the two maps is that CP12 creates two noncompetitive districts, while CP13 creates one noncompetitive and one competitive district. For the benefit of all Montanans, CP13 is clearly the superior choice.
richard wolff
I dislike this map because it separates communities of interest into different districts. In particular, Bozeman and Livingston share common interests and are divided, as are Butte and Helena. I prefer a map 11, where there is less division of areas that naturally work together
Alexander Blackmer
CP12 fails to meet the commission's agreed-upon criteria. CP12 creates two non-competitive districts. By not considering competitiveness, this map would encourage increasing polarization and rather than respectful consensus building of the type that has historically set Montana apart. Regarding considering communities of interest, CP12 fails significantly by putting Lewis and Clark County in the Eastern District. Lewis and Clark County has much more in common - historically, culturally, and economically - with Western Montana communities like Butte, Jefferson County, and the rest of the I-15 corridor. These commonalities include, but aren't limited to, mining and strong labor traditions, along the shared identity of being near the Continental Divide. Certainly, Lewis and Clark County has much in common with these counties than it does with the strongly agricultural counties of the east. The interests of a logger in Lincoln, for example, are profoundly different than those of a sugar beet grower in Treasure County. Likewise, CP12 splits Pondera County, putting much of it in the Western District, despite its clear historic and cultural connection to other agricultural counties in Eastern Montana, particularly with its neighboring Golden Triangle counties.
David Tyler
I oppose CP12. It separates communities with common interests and creates two districts which are not competitive. I do support CP11.
Will Wright
CP-12 is non-competitive and the commission unanimously agreed to create competitive maps
Katherine Anne Hoene
I'm in strong support of Map CP12.
CINDY BOWKER
This map is non-competitive.
Tayln Lang
The goal of creating a new districting map should be creating one that is competitive and doesn't partisanly gerrymander the districts. This map does not accomplish that. I do not support this map.
Steven Allison-Bunnell
While this map is equal population and a reasonably clean boundary, it is NOT competitive, which was a principle adopted by the commission. It also separates communities of economic, social, and cultural interest from each other. Competitive districts are more important at this point than keeping counties together, which is somewhat artificial in many cases given how irregular the county boundaries are.
Lorene Bishop
Map 12 is clearly not meeting the basic definition of competitiveness. It creates districts that are not competitive and intentionally draws both districts to heavily favor the Republican party which violates this Commission's goal. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2.
Cara Orban
Insufficient time for public comment on these newly proposed maps. Lewis & Clark County is part of Western Montana.
Tyler Mortenson
I do not prefer this map as it does not meet the commission’s adopted criteria of creating competitive districts.
Gretchen Rooney
This is not a fair democratic map. It is slanted toward the Republican party.
Michael Lighthiser Sr.
I oppose segregating Park County. Once again the Montana Republican dominated Legislature is up to its old tricks. Montana Democrats complain when things are unfair. Montana Republicans MAKE SURE things are unfair. This abuse of power has disturbed me for many years. The current map proposal in my estimation will disenfranchise Democrats and will unfairly favor installing a purely Republican and ultra-conservative balance to elections in our state. In the best interest of all involved, it would be counter-productive to instill a sense of hopeless apathy to Democrat voters because of the gerrymandering ways of the Republicans in charge.
Linda G Semones
I oppose map 12 because it is an attempt at favoring one party over the other. It separates Park and Gallatin County and it also separates Helena and Butte. These communities are interconnected and should not be separated. Also, this map creates a district where from 75% to 100% of elections have gone to one party. This does not meet the goal of not unduly favoring one party over the other.
Shibu Arens
I oppose CP12 and urge the commissioners to follow their agreed on goal of drawing at least one competitive district. Beyond this map straightforwardly favoring one political party over the other in both districts, it cracks Montana's union vote, divides communities of interest in Jefferson County/ Butte and Park County/ Gallatin, and distributes all of Montana's cities in both districts so that rural Montana will never have its own say in electing either congressperson. I urge a fair map that follows our constitution and all applicable laws, that retains the competitiveness the commissioners agreed on. Thank you.
Bob Hughes
I oppose CP 12 because it is an ;attempt at a partisan district favoring Republicans. Park County does not belong in the eastern part of the state. Park and Gallatin Counties are interconnected economically and as a community. They should be together in the same district.
Bob Ronan
First of all, the timing of the release of the additional maps after there had been a large amount of public engagement on the existing maps, and leaving such limited time for additional comment seems a bit subversive and violates public trust in the process. Second, I've lived in Lewis & Clark county almost my entire life, putting it in the East doesn't make any sense. I feel like our values and culture aligns far more with the West. Third, this map does not adhere to the criteria the commission has set for itself. It unduly favors a political party on both sides and divides communities of common interest. Please reject CP12 and accept CP11. Thank you for your work on this very important decision. Bob Ronan
Nikki Eisinger
The only democratic, fair maps are 11 or 13. It is said that we get the government we deserve. And those supporting Republican gerrymandering (maps 10 and 12) should remember that democracy begins with everyone believing in Democracy and wanting fair representation - now - and in the future. Map 12 ensures that rural montana will never have a voice - and it intentionally draws both districts to heavily favor the Republican party, which violates the Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Jeff Hoffer
Map 12 is drawn with the intent of providing a advantage to the GOP. It violates our constitution’s intent of providing a balanced district for a fair election.
Gina Himes Boor
While this map achieves the commission's stated goals of minimizing the splitting of counties, it does not meet other goals including creating a competitive district, or keeping communities of interest intact. The Cook PVI score for this map is R+6.5 which is above the score deemed fair and competitive and agreed to by the commission (i.e., R+/-5). While this map does keep Flathead county intact, it splits other regions with shared interests such as Gallatin and Park counties and Silver Bow and Jefferson Counties. The commission needs to decide which of their stated goals should be prioritized when they cannot all be achieved simultaneously and given equal weight. From the stated goals, it appears that the commission initially indicated that keeping communities of interest intact should have greater weight than keeping whole counties intact. This map does not do that.
Janice Bacino
I oppose Map 12 as it puts Lewis & Clark County in a district that will not represent the interests of our county. We are much more aligned in interests with the western part of the state, not the eastern farming and ranching part of the state.
Virgle Brite
I prefer CP-1. But if I have to accept a map that is not lawful I would choose CP-12. A question was asked on by a member of the commission on the 30th, why would CP-12 not be lawful. As outlined in MCA 5-1-115 (3) A district may not be drawn for the purposes of favoring a political party or an incumbent legislator or member of congress. The following data or information may not be considered in the development of a plan: (a) addresses of incumbent legislators or members of congress; (b) political affiliations of registered voters; (c) partisan political voter lists; or (d) previous election results, unless required as a remedy by a court. So, the question I would ask; was any map drawn with any of these political views in mind? If so, then their lawfulness are in question. Sincerely, Virgle Brite
Patti Steinmuller
I oppose Map 12. Although map 12 keeps two of the fastest growing counties, Flathead and Gallatin, intact, the map unduly favors the Republican party in both districts as referenced by the winners in both proposed districts in the last eight-ten state elections. Map 12 separates the common interests, daily communication, transportation, and economic endeavors of Gallatin County from those of Park County. Map 12 separates communities of interest of Butte from Jefferson County and Helena from those with common interests including union workers in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge. Although only one county, Pondera, is split, the west part of this agricultural county, is separated from other counties in the Golden Triangle, thus diluting the rural, agricultural voice. Overall, rural voters throughout the state will have less influence in either district than map 11 since the largest cities make up most of the population in both districts of map 12.
Emily Cleveland
I am AGAINST Map 12. It unduly favors a political party which violates the criteria set by the commission and it does not adequately consider communities of interest. It puts Lewis and Clark County in the Eastern District, ignoring current and historic ties between Lewis and Clark County and Western Montana. Likewise, it puts much of Pondera County in the Western District, despite its clear historic and cultural connection to other agricultural counties in Eastern Montana. And lastly, it is inappropriate that two maps were added at the last minute, which makes things confusing and undermines trust in a transparent process.
Haley Eakin
I oppose Map 12 and support May 11. Map 12 fails to meet the criteria of not unduly favoring a political party and considering communities of interest. It puts Lewis and Clark County in the Eastern District, ignoring current and historic ties between Lewis and Clark County and Western Montana. It also does not create a competitive district which is critical.
John Todd
Map 12 fails to meet the criteria of not unduly favoring a political party and considering communities of interest. It puts Lewis and Clark County in the Eastern District, ignoring current and historic ties between Lewis and Clark County and Western Montana. Likewise, it puts much of Pondera County in the Western District, despite its clear historic and cultural connection to other agricultural counties in Eastern Montana.
Erin Clark
I would like to live in a competitive district, and maps 10 and 12 do not include competitive districts.
Don Lorenzen
This map is truly gerrymandering. Putting Missoula and Bozeman together? Not the partisan favoring
Sarah G. Hughes
I oppose CP-12. It would create two districts that both unduly favor one political party. It would sever Park County from Gallatin County and from the rest of western Montana where Park has the strongest cultural and economic ties.
Jason Pitt
Please reject this hyper-partisan map.
Colleen Martin
I oppose Map 12 - CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Sean Tobin
I oppose the Republican's map #12 and support the Democrats map #11. I urge all government officials to remember that you are supposed to be working for the people and not your party. I say this to both sides. What is going on in the political arena across our country is deplorable.
Sally Buckles
I am opposed to this map because it places Jefferson County ion Dist 2. We have a more like relationship with BSB and Madison counties than we do with Cascade or Fergus.
Gail Waldby
I oppose CP 12. CP 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Republicans won every single statewide election in both of these districts in CP 12 in the most recent election. There were 8 statewide races in 2020 and Republicans won all of them in both districts. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal. CP 12 separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. CP 12 intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. CP 12 splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. CP 12 ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
John Mohar
I prefer CP11 which leaves Montana with at least one district which is healthy for our Democracy by being at least competitive. If CP11 is rejected, my next pick would be CP13 which I believe keeps all counties whole and is less but still somewhat competitive.
Kathy Mohar
I oppose CP12 and support CP13 because it more fairly distributes economic drivers, and thus representation, for our state.
Carolyn Hablinski
We believe that CP12 produces two uncompetitive districts. That is not in line with the goals adopted by the commission.
Bryce Bennett
This partisan plan just makes for two non-competitive districts where Congress members won't have to go out and meet with the people to hear what THEY want.
Audrey Hall
This map is unfair and gerrymanders to put one party over another.
Mark Randall Farr
Plan 12 produces two uncompetitive districts. That runs counter to any competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal.
McCall Flynn
CP12 does not allow for competitive districts, which will forever allow one party to be in control in both districts. This is problematic. With Lewis and Clark County in the Eastern District, my vote will never matter in congressional elections. Please do not adopt this map, which will lead to the election of two congresspeople who will not represent me.
Alvaro Freyre
This gerrymandering puts Helena in the East, just to neuter their votes. Keep the eastern Representative focused on rural issues. Keep the western one focused on tourism, ski industry, etc.
Allison Dale-Riddle
This map will lead to the election of two congresspeople who don't represent me
Rachel Reckin
Map CP12 does not create competitive districts, which was one of the goals unanimously adopted by the redistricting commission.
Kathleen Turner
I dislike this map. I currently live in a state congressional district that is very non competitive. I feel My vote has no weight here in this district. My state congressional district incorporates more than one county. I seen no problem with splitting a county. The Western district needs to be competitive.
Court Harris
Include Park County in the Western District. The current Western District should also include Helena/Lewis and Clark Counties.
Lenora S Reckin
This plan does not create competitive districts.
Ken Saunders
#12 is not based on equal representation
Evelyn Cahalen
I support Map CP 12. It maintains Flathead County in the WESTERN district, and includes both the CSKT and Blackfeet Reservations in the Western District, allowing for stronger voice for tribes in this new district. Only one county is split on this map, keeping Flathead, Gallatin and Clark counties whole. Map CP 11 puts Flathead County in the Eastern district, when clearly this county is in the WESTERN portion of the state. Map CP 13 splits too many counties.
Evelyn Cahalen
I support Map CP 12. It maintains Flathead County in the WESTERN district, and includes both the CSKT and Blackfeet Reservations in the Western District, allowing for stronger voice for tribes in this new district. Only one county is split on this map, keeping Flathead, Gallatin and Clark counties whole. Map CP 11 puts Flathead County in the Eastern district, when clearly this county is in the WESTERN portion of the state. Map CP 13 splits too many counties.
MarleneMcCluskey
I support Map CP12 because: · it keeps Flathead County in the Western District · It includes both the CSKT and Blackfeet Reservations in the Western District, allowing for a stronger voice for the tribes in the new western district · it keeps Lewis and Clark, Flathead and Gallatin counties whole · it only splits 1 county · I don’t like cp11 because it puts most of Flathead county in the east. · CP11 is not in the best interest of Montanans. I don’t support it · CP13 splits too many counties · keep Lewis and Clark county whole
Hannah Schweitzer
These districts do not seem competitive and Helena is in the eastern district which doesn't make sense.
Mike Volesky
Map 12 doesn't meet the basic goals of having competitive districts and giving meaningful voice to the native vote. It fails the fairness test.
Kenneth Lousen
I strongly oppose proposal number 12. It is not in keeping with a balanced districting proposal.!..
Hugo Sindelar
I oppose CP 12. It creates uncompetitive districts that unduly favor one political party and will result in disenfranchising Montana voters.
Nicki Jimenez
I oppose CP 12. It splits communities of interest by splitting Butte and Anaconda from Helena, splitting Jefferson County from Butte, and splitting Livingston off from the greater Gallatin economy. It also creates uncompetitive districts which will discourage democratic participation disenfranchise voters.
Paula Darko-Hensler
Not a good option...period
Deanna de Yong
I support map #11. It enables voices of union voters to be heard, creates a competitive district where Native American votes can make a significant impact in elections enabling their voices and concerns to be heard, keeps economic interests in areas more closely aligned w workers issues, and it keeps agricultural areas intact so that rural voices and issues will be heard.
Sandra Brewer
Helena has more in common with the western Montana, Rocky Mountain economies and issues than those of eastern Montana.
Bradley Dunn-meier
I strongly oppose CP 12.
Sarah Whitlatch
The divisions outlined in this map don't match the best interests of Montanans, urban or rural.
Lorna McMurray
Helena belongs in the western district. It has no business being put in with Great Falls and Billings, etc. The culture and values are different. This is an entirely artificial, politically-driven redistricting, and therefore harmful to the communities involved.
William Starkey
To me, striving to keep counties in tact is being trumpeted by people of one political party because - as their literature has instructed them - conveniently favors the anticipated benefits to their party. Very clever, but might counties have different constituents in different pockets and if so, might the respective stakeholders be better served split into districts that match their cultural identity (and voting patterns)?
EA Andy Johnson
The democrat powerhouses of Missoula, Bozeman, Butte, and Helena, will always dominate the western district, which does not comport with Goal 1. Assigning Gallatin County to the eastern district will negate that effect to some extent.
Donna Martin
I strongly oppose Map 12. Once again the Republican pair have put forth a map that does not include even one potentially competitive district. It doesn't matter that 2 reservations are included in a district if it is not competitive - this map actually dilutes the Native vote by having all the reservations in a non-competitive district. As for the argument that a small, divided county would have more voice because they would have 2 representatives, the same can be said, only more so, for larger counties. Both Congressional Representatives would be much more likely to come to the more populated counties than to a very sparcely populated county. And, for that matter, at a public meeting in either Flathead or Gallatin County, I doubt that they would be able to differentiate which side of the district line a speaker came from. Quite frankly, residents of the Helena area identify just as strongly with Western Montana as residents of Flathead County. If the choice has to be made, it is more important to keep the union towns as a community of interest. As I mentioned in previous testimony, although I grew up in and currently live in Libby, I have also lived in Kalispell, Browning, Helena, Bozeman, and St. Ignatius; they all identify with Western Montana. If there were a way to equitably divide the state without splitting a county or community of interest, we wouldn't be on maps 12 and 13. I believe Map 13 was a genuine attempt to come to a consensus, but as I listened during the work session, the Republicans would not even engage in conversation about it. Map 13 is less competitive, but it addresses many of the concerns expressed against previous Democratic maps, particularly by keeping Flathead County whole and including both the Blackfeet and CSKT Reservations at the expense of splitting northern from southern Gallatin County. This map not only dilutes the voices of Native Americans, but also of those of us in both districts who live in the rural parts of the state. Finally, there are many Montanans who do not consider themselves to be either Republican or Democrat. Their voices deserve to be heard as well. That can only happen only in a district that is competitive; where every vote makes a difference. Not one of the 13 maps that have been under consideration have created a district that would "guarantee" that a non-Republican or Democrat would always win. I support Map 13 as being the closest to what might be considered a consensus. But, I can also support Map 11 as being the most competitive; the one that would result in at least one candidate/representative having to take the diverse concerns of Montanans of all political persuasions into consideration. Again, I appreciate the time and effort each of you has put into this process and I certainly do not envy your having to make this difficult decision since you cannot possibly please everyone.
Brian Walsh
See above comment.
EA Andy Johnson
There are two big Native American reservations in the west, and three in the east. I see no way of making these equal. It is what it is.
Brian Walsh
Would be nice if we could have a voice in rural Montana. Vote no on map 12.
Alyson Mike
This map is not competitive -- it is self serving to the GOP.
EA Andy Johnson
With boundary lines Both Maps 12 and 13 look as if the cookie monster took a big bite out of each western district. I do not this comports with the mandatory criteria for the districts. A more compact splitting would be the west side of Hill, Chouteau, Cascade, Meagher, and Gallatin counties -- two equal districts in population, shape, and form.
Ashea Mills
This is the worst choice of available maps.This splits Park County from Gallatin, and would leave us in Park County unrepresented amidst a district with completely different economics, jobs, recreation, and a great many values. Park County is NOT Eastern MT in any way. Map 12 does the same thing to Butte and Jefferson County. You are going against your own rules by splitting communities. This map is also VERY non-competitive. We need equal representation and map 12 is a clear effort at gerrymandering. REJECT MAP 12! Please approve Map 11.
Sarah Elkins
Map 12 means there isn't a single district that is remotely competitive in terms of representing Democratic as well as Republican interests. CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. This is not competitive and violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring one political party. I support map 11 or map 13, which keep Park County and Gallatin County together in one district.
EA Andy Johnson
It is unnecessary to split Ponera County. Splitting counties does not comport with Goal #2. A better district split would be the west sides of Hill, Chouteau, Cascade, Meagher, and Gallatin counties. The population split is +/- 0.2%. Also, this split gives more counties to the west division, 21/34 vs. 15/41, thus is more in keeping with the intent of our Constitution.
Melanie A Symons
I do not support including the Helena area in the eastern district.
Diane Rewerts
CP12 is not a good option for the people of Montana. I splits Butte from the people of Jefferson County which is not in the best interests of the constituents there. Park County needs to be aligned with Gallatin. Helena, Butte, Deer Lodge and Anaconda have like interests and should be together.
jasmine krotkov
This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice.
Laurie Talcott
I do not support Map 12. Map 12 separates my county, Park County, from Gallatin County which makes no sense. Park County, and Livingston in particular, is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy and our interests will be ignored in District 2. In addition, Map 12 means there isn't a single district that is remotely competitive in terms of representing Democratic as well as Republican interests. CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. This is not competitive and violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring one political party. I support map 11 or map 13, which keep Park County and Gallatin County together in one district. Thank You!
Laurel Rhodes
I do not support Map 12. Please move a map forward that ensures that Park and Gallatin County are kept together, and creates at least one competitive district. • CP 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy. A large number of Livingston residents commute to Bozeman for work as well as shopping, dining, and recreation. Livingston is a hot spot for Bozeman residents to dine, and enjoy the outdoors. Park county interests will be ignored in District 2. • CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Misty Wohltman
I support Map CP12!!!! It is fair and the best decision!
Chris Hegge
I support Map CP12 because:· it keeps Flathead County in the Western District · It includes both the CSKT and Blackfeet Reservations in the Western District, allowing for a stronger voice for the tribes in the new western district· it keeps Lewis and Clark, Flathead and Gallatin counties whole · it only splits 1 county · I don’t like cp11 because it puts most of Flathead county in the east. · CP11 is not in the best interest of Montanans. I don’t support it · CP13 splits too many counties · keep Lewis and Clark county whole
laurie lee walsh
I'm adding my red dot to dist.1. My comment of appeal is already recorded but my dot didn't record .. now it is showing. PLEASE DO NOT to adopt this map. It's adds a big ol' thumb to the scale that is already beyond the pale, out of balance against rural voters and union folk. It's 100% wrong to stack the deck further out of reach. I appeal to your sense fairness.. that everyone should get a fair shake. THANK YOU!!
laurie lee walsh
I am so disheartened as a person in rural MT. We can never have a say with this map. It also effectively silences (by dividing) union voices for the 1st time ever. This is so wrong on so many levels & will effectively silence the "little guy." If this map carries the day.. the fix is in. PLEASE don't do this to us!
James Holbrook
CP 12 divides the historically unionized communities of Helena, Butte, Deer Lodge and Anaconda into two districts, thereby diluting the voice of working people in deciding their congressional representatives. This map puts Helena and Billings in the same district. As someone who was born in Billings, Helena has less in common with that community than they do with other communities in the West, including Missoula.
Claudia L Davis
I oppose Map 12. This is not "competitive".
Michael Smith
Please move a map forward that ensures that Park and Gallatin County are kept together, and creates at least one competitive district. • CP 12 slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Gallatin regional economy. A large number of Livingston residents commute to Bozeman for work as well as shopping, dining, and recreation. Livingston is a hot spot for Bozeman residents to dine, and enjoy the outdoors. Park county interests will be ignored in District 2. • CP 12 creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party.
Jacob Foster
CP12 is the first map to split Lewis and Clark County off from the rest of Western Montana. It was introduced late in the process and thus is receiving last minute public comment. Lewis and Clark County is a party of Western Montana. Helena is a Union and University town that has far more in common with Western Montana communities than those in the East. The reason Lewis and Clark County ended up in the East in this map is simple: Republicans don't want competitive districts. This didn't happen by accident. Republicans chose a Western Montana community that tends to vote Blue and put them in the East to dilute the Blue vote of Western Montana. This is a politically motivated map and is not worth consideration. Vote Map 11.
Jacob Foster
CP12 is the first map to split Lewis and Clark County off from the rest of Western Montana. It was introduced late in the process and thus is receiving last minute public comment. Lewis and Clark County is a party of Western Montana. Helena is a Union and University town that has far more in common with Western Montana communities than those in the East. The reason Lewis and Clark County ended up in the East in this map is simple: Republicans don't want competitive districts. This didn't happen by accident. Republicans chose a Western Montana community that tends to vote Blue and put them in the East to dilute the Blue vote of Western Montana. This is a politically motivated map and is not worth consideration. Vote Map 11.
Kayje Booker
I do not support Map 12 as it does not meet the goals the Commission has set for itself. Regarding communities of interest, as someone born and raised outside of Helena, I can attest that Helena and L&C County belong in the Western District. Helena has close historic ties to Butte and Silver Bow County as well as current social and economic ties to Missoula. It identifies strongly with western Montana and does not belong in the Eastern District. This map also falls outside of the range that all Commissioners agreed was competitive and fails to meet the criteria of not unduly favoring a political party. Montanans deserve to have at least one competitive district.
Tracy Donaldson
I dislike this map because it places Lewis & Clark County in the eastern district. It is preferable to some of the other previous maps in that it does not split Gallatin County between districts, and it includes Gallatin County in the western district. I realize that it is quite a conundrum for the commission to create 2 districts equal in population, when so much more of the state's population resides in the western portion.
Brian R Globerman
I do not support CP12 because it creates a grossly uncompetitive district. As stated earlier, I believe CP11 is the best compromise for population distribution, minimizing breakup up of cities and counties, and achieving competitive Congressional elections.
Nick Lockridge
I urge the commissioners to reject this map. As someone who was raised in a union household, and freely belongs to one now (IBEW local 206), please don't break up our union families or 'communities of interest' as you call them by splitting Jefferson and Lewis & Clark away from Butte. Blue-collar families like mine have worked hard to have our voices heard by the higher-ups and elected officials of our state...don't divide that now. Please reject map No. 12
Gayle Helt
My map of choice is #1, however if looking at 12 or 13 I would choose #12 as it has the most fair distribution of the two.
Anne Thomas
This plan creates a district where Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. That's not competitive and intentionally drawing both districts to heavily favor the Republican party violates this Commission's goal of not unduly favoring a political party. Republicans won every single statewide election in both of these districts in the most recent election. There were 8 statewide races in 2020 and Republicans won all of them in both districts. That is clearly not meeting any basic definition of competitiveness that this Commission unanimously adopted as a goal. This plan separates Butte from Jefferson County. People commute from Jefferson County into Butte every single day, and it makes no sense at all to separate the two communities. This plan intentionally cracks the union vote to separate workers who have banded together for more equitable workplace standards. Separating Helena union workers from their brothers and sisters in Butte, Anaconda, and Deer Lodge isn’t just bad policy. It’s immoral. This plan slices Park County off from Gallatin. Livingston is a vital part of the greater Galaltin regional economy, and their interests will be ignored in District 2. This plan splits a small rural county, ensuring that its voters will be ignored by both Congresspeople. County splits should respect communities of interest and large counties have distinct communities of interest within them that can be split more logically and ensure real representation for communities divided within a county. This plan ensures that rural voices can never carry the day in any Congressional district. Our largest urban areas are equally split between the two districts, meaning that rural Montanans can never elect a Congress person of their choice
Amanda Lockridg
I urge the commission to reject this map for several reasons. 1. As a union member, I am incredibly frustrated that this map separates the union communities of Helena from their neighbors in Butte, Deer Lodge and Anaconda. Montanans who voluntarily join together to advocate for their rights in the workplace are a strong community of interest. It is important for working people to have a strong voice in our elections, and this map dilutes that voice. 2. This map creates two congressional districts that both unduly favor one political party. There is little chance that the Western District will be won by anyone other than someone running on the Republican Party ticket. And that means that neither of our congressional seats will require a candidate to work to earn the vote of their constituents.
Lillian Ostendorf
I support Map CP12 because: · it keeps Flathead County in the Western District · It includes both the CSKT and Blackfeet Reservations in the Western District, allowing for a stronger voice for the tribes in the new western district · it keeps Lewis and Clark, Flathead and Gallatin counties whole · it only splits 1 county · I don’t like cp11 because it puts most of Flathead county in the east. · CP11 is not in the best interest of Montanans. I don’t support it · CP13 splits too many counties · keep Lewis and Clark county whole
Mark Sheets
I prefer map 11 as the best one to meet all criteria. It keeps economic interests together for better representation. I do not like maps 10 or 12. They are too convoluted and split economic interests.
Julia Shaida
This map fails to create a competitive district. Republicans have won over 75% of statewide elections over the last 8 years in one district and 100% of elections over the last 8 years in the other district. Further, this map divides the communities of interest of Bozeman and Livingston, and it splits up the union towns of Helena and Butte, Anaconda and Deer Lodge.
Megan Harbaugh
This map falls short on several fronts. First, it does not create any competitive districts. Second, it divides communities of interest - both Livingston from Bozeman, and Helena from our union communities of Butte, Anaconda and Deer Lodge. This map is a blatant attempt to separate the power of workers who have fought together for decades and it should be rejected.
Diane Fladmo
#12 creates a map that violates the Commission's goal of not favoring a political party and not meeting a basic definition of competitiveness. I urge rejection of #12 for these reasons.
Steven Donnell McArthur
I feel that the values of going with option 11 are in line with a more ballanced honoring of the views of the peole in the distinct areas of the state and feel that it best allignes the areas so that there is equal opportunity for all citizens voices to be heard.
Greg Hinkle
Please support CP12. Common sense would keep all of Flathead County in the Western District as well as the CSKT and Blackfoot lands. Please reject all other options. Thank you.
PJ McNeal
I oppose this map. Its creators cherry-picked areas in order to specifically silence a large group of Montana citizens who oppose their partisan agenda. Our constitutional framers intended for each Montana voter's voice to be weighted the same. The opinions and experiences of those voters should be seriously considered by anyone who wants to be or is elected to represent us in Congress. This map muffles the voices of too many Montanans.
Brenda Wahler
I strongly oppose Lewis and Clark County being in the “eastern” district. It is culturally part of western Montana. The Continental Divide does not and never really has been the dividing line between the districts per-1996 (Bozeman and Helena both east of the divide but both in the old western district) so given that reality, It makes far more sense to put the Flathead into the “north and east” district, as it keeps like-minded communities together.
Noreen Breeding
This map is not competitive. It splits Park County from Gallatin County and Jefferson County from Butte even though there is much social and commercial interaction between the pairs. Lewis and Clark County does not belong in the same district as Great Falls. Dividing counties should not be an obstacle because county boundaries are for the most part arbitrary and counties vary greatly in shape and area. But the division lines should be placed in areas of low population density, not along city boundaries.
Jordan Mullosk
Lewis and Clark and Jefferson counties should be included in the western half. Helena communities have more in common with communities west of the divide.
Charley Carpenter
This map is not competitive, and makes several separations of communities of interest, including Gallatin/Park, and Silver Bow/Jefferson.
Thomas Cuezze
Please reject this map. It splits Bozeman and Livingston from each other, two communities which are integrally tied together socially and economically. It also fails to create a competitive district in the west.
patrick berryhill
In the interest of overall balance for the state I prefer CP11.
Tammy T
And a FYI, if you haven't realized, when you issued these last two maps (12 and 13) under the cloak of darkness, and because you issued them in the first place -- at all, you officially took this too far. You lost your credibility. You lost people's trust. THIS wasn't necessary. So go ahead and gerrymander until your heart's content, draw a line here and there, draw an outline of Quasimodo or Medusa. Give them the hand of Freddy Krueger and the feet of Frodo Baggins. You're not going to listen to anyone anyhow. Who will stop you in this process now? WE'LL just see you at the ballot box. And come 2022, the cheating will be no more.
Tammy T
As we learned with every other complaint, we simply cannot divide counties. People find it offensive and don’t “like” it. You must see, Montana "culture" and "values" are no longer just that -- "Montana culture and values." No, no, no. What we've witnessed is a schism reminiscent of the 11th century Church. This is truly Biblical. No longer is a Montanan just a Montanan, oh no; as he travels along the interstates and highways of our most altered state, he must prepare for the cultural shock he'll encounter when he leaves the uncultured wasteland of rural Montana -- a dusty old hellhole where biology still lags behind: men can't yet birth children, teachers still call their students Boys and Girls, and married couples -- a true symbol of the backwardness so prevalent in the Eastern District -- don't rely on ANY funds from the government to pay their way. With the vast differences in culture and values from one side of the state to the other, the shock one will undergo as he travels from Lewistown to Dillon, from Havre to Cut Bank, or from Billings to Bozeman, is indescribable. This divide is ever so fragile. The divide must not offend a person in any way, shape, or form. If someone doesn’t like the boundary, as a child “doesn’t like” their best friend at recess in first grade, the divide must be redone. This new Montana MUST reflect that there is no longer the “Montana” we once knew. Create with caution, mind the two distinct peoples, and don’t hurt anyone’s feelings.
Lucy Morell-Gengler
I would prefer Lewis and Clark county - particularly Helena be placed in the western district.
Eric Grove
I’m a lifelong Montanan from Helena and to put Helena in the same district as the rural trade centers of Great Falls and Billings makes no sense. An entirely different community, both in culture and values. Belongs in the western district.
Garth Neuffer
While this new map does a decent job of keeping most counties intact (including mine, Gallatin County) and it also includes two reservations in the Western district, I think Map #11 is the best of all the maps at keeping communities of interest together (including Gallatin and Park Counties) and providing for a competitive district in the West. No doubt this is why Map #11 has so many positive comments from Montanans who care about fair representation and dialing down the corrosive political divisiveness plaguing much of our nation. Montanans are better than that. Let's stick with the plan that best represents our common ground, common interests and common sense. Map #11 should be a keeper. Thanks for all your hard work on this!
James Gomolka
It makes no sense to put any part of Bozeman in the western district. Any attempt to do so is gerrymandering as this map clearly is. It is not compact and does not group areas with similar issues.
Sharon S Patton-Griffin
This map is horrible and the whole process has become a farce after listening to the hearing today. The rest of us did not have the re-warning to get organized and get a bus to come to Helena. This hearing makes this process look like a Republican-manipulated game with people who didn't have prior knowledge and Derek Skees to organize us. How could you do this? Which map won the first "round"? Why are we doing this again unless it is to make it look like all Mt want Map 1.
Jeannine M Cozzens
I believe each map under consideration should be competitive; this one IS NOT.
Sue Beland
This map puts Helena and Park County in the eastern district which disenfranchises large segments of Montana voters and, therefore, suppresses free speech.
Gail Waldby
This map splits Pondera County and is not competitive (Cook PVI Score of R+6.5).
John Wright
The City of Helena has strong economic ties with Jefferson County and this map keeps them intact.
John Wright
Pondera County is divided correctly and Gallatin County remains whole with this map. Kalispell belongs in western Montana because of its economic importance in the region. I would recommend only using the 2016 Montana Gubernatorial, with the 2018 and 2020 Montana U.S. Senate race results to determine the competitiveness of the proposed districts since they had the strongest Democratic candidates. The southern part of Cascade County has economic ties with Lewis and Clark County and travel to the west of Helena is more difficult because of McDonald Pass, especially in the winter months. There are gates on I-90 near Livingston because of frequent poor road conditions to Bozeman during the winter months.