Forward Party State Sen. Daniel Thatcher has proposed a new congressional redistricting map for Utah, drawing from a plan he submitted in a previous cycle. The Utah Forward Party will also host public forums to gather feedback on the process.
According to KUER 90.1, Thatcher, who joined the Forward Party this year, unveiled the map on September 17 at the state capitol. His proposal comes amid a court-mandated redistricting process following an August ruling that struck down Utah’s 2021 congressional boundaries. The ruling stemmed from a lawsuit arguing the map failed to comply with Proposition 4, a 2018 ballot initiative aimed at curbing gerrymandering.
Thatcher originally drew the map during the 2021 redistricting cycle. He said it prioritizes compact districts and keeping counties intact while ignoring partisan voting data and focusing on equal population distribution. According to details, his plan keeps 25 of Utah’s 29 counties whole while splitting Salt Lake, Utah, Weber and Davis counties.
Like the invalidated 2021 map, Thatcher’s proposal also divides Salt Lake County among all four congressional districts. That approach also drew criticism in the previous process for diluting the influence of the state’s largest Democratic-leaning area. In response, Thatcher said the division is unavoidable because of population size and argued his lines were drawn without regard to voting patterns.
Phil Boileau, Executive Director of the Utah Forward Party, said the party is not endorsing Thatcher’s proposal but supports his effort to offer alternatives. He added that the party plans to host public forums to gather feedback.
Under the court’s schedule, the Legislature must release its proposed map by September 25. Public comment will remain open for 10 days before a final vote during a special session on October 6. The approved map will be used for the 2026 election cycle.
An idea that I have mentioned before might help relieve some redistricting issues: Congressional districts ought to have a minimum size. IMO, a good minimum would be about 1,000 square miles, which is about the size of Rhode Island.
How would this affect redistricting? Rural districts would continue to be single member districts, which, IMO is okay because most rural areas tend to be demographically homogeneous over a large territory. Metropolitan areas could either have multi-member or overlay districts, which would allow for greater representational diversity in those more demographically heterogeneous areas.