When the state Supreme Court reviewed a new Pennsylvania redistricting plan recently that would govern legislative elections for most of the next decade, a key topic of conversation was the state constitution.
Lawyers for many of the dozen challengers said the Republican-controlled commission's latest plan still calls for too many splits of counties, municipalities and wards to satisfy the constitution's requirement that divisions be voided unless "absolutely necessary."
They also say that the plan for 203 House districts and 50 Senate districts did not go far enough in reshaping boundaries that were previously ruled insufficiently compact and contiguous previously.
In other words, the redistricting commission is being accused of redrawing boundaries with politics rather than practicality or the constitution in mind.
That's not breaking news. Both parties have been known to get political when they have a chance to redraw redistricting boundaries.
But it's still discouraging news.
It's left for the state's high court to decide whether this redistricting plan meets constitutional requirements.
In the meantime, wouldn't it be nice someday to have a redistricting map that is based on practical geography and demographics rather than perceived political advantage?
We dream of such a day.