Republican lawmakers in Harrisburg have finally released their redrawn state legislative districts and congressional districts. The once-a-decade process of redistricting is mandated by the Constitution. The party in power in the state redraws districts to maintain or increase its political power. So, the latest redistricting exercise has been done by Republicans, who control the state House, Senate and governorship.

Democrats complain that the proposed changes are politically motivated. Republicans say they are fair.

The new district map could be better, less partisan. It also could be worse. No matter how it is drawn, there will be winners and losers.

If Democrats were the party in power, the lines would be different — and Republicans would be complaining about unfairness and partisanship. And they would be right, just as Democrats are now.

One challenge that this round of redistricting had to accommodate is the loss of one congressional seat, due to Pennsylvania’s population having grown more slowly than other states’ between the 2000 and 2010 census counts. Western Pennsylvania grew more slowly than the Philadelphia area, so a district in this end of the state was cut.

With Republicans in control, the new map appears to benefit the GOP at the expense of Democrats.

The proposed new district maps, like earlier maps, contain some convoluted districts. Some boundary changes are necessary to maintain equal population levels but, more often than not, boundary changes are designed to carve out — or include — more Republicans or more Democrats to create safe districts for the party in power. It’s an inherently political process.

When it’s abused, redistricting is called gerrymandering, a name that dates back to 1812 when a Massachusetts senatorial district was drawn in a distorted way. The district was approved by Gov. Elbridge Gerry and was said to look like a salamander, giving birth to the term “gerrymander.”

The latest proposed legislative map offered by Republicans could have been worse —and was worse. An earlier draft had a gerrymandered district wrapping around Harrisburg in a “C” shape. That was changed.

Still, Democrats have said some new districts look like an oil spill or even roadkill. Looking at the proposed map does trigger some head-scratching.

Redistricting reverses the old grade school civics lesson about voters choosing politicians. With partisan redistricting, politicians choose their voters, reducing competition and making safe seats.

When politicians do the redistricting, it’s all about incumbent protection, not serving the public. That’s why the process should be taken out of politicians’ hands.

Before the 2020 census arrives, Pennsylvanians should press to have redistricting duties shifted to a nonpartisan commission, as is done in a handful of other states.

California, the most recent state to adopt a nonpartisan redistricting process, achieved that shift through voter referendum. But in Pennsylvania that will not work. A constitutional convention is the only way to take redistricting away from politicians in this state.

It will take intense political pressure from voters for non-partisan redistricting to come to Pennsylvania; politicians won’t want to give up the power. But voters should demand this basic reform. It’s overdue to take this important function out of the hands of self-serving politicians.

Taking redistricting away from lawmakers could have the added benefit of reducing their workload. Because redistricting is so critical for maintaining or enhancing political power for 10 years, it’s a top priority for political leaders. Some observers have argued that the failure of the state Legislature to get much accomplished this year is related to leadership’s preoccupation with redistricting.

Voters need to understand what redistricting is and how it works. More people should realize that politicians draw lines for political purposes and to protect incumbents. Nonpartisan commissions are more likely to create competitive districts, a rarity in most states — and where votes really matter.

The new maps drawn by state Republicans could be better, and maybe could be worse. But they are clearly partisan and should motivate voters to have a nonpartisan commission in place by the time the 2020 census takes place.