State redistricting would be affected in a constitutional amendment proposed Tuesday, which would prohibit incarcerated felons from being included in certain Wisconsin census counts.

The Assembly Committee on Elections and Campaign Reform held a public hearing Tuesday to discuss the newly proposed amendment.

Rep. Fred Kessler, D-Milwaukee, one of the resolution’s sponsors, said the amendment would make it so incarcerated felons would not be counted in cases where census numbers are used for redistricting legislative, county, city and school districts.

Kessler said he believes it is “fundamentally unfair” that imprisoned felons are used in census counts in districts used to select elective officers because they cannot vote or take part in a democracy.

“The appropriate way is to not count people unless they have the right to vote,” Kessler said. “My view continues to be, if we let them vote they should be counted; if they’re not allowed to vote, they shouldn’t be counted.”

Kessler said this is cause for concern because many districts in Wisconsin have substantial prison populations. If the prisoners are counted for redistricting purposes, then people living in those communities who have not been incarcerated have a disproportionate weight in their votes.

Andrea Kaminski, executive director of the Wisconsin League of Women Voters, agreed the resolution would fix an unfair system.

“It results in an inflated level of representation for residents in those districts,” Kaminski said. “State prisoners don’t use local services such as streets, fire or police, nor may they vote or run for office.”

Kaminski added the resolution would be an important step forward in Wisconsin for achieving equality in districts.

University of Wisconsin political science professor David Canon said he believes this amendment is targeted at communities with large prison populations that are being unfairly represented.

Canon gave the analogy of a state where every legislative district is comprised of 100 people, but in one of the districts, 10 of those people are incarcerated felons. That would mean the other 90 people in that district would have the same amount of weight to their votes as 100 people in another district.

According to Canon, New York City recently implemented a similar measure, which prohibits imprisoned felons from being counted in the districts they are incarcerated in, but does allow them to be counted in their home districts, which usually tend to be larger cities.

Canon added the Wisconsin amendment could be seen as more neutral than New York’s because it does not favor rural communities or larger cities, but just refuses to count imprisoned felons in any case.

“Personally I can’t see any arguments for why you wouldn’t want to do this,” Canon said. “It’s more fair just to not count them because rural voters are being advantaged now.”

Canon said some counterarguments might be to say that prisons put an economic burden on the counties they are located in; however, he sees this as a weak argument.

“Prisons actually do provide jobs and they act as pretty good for communities where they’re located. It’s not local taxpayers paying for prisons, they’re paid for equally by residents of the state,” Canon said.