We affirm, as does the Constitution of the State of Utah, that “all political power is inherent in the people.”

Utah lawmakers have lost sight of this north star in many ways, but none less apparent than the map redistricting tug-of-war with the people of Utah. In response to Judge Gibson upholding Proposition 4, Mike Lee said, “the judge is replacing the will of elected lawmakers with there [sic] own policy preferences,” showing his and other lawmakers’ warped belief that their will reigns supreme over that of their constituents.

Proposition 4 was a clear, lawful expression of the will of the people and its restoration was not only right, but constitutionally required.

Speak out on the new maps.

In accordance with Judge Gibson’s ruling, several new maps have been drawn for consideration and a period for public commentary is open until Monday, October 6th. You can leave comments in favor of or opposed to any of the maps.

For their apparent ability to reintroduce some competition in some districts, we recommend supporting Map B proposed by the Legislature, and the Escamilla Owens Map proposed by state Democrats. We also encourage you to vote against Map C, which is supported by the state GOP because it is least competitive and most likely to maintain the status quo with secure Republican seats.
(see also links to Map A, Map D, and Map E).

We hope someday to see true independent maps drawn up by an independent body comprised of those with no stake in the outcomes.

Why does competitiveness matter?

True to our mission at Moderates of Utah, we favor outcomes most likely to lead to moderate outcomes. When congressional seats are a sure bet for one party or another, that favors candidates at the extremes. When seats are competitive, candidates must appeal to a broader cohort of voters. To win votes from the opposing party, they need to carry a more moderate message, resulting in candidates more representative of the average Utahn.