I served two terms in the Louisiana House of Representatives as an Independent. Being a member of the "no party" party gave me a unique perspective on the legislative process. I often joked that there "ain't no party like no party," and the line usually got a laugh. But there was truth behind the humor. Free from party expectations, I was able to evaluate legislation based on its merits rather than whether it came from Republicans or Democrats.
That perspective is one reason Act 2 of the 2026 Regular Session concerns me.
Much of the public debate has focused on who benefits from Louisiana's new congressional map and whether the district lines are fair. Those are important questions. But I believe they distract from a larger problem that has plagued our politics for years.
The real problem is partisanship.
During my time in the Legislature, I attended caucus meetings and worked alongside members of both political parties. What I observed was often frustrating. Too much energy was spent maintaining party unity, counting votes and protecting political advantages. Too little energy was spent listening to opposing viewpoints, finding common ground and building consensus.
Redistricting has become a perfect example of that mindset.
Rather than viewing congressional maps as a way to ensure fair representation, both parties increasingly view them as tools to maximize political power. Every line becomes a battle. Every district becomes a strategy. Every election becomes a fight over who can gain an advantage before a single vote is cast.
That approach may help political parties win elections, but it does little to strengthen democracy.
When districts become heavily Republican or heavily Democratic, the most important election often becomes the party primary rather than the general election. Candidates have less incentive to appeal to a broad cross-section of voters and greater incentive to satisfy the most partisan voices within their own party. Over time, compromise becomes more difficult and political polarization becomes more severe.
The result is a legislature filled with members who are rewarded for being loyal Republicans or loyal Democrats rather than independent thinkers willing to work across party lines.
I witnessed that firsthand in Baton Rouge.
I encountered some great ideas over the years from Republicans and Democrats alike. The best solutions rarely belonged exclusively to either side. They emerged when lawmakers were willing to listen to one another and focus on solving problems rather than scoring political victories.
Unfortunately, the current redistricting debate sends the opposite message.
Many Louisianans look at the constant legal battles, shifting district lines and partisan maneuvering and conclude that politicians are choosing their voters rather than voters choosing their representatives. Whether that perception is entirely fair is almost beside the point. Public trust depends on people believing the process is fair, transparent and not constantly manipulated for political gain.
When that trust erodes, cynicism grows. Citizens disengage. Voter participation declines. Confidence in government weakens.
As someone who served outside the two-party system, it is disappointing to watch both parties continue to treat redistricting as a political weapon rather than an opportunity to strengthen public confidence in our institutions. Fair representation should matter more than partisan advantage. Public trust should matter more than gaining or protecting a seat in Congress.
Joe Marino III
Provided photo
Louisiana deserves better than another round of political warfare over district maps. We need leaders who are willing to place the long-term health of our democracy ahead of short-term political gains.
The goal of redistricting should not be to help one party win. It should be ensuring that voters have confidence that their voices matter and that elections remain competitive, meaningful and fair.
Without that trust, no map will ever be good enough.