Gerrymandering

[jclay]

Gerrymandering isn't new but, yet again like peeling an onion, the more I read and realize the more concerned I am; frightened, really. I watched it happen to the panhandle congressional districts where I live. My middle brother managed the small team that developed Florida's first GIS system for state redistricting a couple of decades ago, and watched it get gratuitously abused by the Republican Party.

The lead paragraphs in the linked Guardian article are these, and our democratic institutions are in trouble. I suggest that concerned folks start volunteering $ and/or time to Stacey Abram's Fair Fight campaign and similar. I don't think it's a stretch to believe that the Republican Party intends to gerrymander districts to the point that it will be virtually impossible to defeat them; I've heard it before and I'm still hearing it. We are approaching what I think is the point of no return. I know that I haven't done enough and I need to change that. I hope others will seriously consider doing the same. And for those who are already doing meaningful work, thanks.

In Washington, the real insiders know that the true outrages are what’s perfectly legal and that it’s simply a gaffe when someone accidentally blurts out something honest.

And so it barely made a ripple last week when a Texas congressman (and Donald Trump’s former White House physician) said aloud what’s supposed to be kept to a backroom whisper: Republicans intend to retake the US House of Representatives in 2022 through gerrymandering.

“We have redistricting coming up and the Republicans control most of that process in most of the states around the country,” Representative Ronny Jackson told a conference of religious conservatives. “That alone should get us the majority back.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...UFlOUFKi0LNY-c

[Too Tall]

Thanks for this, I'd love the discussion.

Ronnie Jackson, oh man. hahahahaha Sorry it is hard to take anything he says seriously given his recent history.

[jclay]

Ronnie Jackson, oh man. hahahahaha Sorry it is hard to take anything he says seriously given his recent history.

I understand your reaction to that guy, Trump and everybody else associated with them but don't sell them short. Don't ever sell your opponents short. That's a sure way to have your ass handed to you. Jan 6 comes to mind...and a hell of a lot worse.

The Republican Party has been extremely effective in stonewalling progress for decades, certainly since economist James Buchanan's work. I want to give examples but I wouldn't know where to start; I mean, where do you start to count the grains of sand on a beach? But I'll pick two, right here:

When DeSantis and the Florida Legislature manage to pass legislation that prohibits teaching the truth about our history as it relates to racism and genocide, when they accuse universities of "indoctrinating" students and creating intellectually repressive environments while they pass legislation to do exactly that....to limit study to only the social and economic perspectives to which they subscribe....and a large enough percentage of the population buys the lies, we're in a heap of trouble.

The Florida legislature has manage to gerrymander my congressional district such that it's virtually impossible for anybody but a social conservative like Neal Dunn to be competitive. It was planned, executed and it succeeded, and all of it was in plain sight at the time. The Republican legislatures controlling critical states have the power to rig their voting districts to incredible advantage and they're doing it in the sunshine, in plain sight. They have the power to restrict voting to favorable demographics, and they're doing it in plain sight, without any compunction.

This really is how civilizations are lost.

[Too Tall]

This is also how Democracy rolls with the punches. Without a reason' to rise for occasion minority rule has a shot. The game is far from lost.

Oh Ronnie really is a stumbling fool. He should do more public speaking.

[theflashunc]

The VRA was gutted and gerrymandering is coming along with significant voting restrictions in states where the GOP controls the statehouse without real intervention from the Democrats in Congress.

It's pretty clear the GOP is laying all their bets on minoritarian rule, having given up on trying to win on the merits of policy. So instead just rig the system. Its Jim Crow redux, yet in some ways worse when you pair it with the emerging GOP notion -- supported by these nonsense audits -- that any election they do not win can be overturned or is viewed as inherently illegitimate.

I remember living in Charlotte and having the same Representative in Congress as my dad and step-mom, who lived 80 miles away, in a district that just cherry picked left-leaning districts from cities along the I-85 corridor.

[jclay]

This is also how Democracy rolls with the punches. Without a reason' to rise for occasion minority rule has a shot. The game is far from lost.

Oh Ronnie really is a stumbling fool. He should do more public speaking.

I hope you're right but I think you underestimate the gravity of what's happening.

Gerrymandering and targeted voter hindrance at the scale we're seeing and in the current political/social context don't constitute democracy's rolling with the punches in my view.

[Too Tall]

I hope you're right but I think you underestimate the gravity of what's happening.

Gerrymandering and targeted voter hindrance at the scale we're seeing and in the current political/social context don't constitute democracy's rolling with the punches in my view.

I'm no Polly Anna trust me. There are going to be some acute challenges. Legal challenges notwithstanding the majority (voters) will be done. Fence sitting is so 2017.

[rec head]

For some reason gerrymandering has always infuriated me more than the other fucked up electoral things we do. I don't know why it stands out. Maybe because voting districts seem like common sense and they destroy it and democracy when they gerrymander?

[Sino]

1) This is a totally bipartisan issue. Both sides do it, and yes, it's ridiculous and an assault on the republic.

2) You're so terrified about this? I'd think if you really cared about the "republic" things like the following would send your spidey sense tingling if you are worried about a party setting themselves up for a totalitarian takeover:

Making D.C. a state (really the ultimate gerrymander),
stacking the Supreme Court,
eliminating the filibuster,
creating a national police force (ie- gestapo),
"F-15s and nukes" to deal with their own citizens,
no voter ID necessary,
a border disaster (yes, it is a disaster),
skyrocketing inflation (admittedly, that one is a shared responsibility, but asking for more $ at this point is incredibly irresponsible)


and hmm, what else? I don't know what the left leaning equivalent is to inforwars, but man did you ever drink the koolaide.

[EDS]

I hope you're right but I think you underestimate the gravity of what's happening.

Gerrymandering and targeted voter hindrance at the scale we're seeing and in the current political/social context don't constitute democracy's rolling with the punches in my view.

The gerrymandering started a long time ago so in many respects it has already happened. The republicans have been wildly successful with this so no surprise they are going back to the well.

[thollandpe]

and hmm, what else?

You forgot to mention the deep state of pedophiles and their child trafficking ring.

Seriously? Gerrymandering has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen.

Out of the things you mention, most have a snowball's chance in Portland (112F on Sunday) of happening.

As for the other things, I've never had to show an ID to vote, only to register, and I've never cheated. And you're right, the border is a disaster. Hard to imagine that Canada had to close off travel with us because of our catastrophic mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Jorge L Guerra]

I happen to have re-read supreme court's 2019 5-4 Rucho decision, and walked away with the dreadful sense that this was the day democracy died. It's a good read, especially the very approachable dissent.

While it is true that gerrymandering has been with us the beginning of the nation, and also true that both parties have engaged in it, it is a false equivalency not to recognize the threat the Republicans have turned it into. In the North Carolina map at issue in Rucho the Republicans earned 50% of the statewide vote but took 10 of the 13 seats. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, and Justice Kagan, in dissent, both agreed that the practice is unconstitutional. Roberts, however, concluded that the courts could not devise a clear, predictable, legal standard and, therefore, concluded that the court was not equipped to remedy the practice, punting it over to the Congress. My view is that Justice Kagan had the better of the "justiciability" argument and that the Court could, and should, have acted.

But the point I want to underscore is that the Supreme Court was unanimous in the belief that the practice was un-democratic and unconstitutional. Not a hint of any defense of the practice. Why isn't that enough to cause decent people not to use it?

[Too Tall]

I happen to have re-read supreme court's 2019 5-4 Rucho decision, and walked away with the dreadful sense that this was the day democracy died. It's a good read, especially the very approachable dissent.

While it is true that gerrymandering has been with us the beginning of the nation, and also true that both parties have engaged in it, it is a false equivalency not to recognize the threat the Republicans have turned it into. In the North Carolina map at issue in Rucho the Republicans earned 50% of the statewide vote but took 10 of the 13 seats. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, and Justice Kagan, in dissent, both agreed that the practice is unconstitutional. Roberts, however, concluded that the courts could not devise a clear, predictable, legal standard and, therefore, concluded that the court was not equipped to remedy the practice, punting it over to the Congress. My view is that Justice Kagan had the better of the "justiciability" argument and that the Court could, and should, have acted.

But the point I want to underscore is that the Supreme Court was unanimous in the belief that the practice was un-democratic and unconstitutional. Not a hint of any defense of the practice. Why isn't that enough to cause decent people not to use it?

I'm a bit stuck on the word "decent".
Without Googling I recall a number of court decisions re re-districting where the court found these not legal. I need to do some digging.

[jclay]

Rather than thrashing about with this thread I suggest volunteering for Stacey Abrams organization and similar. That will be a hell of a lot more fruitful in terms of protecting and expanding our democracy as well as facilitating the address of urgent issues of our time.

[Jorge L Guerra]

Josh, I agree that "decent" is not the right word, I wrote in a hurry then tried to go back to replace "decent" with something like "people of goodwill and intentions" but couldn't figure out the editing. Separately, while numerous pre-Rucho lower Federal courts had found re-districting maps to be unconstitutional and required that they be redrawn, Rucho took the federal courts permanently out of the game. (State courts can still intervene where their state constitutions provide a basis for that.)

And jclay is exactly right.

[smontanaro]

Rather than thrashing about with this thread I suggest volunteering for Stacey Abrams organization and similar. That will be a hell of a lot more fruitful in terms of protecting and expanding our democracy as well as facilitating the address of urgent issues of our time.

In light of this morning's Supreme Court decision, legislation is probably the only avenue for voting rights changes. That will be paywalled, so here's a snip from the start of the article:

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld voting restrictions in Arizona and signaled that challenges to new state laws making it harder to vote would face a hostile reception from a majority of the justices.

The vote was 6 to 3, with the court’s three liberal members in dissent.

...

As Republican-controlled state legislatures increasingly seek to impose restrictive new voting rules, Democrats and civil rights groups have turned to the courts to argue that Republicans are trying to suppress the vote, thwart the will of the majority and deny equal access to minority voters. The decision suggested that Supreme Court would not be inclined to strike down many of the measures.

[Too Tall]

Thanks Jorge you are a considerate man. We should ride bikes sometime.

[fortyfour]

To illustrate @jclay's point, North Carolina is a perfect example when you place it's congressional districting under a magnifying glass. I can't remember if it was this article or another in 2018 that referenced it, but it's a good quick read for why this is a problem (both Democrats and Republicans do this, but I'd argue Republicans have taken it to a whole other level). Article via the Brennan Center here.

In short: "Democrats won roughly 50 percent of the vote in North Carolina, their best performance in almost a decade. But despite an extraordinary year, they netted just three of the state’s 13 congressional seats — the same as in 2014 and 2016. That happened because a promising Democratic wave crashed against one of the country’s most extreme gerrymanders, a congressional map that Republican legislators brazenly stated on the record that they carefully crafted “to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and 3 Democrats.”

What's unfortunate is the majority of voters who cast ballots in those NC races are not being represented by those they actually voted for and who took a plurality of those votes because of how the districts were drawn. That's not good for the Republic and it's certainly not good for North Carolinians. Just my opinion and perspective.

[zachateseverything]

If democrats start carving up voting districts with nearly the same level of malice and precision as the other party I'll call them out too. The fact is that Gerrymandering has resulted in a lot of dogmatic goobers walking into office after winning a party primary. Politicians from "safe" districts are less likely to compromise and get stuff done.

[DJB]

I'm from Michigan and we have some of the most aggressively gerrymandered districts in the country. We also have a citizen driven movement, https://votersnotpoliticians.com/ that looks to be successful in taking the districting process away from partisan legislators. I think this will have a tremendously positive impact.

When people were collecting signatures on the petition that put the proposal on the ballot, people were waiting in lines 5 and 10 people deep to sign.