BOSTON - For more than two centuries, Massachusetts has had the dubious distinction as the poster child of politically manipulated electoral districts.

But some persistent lawmakers are trying to get the birthplace of "Gerrymandering" to join an increasing number of states that limit legislators' power to redraw their own districts.

Legislation filed by state Sen. Richard Moore, D-Uxbridge, would create a seven-member commission to redraw electoral districts for state senators and representatives, and U.S. representatives.

"When we (the Legislature) do it ourselves, we usually do not come out looking pristine," Moore said. "It think it's important to provide a greater level of credibility with the public."

State Sen. Scott Brown, R-Wrentham, a co-signer of Moore's legislation, said he has seen the effects of politically motivated redistricting first-hand. His Norfolk, Bristol and Middlesex district stretches over 40 miles covering parts of 12 towns from Wayland to Attleboro. The map of the district resembles a sprawling salamander similar to the original "gerrymandered" district created by Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry in 1812.

"Going from Attleboro to Needham is a little nuts when I have to get there in 30 minutes, and sometimes it takes me an hour-and-a-half," Brown said. "Logistically, it's trying."

Brown has been joined by every other Republican in the Legislature in endorsing the new approach.

The Legislature redraws electoral districts ever 10 years to ensure they are roughly equal in size. Redistricting also is required to protect the rights of minority voters and avoid dividing communities as much as possible.

But it doesn't always work that way.

Massachusetts has been the subject of several high-profile court cases since its last round of redistricting following the 2000 Census.

In 2004, a panel of three federal judges found the state had violated the Voting Rights Act by redrawing districts to dilute the influence of minority voters. The state "sacrificed racial fairness to the voters on the altar of incumbency protection," the panel said.

Former House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran later pleaded guilty to obstructing justice by lying under oath during the investigation into the redistricting plan.

The court found that in Finneran's district, minority neighborhoods in Boston had been replaced with parts of predominantly white Milton.

Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts, a government watchdog group that helped design Moore's plan, says the present system "has it backwards." Redistricting is "currently about elected officials picking their voters when it should be about voters picking their elected officials," she said. "We want to turn it right-side up again."

Under Moore's legislation a redistricting commission would include:

A dean or professor of law or political science appointed by the governor.

A retired justice appointed by the attorney general.

An expert in civil rights law appointed the secretary of the commonwealth.

In addition, the House speaker, House minority leader, Senate president and Senate minority leader would each nominate three candidates, of whom one of each would be selected by the other three appointees.

The Legislature could reject the commission's plans, but after rejecting three separate proposals, the fourth would become law without a legislative vote.

Twelve states now use non-legislative commissions to redraw state legislative districts. They are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington.

Six states use commissions to draw congressional districts. They are Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, New Jersey and Washington.

Past efforts to change the redistricting process in Massachusetts have been unsuccessful. Moore filed a similar bill last year, but it did not pass the Legislature. And last month, the Committee on Election Laws voted not to endorse his latest proposal.

"There is a built-in institutional bias against giving up power," Moore said. "I'm hopeful that we have a shot with the statewide bill, but I'm not at all optimistic about the congressional redistricting bill."

Wilmot said there is renewed interest in the idea following high-profile litigation in Massachusetts and across the country, but concedes that creating an independent commission is a "tough sell."

"It's a pretty heady power to redraw districts," she said. "One does not give up power easily."

Wilmot said other factors complicate the effort to change the redistricting process in Massachusetts. Chief among them is the power of the legislators.

"We do have a very, very centralized Legislature," she said. "In general, if the legislative leaders don't like something, it's very hard to get it done."

But there also are arguments against special commissions. Some say that even if the Legislature ceded redistricting power to an independent commission, it would not solve all the state's redistricting problems.

For example, under Moore's proposal, five of the seven members would be appointed by positions currently held by Democrats, and that worries even Brown, who has signed on to the bill.

"My concern with all these independent commissions is how independent would they really be," said Brown, one of only five Republicans in the Senate. "I've never seen an commission that was totally independent."

Still, Brown and his fellow Republicans have shown strong support for the proposal. All 24 Republicans in the Legislature signed on as co-sponsors to identical legislation filed by House Minority Leader Brad Jones, R-North Reading.