Redistricting Committees meet tomorrow to move maps forward. Rep. Tom Pischke declares Senate map “will be presumed unconsitutional.”

The Senate and House Redistricting Committees are both moving forward tomorrow with updated maps which they’ll vote on. The updated “Blackbird 2.0” map is the most likely to move forward in the Senate, with the updated “Eagle 2.1″ map proposed by Troy Heinert most likely to go by the wayside.  In case you’re wondering what Blackbird currently looks like, I’ve taken screenshots for your review below:

The House Redistricting Committee will likely move their (ironically named) map “Grouse 2.0” forward.

At least one House member is expressing his confidence in the House map over that of the Senate, blaring a message of my map is better than your map, as State Representative Tom Pischke is on Facebook tonight claiming that the Senate’s map will be found unconstitutional:

This would be the same House member that thought last election Liz May would be a truer Republican than Dusty Johnson, so I’ll reserve judgement on his legal acumen until a later date.  Although, I am glad he’s scrounged up some concern over what South Dakota’s Native American population would like to see.

We’ll see which of the maps is able to go the distance. Stay Tuned.

9 thoughts on “Redistricting Committees meet tomorrow to move maps forward. Rep. Tom Pischke declares Senate map “will be presumed unconsitutional.””

  1. No way the mad dad knows what that word means. Unconstitutional that is. Joel Koskan probably doesn’t know either but he will keep coming to the capitol with his briefcase.

    1. Joel Koskan doesn’t have a briefcase and probably understands the constitution, including the 14th and 15th amendments, better than yourself.

  2. Pischke is among the least knowledgeable people to ever serve in Pierre, so his opinion is worth the same as his word: nothing.

  3. Self-serving lawmakers who openly lobby on social media and the press for one map over another provide all the more proof why an independent redistricting commission is necessary going forward.

  4. Under what legal theory, Mr. Pischke? And what precedent do you have supporting such a claim?

  5. Pischke has found a second issue….his own self preservation; the mad dad stuff now this….

Comments are closed.