I write today on an urgent issue — the names of our state districts are awful. They are interchangeable, non-descriptive, and so unmoored from community that pretty much nobody remembers theirs. Uninvolved citizens have no idea of theirs as they are so generic, and active citizens struggle to keep straight these nearly identical names that follow no evident rhyme of reason. So I’m taking a bold stand on a non-existent issue — we need to come up with better names for our senate districts.
This is inspired by our recent Democratic convention of course, where people are seated by Senate district. And all the day one saw politically active people checking their own credentials to see where they sat. I won’t say who, but I did speak to one state representative who was confidently wandering around the wrong district (had the names reversed). And heaven help you if you’re actually looking for someone. Is so-and-so in “Norfolk and Plymouth”, or “Plymouth and Norfolk”? Or perhaps their town is in “Norfolk, Bristol, and Plymouth”. If you’re from Middlesex County, you could be in one of fourteen districts, thrown in with any combination of other county names. And pity Senator Brewer, who I imagine carrying out bookmark-sized business cards to show that he represents “Worcester, Hampden, Hampshire and Franklin.”
We could just number them, I suppose, as Colorado, New Hampshire, and most others do. Give us another number to remember. I suppose that would make it easier to keep them straight, but not necessarily make them interesting. Instead, I propose to borrow the system of Quebec, wherein each district bears a name that mirrors the area’s history (Jacques-Cartier), geography (Deux-Montagnes), and culture (Notre Dame de Grace). You can see the list here. You learn a bit about the place, and don’t tend to forget them. Sure, you lose the vague sense of mapping that we have now — obviously, the “2nd Middlesex and Essex” isn’t in the Berkshires. But it’s not as if a “Mount Greylock” district is going to be on the coastline.
This could be a great civic project for students, as much as the educational hierarchy is willing to tolerate the instruction of civics. During a general election, people could vote on what name they want for their district. I don’t pretend this is an urgent priority, but for heaven’s sake, Massachusetts can do better than these opaque amalgams of dying governments in our system. Submitted for your consideration.
My district would change from “Worcester-Norfolk” to Blackstone Valley under such a scenario – much better!
I was a “greeter whip” for Warren at the convention, so I was stationed in front of my district, welcoming the delegates as they arrived and took their seats. I can’t tell you how many confused delegates approached me and asked where their district was, but at least I had a map and I was able to point them on their way. I wonder if the signage should also list out the town names, that would certainly help people to know they’re in the right spot.
I found a friendly face at one area where they weren’t backed up with work and they pointed me to the correct area.
And in our copious free time between activities, we were joking about how many of us were new. Someone else in the group pointed out that it probably meant everyone who’d been there before now knew better….
In other words for example, instead of having a Middlesex & Worcester AND a Worcester & Middlesex, they could be 1MW and 2MW. Ditto for the Plymouth/Bristol combination.
BTW, Sabutai, did you intend to make your point by refering to “2nd Middlesex and Essex”, which doesn’t exist? It is the 2nd Essex and Middlesex, thank you very much!:)
As a Belmont resident, I’m in the Second Suffolk & Middlesex district (ably represented by Will Brownsberger). But I wonder about the Cambridge residents who might be in the First Suffolk & Middlesex district or in the Middlesex & Suffolk district. I guess this is an improvement on the prior map, which had a Middlesex & Suffolk district and a Suffolk & Middlesex district.
My guess is that the counties are listed in order by population in the district. So “Second Suffolk & Middlesex” means that this is the second of two districts where Suffolk county residents outnumber Middlesex county residents. Seems like a logical way to name the districts, but just numbering the districts would be more user-friendly.
If people want more descriptive names, “Second Suffolk & Middlesex” would need a name that sums up Belmont, Watertown, Brighton (but not Allston), Fenway, and Back Bay — good luck with that.
So they seated Boston/Ward 4 in the Second Suffolk senate district. Which was cool since we got to meet the nice folks from the JP wards, instead of hanging with my former peeps from A/B. Of course, the redistricting is making a hash of it all anyway. I like the geographic naming. Maybe they should be antique geographic names from colonial days, using the antique spellings.
So many people from Wards 4 & 5 came to the 2nd Suffolk & Middlesex confused as to where they were supposed to be. I will seriously go into a rant if I don’t stop myself about this issue… Why the party didn’t just either leave the wards split or put the actual district people were supposed to sit in on the credentials, I’ll never know.
…and I started to try, but maybe just call them by the names of the Senators.
…every time a new senator was elected? Sorry, that’s not very practical.
Actually, the districts are numbered. Fourth Middlesex, in the world of voter extracts, is SD 36. Apparently, the simple two-digit number is much easier for the data managers who maintain the state’s voter lists.
Having grown up in New York, the numbered districts have a sense of order. District 1 starts on the far east end of Long Island, District 62 is north of Niagara Falls, on Lake Ontario and the Canadian border. You can get a sense of where a district is based on the number; the middle of the numbering scheme (31) includes the upper west side of Manhattan and along the Hudson into the Bronx, 36 is in The Bronx, and the numbers increase as you head north along the Hudson River.
But I like the names for our districts. Cape and Islands is descriptive. Fourth Middlesex is about as descriptive as you can be for a county with 1.5 million people.
My pushback? Political junkies (those of us who attend conventions) should know our political address. For those of us who may not know the address, the convention credentials had the district beautifully printed under our names. (If we had a sufficient supply of lanyards, the whips and greeters may have actually been able to see this information). However, under the Sabutai-Quebec naming scheme, some districts would be more challenging to name than others. Fourth Middlesex runs from Arlington through half of Lexington, and also contains Woburn, Burlington, and Billerica. What would you name this district? It’s kind of difficult to come up with a geographic name or theme that is consistent with Arlington and Billerica.
Oh wait, that doesn’t work unless the districts are also drawn to represent watersheds.
How would that be? Representatives of communities with a common ecosystem? I can see a lot of advantages.
Besides, “Mystic and Alewife” would be a cool name for a district.
Couldn’t we just name each district for its best tavern?
And then, every off-year election could have an election on which is best. Imagine how turnout would rocket.
I vote for the Turtle Tavern in Milford – come on out for Drinking Liberally, the second and fourth Wednesday every month at the Turtle, 72 Main St, Milford, right next door to town hall!
This is an idea of genius! And considering how much politics gets conducted in local watering holes, it’s incredibly practical, as well.
…was to name each district after a famous person from the district.