In most states, including Pennsylvania, the once-a-decade process of redrawing legislative and congressional districts is partisan, with the party in power redrawing district boundaries to create safe seats for its members and trying to knock off incumbents in the other party by that party’s voters with creative line drawing.

The 2011 redistricting plans drawn up by state Republicans are pretty much as expected. At both the legislative level and congressional level, the proposed map changes make some seats safer for Republicans, while making formerly Democratic seats more vulnerable.

The congressional map also pits two Democratic congressmen against one another in Southwestern Pennsylvania, reflecting the fact that the state is losing one seat in Congress because other states grew faster from 2000 to 2010.

That same map also splits Erie County between two congressional districts. The impact of that change is expected to make it harder for someone from Erie to get elected to Congress, something objected to by both Democrats and Republicans in that city.

And when it comes to dividing up a county, the proposed legislative map would have seven state representatives, each having a small piece of Butler County. Most observers say carving up a county into seven pieces dilutes the influence of the county in the General Assembly. Instead of one or two state representatives with a large constituency in Butler County the new plan will have seven lawmakers, with each one having a small part of their district extending into Butler County. They are less likely to indentify with Butler County in that scenario.

The preliminary versions of the legislative maps were released in the fall. After about a monthlong comment period, various changes, a few substantive and many minor or technical, were made.

The release of the congressional map plan, which was delayed several times, was finally revealed last week. Then, it was on a fast track — approved by the state Senate within 24 hours and with House approval expected within days. Because of the time crunch, created by Republicans, there could be no meaningful public feedback.

In addition to being drawn to benefit Republicans — as expected, and in the same way that Democrats would redraw lines to benefit their party if they were in control — the congressional maps were released at the last minute, making any changes virtually impossible.

So, Republicans hit Democrats with a one-two punch. First, partisan interests appear to have dictated district boundaries, and then the last-minute rollout reduced opportunities for public feedback or changes.

Earlier this year, several public hearings were held regarding redistricting. Republicans suggested that this time the process would be more transparent and would include public comments. But by having public comment meetings before there were any redrawn maps to comment on suggests the public hearings were not meaningful.

Splitting Erie County will make it harder for an Erie resident to represent the county in Congress. By also adding all of Butler County to the 3rd District, now represented by Republican Mike Kelly, a Butler resident, the power base shifts south, benefiting Butler County at the expense of Erie County.

Democrat and Erie resident Kathy Dahlkemper, who represented the 3rd District before being defeated by Kelly, was correct when she commented on the latest redistricting plan, saying “Both parties do this. If the Democrats were in the majority and there were a Democratic governor, they would be working ways to make the districts more favorable to Democrats across the state.”

She’s right. Both parties abuse the redistricting process. That’s why it should be handled by a nonpartisan commission beyond the influence of the state Legislature. But that kind of change requires changing the state constitution. It’s a challenge and one that means taking on politicians’ self-interest. But it’s worth the effort.

Since it happens only once a decade, redistricting only makes headlines for a short time. That’s unfortunate because redistricting abuse, known as gerrymandering, lets politicians chose the voters they want, reducing competition. That reduces choice and makes government more divided, more partisan and less democratic. And all that discourages voters and increases apathy — just what incumbents prefer.

The next time redistricting is done — after the 2020 census, the process should be out of the hands of politicians — of both parties. Pennsylvania should join the handful of states making redistricting more about voters and less about politicians and incumbent protection.