Three States Passed Redistricting Reform on Nov. 2. What's the future of gerrymandering?

This may sound wierd... (1.50 / 2)

But I am in favor of redistricting in Alabama. I hope that the redistricting will abolish long held minority majority voting blocks. Most of you are wondering "What the HECK?!?!?!" Here is why:

Propping up minority majority voting blocks or districts are enabling the continued subjugation of one party or another, based soley on RACE, not political preference. While this practice may benefit the scale of minority representation by ensuring a black candidates electability, it also serves to de-value the voting blocks power of prescence. It is no big secret, those "safe Dem districts" do not recieve party wide attention or power, as they are not seen as a potential threat of losing them. In simple terms, "Why give concessions or put emphasis to district 7 funding if it is going to be a safe Dem vote no matter what?"

The continuation of minority majority voting blocks also acts to dumb down the political integrity of the voters contained within. If all they (we) know is to vote how we are told to vote, then the individual candidates qualifications and relation to voter means nothing. In simple terms, voters in minority majority blocks were told, "Vote for Sparks, not Davis". I do not believe voters in the minority majority districts even questioned "why?", but went along with it just because it is the way it has been done forever. And most certainly, the better candidate for Governor might not have seen his chance at becoming elected.

Minority Majority blocks are not only taken for granted, but they are used and abused as a tool for marginalization. If the powers to be say, "we support gambling", then it is certain that the minority majority blocks will support gambling, "just because".

On top of that, I do not think that successful and qualified black candidates will have any problem at all gaining nomination nowadays. The old arguement for minority majority districts was that they were needed to ensure black represenation of interest. For a long time, it was necessarily practiced and gave a positive result. However, with the softening of racial factors in society and the advancement of professional class of African Americans, the practice of developing minority majority voting blocks is no longer needed and only provides to hinder the integrity of the African American vote.

This is an honest opinion, and one I hold to be very true.

I think it better to do right, even if we suffer in so doing, than to incur the reproach of our consciences and posterity.
Robert E. Lee  

---

by: fundmaker @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 16:17:09 PM UTC

Let me add... (2.00 / 3)

It is also very insulting to me that those of us who live in the minority majority districts are "controlled" en' mass. Young people who I speak with may be eductated in math and science, but they are definately led by the nose like a field ox to vote this way or that way, just because. Lets force ourselves to educate our base by actual practice of learnining politics and the stances our potential representatives may take on our behalf. The only way to force this is to tear down the walls of class and race, placed on us so many years ago. These are definately not the JIM CROWE days, and we must begin playing ball in the 20th century.

I think it better to do right, even if we suffer in so doing, than to incur the reproach of our consciences and posterity.
Robert E. Lee  

---

by: fundmaker @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 16:25:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So racism is dead, but, in your book, blacks are too dumb to make electoral decisions for themselves. (3.00 / 1)

Sorry friend, but I have to strongly disagree with you. I have worked on the only campaign that I'm aware of in modern Alabama history where a minority Democratic candidate won in a majority white district. A week ago - once you had the higher turnout of a general election - he got voted out because he was perceived to be, in the words of one constituent I ran into on election day, "just another Democrat n*****."

I think that we need non-partisan commissions in charge of redistricting, but I also think that it's important to ensure some minority representation. It's possible to achieve both and it's possible to do it while utilizing data driven redistricting instead of the horse-trading that goes on today.

Lots of white Democrats want to put an end to minority-majority districts because "cracking" the black vote in our state's urban areas would theoretically throw a lot more Democratic votes into suburban districts that are currently not competitive. There might be circumstances where that's appropriate but I don't believe that it's fair to African-Americans to leave Alabama with a greatly reduced number of African-American leaders in the legislature.

It's also incredibly lazy for progressives to complain about groups like the ADC and New South being the reason for Artur Davis' loss in the governor's race. Barack Obama overcame the opposition of the ADC to win a supermajority of Alabama's black vote. There was nothing preventing Artur Davis from doing the same thing.

Black voters, like any other voters, want engagement from their political candidates. Part of the problem with a lot of white progressives that I have known is that they tend to perceive black voters as a massive bloc that does whatever Joe Reed tells them to do. Nothing could be further from the truth. Like every other community, there are internal divisions and local concerns that drive their voting behavior, especially in primaries. Unlike white Alabamians, black voters tend to make their general election decisions based on economic concerns rather than whatever the wedge issue of the day is. Usually, black voters don't vote for Republicans because a) they don't trust the Republicans to govern in an economically fair manner and b) because Republicans don't ask for their vote.

This is why you can have a rather wide disparity in record and views within the black caucus. You can have consistent progressive champions like Sen. Hank Sanders who has been perhaps the only consistent voice of economic liberalism in the Alabama Senate for a while alongside relatively conservative Senators like James Gordon. 

---

by: bluebearcat @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 01:02:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There has got to be a population based computer model... (4.00 / 2)

... that can draw largely block districts without taking into account skin color or anything else. That would be true representative democracy.

Do better.

Dale, I have to say you were right - mooncat

You're an entertainer son! -Parker Griffith

---

by: DaleJackson @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 16:22:26 PM UTC

For once... (4.00 / 1)

...I agree with you, Dale.  War and pestilence will follow.

---

by: Almoderate @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 16:51:27 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Any model that draws districts without considering (4.00 / 1)

The power relationships within the districts is just a model of corruption. 

Sorry, Dale, there's no representative democracy without democratic representation.

"The War in Iraq is not the disease. The War in Iraq is a symptom. Arrogance is the disease" - Bill Richardson

---

by: herding old cats @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 05:31:10 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wonder whether Charlie Crist... (4.00 / 1)

changed his mind on this political position, too?

Nevertheless, I'm surprised to see that the NAACP supported the Florida effort.  Generally, the NAACP leadership has supported (or not opposed) gerrymandered districts to protect majority-minority districts.  What gives in this case?

As for redistricting, unless we give up the ideal of affirmative-action in congressional representation, gerrymandering will continue to occur.  Is the Seventh District willing to give up its lock on a minority in that seat?  Does its constiuents want to make the district competitive?  If so, it's a new day in Alabama, but I expect any effort in that direction will wind up in litigation in federal court.

---

by: bhbhm @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 21:42:43 PM UTC

the NAACP support caught my eye as well (4.00 / 1)

I'm hoping to get the time in the next few days to do more research about how the campaigns were run in California and Minnesota.  It was quite the battle in Florida and obviously the initiatives attracted bipartisan support from voters - just as they had stiff opposition from elected officials and political parties.

There are no "safe" Republican districts. You can run but you can't hide.  - Rahm Emmanuel

---

by: countrycat @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 22:15:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Courts have no say unless... (4.00 / 1)

Bhbhbh,,, You mentioned that Alabama reduction of black majority voting blocks might end up in court. Well, along with the redistricting comes a whole new set of laws to support the redistricting, all which will be drafted in the governors office and sent down to the house for review, amendment and back up again. The legislature will define the redistricting well enough that outside of an activist judge getting hold of it, the law will hold. Also, the NAACP has a new stance on the old issue of "plantation mentality". For the last few years, NAACP has accepted that hemming up black votes to just a few districts is also acting to suppress the vote, as a whole. NAACP will and should support the same stance in Alabama, for the very reasons I stated in my first post in this article.

 

I think it better to do right, even if we suffer in so doing, than to incur the reproach of our consciences and posterity.
Robert E. Lee  

---

by: fundmaker @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 22:23:15 PM UTC

"Hemming up" black voters (4.00 / 3)

Ghettoization.  Use spiderlike district maps to place all the black voters in a minimum number of districts.  Yes, that virtually guarantees election of black representatives, but it is also makes it easier to marginalize those representatives -- how many black Democrats had leadership positions in the Alabama Legislature?  And the implicit assumption is that minority candidates can only win in a heavily minority district -- these districts typically aren't 48-52% African American.  A whopping 63% of voters in Alabama's 7th district are AA.  Yes, I know Alabama doesn't have a great record of electing minority candidates outside these special districts, but as we saw with Davis, it's very hard for candidates within heavily minority districts to run on positions that appeal to the broader electorate -- and that guarantees they'll always be marginalized and beaten if they seek to move outside their gerrymandered district.

There's an argument that racially gerrymandered districts are one reason we see so very few black politicians elected to the US Senate or governorships.

The real cause of the limited number of blacks in Congress is not racism, but racial gerrymandering, in which black voters are concentrated in Congressional, and other, political subdivisions where blacks predominate (instead of designing, planning, or fashioning a district to follow national geographical and institutional boundaries). This form of gerrymandering supported by national Democrats and a few moderate Republicans has created over 39 Congressional districts that are predominately African American. To be more precise, 25 or [of?] 39 districts where blacks now have Congressional seats have outright black majority populations.

    The rule behind gerrymandering is that only “safe” predominately black districts could guarantee the election of blacks to Congress because of protracted racism among whites and Hispanic voters. 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 13:54:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mooncat, thank you... (4.00 / 2)

Mooncat, your supporting article expanded on the point I wished to make. The first reaction from a traditional progressive or liberal is to "hate" on my comments on the matter. But thank you for reading what I have written and at least understanding that I am promoting equality, not Jim Crowe laws.

I think that today, Democrats must take an honest look at the way we have treated blacks, especially in Southern States.

Sadly, this is a message that must be pressed upon ourselves, otherwise, nothing will change. I was reading about two new black congressman who were elected this year. Both are Republicans! ?!?!?

The Black Caucus made sure to give them the invite. One of the incoming freshman Congressman turned the invite down. The other one, Congressman elect WEST, accepted the invite on the basis that he intends to change the old mindset of African Americans to a modern and competitive mentality. Anyone reading, please google his comments on the issue.

 

 

I think it better to do right, even if we suffer in so doing, than to incur the reproach of our consciences and posterity.
Robert E. Lee  

---

by: fundmaker @ Wed Nov 10, 2010 at 18:20:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

i live with a redistricting commission... (4.00 / 2)

...in washington, and we've had it for a long time (it began in 1983, after a "legislatively referred constitutional amendment" vote in 1982), and it's been a pretty good process--and we don't have any "funny" districts, either, which i think probably do create a situation that makes it even harder for a new candidate to emerge.

"...i have to quote marx here: groucho and chico were having a debate..." --barney frank

---

by: fake consultant @ Mon Nov 08, 2010 at 23:00:59 PM UTC

Gerrymandered districts are the root of most of the current insanity (4.00 / 2)

This "safe" district crap is the reason politicians feel free to write off the wishes or opinions of roughly half the electorate -- their own district is purposely drawn with very few of the "other half" in it.  In fact, they are forced to become more and more extreme in their statements and votes in order to avoid a primary challenge.  The result?  Moderates are an endangered species and Congress/democracy is being poisoned by partisanship.

It warms my heart to see a few states taking steps to rein in the crazy redistricting deals -- and the ones mentioned are big states, too, with a lot of representatives.  Maybe anti-gerrymandering forces will go after Texas next.  After the three ring circus in 2003, they should be the poster child for redistricting reform.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 13:20:44 PM UTC

"Communities of common interest" (4.00 / 2)

Reform opponents in Florida wanted to ...

allow lawmakers to continue basing districts on "communities of common interest."

Which is another way to insure that they could choose their voters instead of the other way around.  Interestingly, similar language is being used by Alabama Representative Mike Rogers to talk about congressional redistricting.

Rogers, a former member of the Alabama Legislature who is familiar with the redistricting process at both levels, said he wants the map to bring consistency and keep similar communities together.

  "People have a right to expect to maintain the homogeneous nature their district has," Rogers said. "They develop relationships with their member of Congress and it's unfair to move them around like political pawns to hurt or help somebody." 

Rogers, who was elected in 2002, is using the "voters develop relationships with their member of Congress" excuse to justify moving St. Clair county and part of Coosa county out of the 6th cd and into his own.  He's never represented those voters, but he's arguing that they have some kind of "relationship" with him and so are a better fit in his district than in the 6th.  Pardon me, but Mike Rogers is really just after some heavily Republican areas to shore up his re-election prospects.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 14:09:19 PM UTC

In Minnesota (4.00 / 2)

the vote was a Minneapolis vote that affected city offices.  But there's an effort in the state to redesign the whole process.  Since 1970, every redistricting plan in MN has ended up in court and districts have been drawn up by judges.

Groups such as the League of Women Voters, Common Cause, and other citiens' groups are working with the University of Minnesota to draw up a plan for redistricting reform.

Their problem?  Getting the Minnesota Legislature to put it on the ballot.  :-)

There are no "safe" Republican districts. You can run but you can't hide.  - Rahm Emmanuel

---

by: countrycat @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 14:43:05 PM UTC

Problem getting the legislature to put it on the ballot (4.00 / 1)

Well, Minnesota is in good company!  I'm sure legislatures all over the country would love to have the freedom to draw those lines wherever suits them so they can carefully exclude a potential primary opponent, get rid of a neighborhood that leans toward the other party and otherwise guarantee their own re-election years before voters even think of casting a ballot. 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Tue Nov 09, 2010 at 15:13:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]