Republicans Running Scared As Democrats Introduce Bill To End Gerrymandering

[KamaAina]

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/republicans-running-scared-as-democrats-introduce-bill-to-end-gerrymandering/

Since President Obama was elected to office in 2008, Republicans have been waging a seemingly never-ending war on the integrity of our electoral system. In 2010, GOP donors poured money into state elections with the sole purpose of having as many Republicans as they could in office, to redraw congressional district lines during the census year. When hundreds of member of the Tea Party were elected that year, that’s exactly what they did.

They redrew lines in as many states as they could to tip the scales in their favor, in order to take control of Congress. Even though President Obama was reelected in 2012 by a landslide, Republicans still managed to take control of both the House and Senate in the last two midterm elections; but Democrats have had enough. Last month a group of Democrats introduced legislation that would put an end to the gerrymandering which allowed the malicious party to take control.

America has 435 House districts, and the districts in more than half of the states are drawn by whichever party has the majority in that state during a census year. Republicans, especially, have taken advantage of this weakness and gerrymandered districts in crucial battleground states like Florida, Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Louisiana. It’s so bad that only 24 of our 435 legislative districts are considered competitive and Republicans are expected to keep their majority for at least the next seven years....

The 19 Democrats who co-sponsored the bill want to take the power of redistricting out of the hands of partisan state legislatures and put it into the hands of bipartisan committees. Commissioners would have to prove they have no conflicts of interest and it would be their job to redraw lines so they comply with voting rights law and be “geographically contiguous and compact.” Twenty-one states already do this, but the Democrats’ bill would create a uniform process nationwide.

[haikugal]

1. Good! We need to push them off the cliff...I for one have had enough for decades!

[billhicks76]

10. Now They Are Talking

Will Obama try and market this like TPP?

[haikugal]

12. Thanks, I needed a chuckle!

[MBS]

90. ditto! n/t

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

2. Outstanding idea, cant pass with all these asshole teaparty pricks, but someday.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

6. I could build a whole legislative agenda out of bills fitting all those conditions. N.T.

[Jackpine Radical]

27. That was my first thought too, but

we can sure as hell embarrass the shit out of them & show them up for what they are by forcing them to publicly take a stand against democracy.

That may be worth it in building a solid impression in the public mind that they can't win without despicable practices.

[polichick]

3. Let voters choose politicians instead of politicians choosing voters?! Outrageous!

[daleanime]

8. +1

[Beartracks]

33. OMG: THIS. +1000 n/t

[Agnosticsherbet]

4. States have the explicit power to run their own elections. Even if Republicans allowed a vote

and the vote passed, it would probably not pass a Supreme Court Challenge, even if we elect a Democratic President who changes the balance of the court.

[former9thward]

55. There is already a challenge and it has been heard by the Supreme Court.

It is an Arizona case and the decision will be released by the end of June but could come any day. In oral arguments most of the Justices seemed to be hostile to the arguments of the independent commission but we will see.

[Agnosticsherbet]

65. California set up na independent commission.

Initially, it was supported by Republicans. That commission, along with changes in or primary system, led to the control of State government by Democrats.

I think that if the Supreme Court tosses out voter and state created independent commissions, that California will ultimately return to the Republican stalemate in the State House and end a lot of the good things passed by Democrats and Brown.

I don't think a national commission would be Constitutional, even if it is a good idea.

[CanonRay]

5. Long overdue.

Why didn't we pass this in 2009 when we had the all the power???

[Hekate]

13. Because we didn't have "all the power". Sorry, it's just a DU meme. nt

[Fearless]

20. Do Republicans have "all the power" now?

[99Forever]

7. Well that ought to breeze right through this Congress.

[okaawhatever]

9. K & R nt

[Pharaoh]

11. It's why Wisconsin

Has been taken over by the crazys!

[Hekate]

14. It's a great idea. What are the chances of passage any time soon? nt

[SCantiGOP]

15. As Biden would say: A big effing deal!

This would be the most significant change in our government since the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.
If we had a large number of districts that were close to 50-50 you wouldn't see the gridlock and Tea Party activity. Congressmen would actually have to talk to - and listen to - those of the other party to get re-elected.

And, it is currently very much to the GOP advantage. South Carolina regularly has about 30% of its vote from African Americans. We have 7 congressional districts. Very simple math: 30% of 7 should clearly result in 2 minority districts. Instead, they have packed black voters into Clyburn's district (which runs over 100 miles and includes parts of downtown Charleston and well as downtown Columbia) leaving the other 6 districts as virtual locks for whoever gets the GOP nomination.

This, and changing the insane primary system where Iowa, SC and New Hampshire (which are all oddities in different ways) get to select the candidates would move us much closer to a true democracy.

[former9thward]

56. The Voting Rights Act requires super majority minority districts.

This is to ensure minority voters will be represented. A super majority is generally defined as 70% minority. That is one reason why black voters get packed into those districts. Black congressmen, such as Clyburn, oppose changing the Act for obvious reasons, as well as Republicans for obvious reasons, so it remains.

[SCantiGOP]

60. not exactly, former9thward

There is no set percentage, certainly not as high as 70%. See this recent article on a challenge to Alabama using that argument:

At the crux of the dispute, in Alabama Legislative Black Caucus v. Alabama, is the question of whether the Voting Rights Act requires minority controlled districts to have a fixed percentage of minorities. Alabama argued at the Supreme Court that it believed that the Voting Rights Act mandated that if a district had been 70 percent African American before redistricting, it needed to be 70 percent African American after redistricting — even if that meant mapdrawers had to go out of their way to find African-American voters to add to the district in order to simultaneously satisfy the legal requirement that districts have equal populations.
In the case of Alabama’s maps, this interpretation resulted in radical changes to the boundaries of a number of districts where African Americans had successfully elected candidates for years. In one extreme example, mapdrawers needed to add nearly 16,000 people to an African-American majority senate district in central Alabama to make the district the same size as others. While there were a number of white voters in the area who could have been added to the district without requiring significant boundary changes or impacting African-American electoral effectiveness, mapdrawers chose instead to completely redraw the district to add 15,549 African Americans and, remarkably, only 36 whites.
https://www.brennancenter.org/blog/supreme-court-rejects-mechanical-interpretation-voting-rights-act

This is a purposeful misinterpretation of the law that the GOP has used to pack minority voters into districts so the 3 or 4 surrounding districts become reliably Republican.

[former9thward]

68. Yeah, try and get Clyburn to buy your argument.

Good luck with that one...

[Daniel537]

82. Yeah that's what they tried doing here in Florida to stop the Fair District amendments.

An "unholy alliance" between GOPers and Black congressmen tried to stop it to preserve their virtually-guaranteed seats. It was upheld in the end, but of course the legislature still found ways to implement gerrymandering and the fight continues.

[mountain grammy]

16. About the only thing the GOP is good at: gerrymandering..

in other words: voter fraud!

[blackspade]

25. More like....

Voting fraud.

[-none]

45. No, Election fraud.

Voting fraud is done by individuals and has never been a problem.
Election fraud, on the other hand, is being done whole sale by the likes of Karl Rove and crooked Republicans in the several key states. Republican gerrymandering is a key part of the election fraud the Republicans have been doing since the 2000 elections. Along with exit polling suddenly not being accurate in this country at the same time. Never mind exit polling is still a very good indicator everywhere else, just not here.

[mountain grammy]

53. You're right. The GOP screams voter fraud

all the time they're committing election fraud.

[-none]

54. The GOP has to confuse people just to survive.

Facts and truth are like sunlight to a vampire.

[mnhtnbb]

17. Add NC to the list. The Repubs screwed us but good.

At least the Supremes are making them redo it here.

[Jamastiene]

70. Check out the messed up 8th District here.

They lumped us in with some of the reddest western counties they could find. We are stuck with extreme right wing and extreme extreme right wing Republicans in NC right now because of that crap. I'm sick of it.

[Renew Deal]

18. What evidence is there that they are "running scared"?

Although I think they should be if it somehow manages to pass. I don't think it can happen in the current environment.

[The Stranger]

19. What had they been waiting for?

They're only just now doing this?

[Fuddnik]

21. We passed a state constitutional amendment for that in Florida.

And the state legislature and courts have ignored it ever since.

[hifiguy]

22. What do you call a busload of Repukes going over a cliff?

A good start.

What's black and tan and looks good on a Repuke?

A Doberman.

Don't forget to tip your waiters and waitresses. I'll be here all week, folks...

[blackspade]

23. About time.

Maybe the Party leadership should have pushed this when they were in control?

[mopinko]

24. and texas redistricted in an off year.

none other than the bug man, with his deep pockets and his probably quite credible threats, the blue bled out of texas.

when will we hear about all of jack abramoff's info, which he plea bargained with?

[sadoldgirl]

26. No matter how many times they could pass it,

States Rights will make it invalid.

[-none]

46. Not when it come to national elections, as for President and Congressional seats.

The federal government could mandate uniform election laws for federal offices across the country. Elections for state offices would still be controlled by the individual states.

[awoke_in_2003]

28. About fucking time...

they get real ambitious when they are the minority party and don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting it passed.

[PosterChild]

29. Progressive, Forward Thinking Legislation - K&R /nt/

[lovemydog]

30. Good news.

This is very important.

[daredtowork]

31. Need this even at the city level. nt

[WestSideStory]

32. I don't know if this would be constitutional

VRA was constitutional pursuant to the 14th Amendment. But a general ban on gerrymandering at the federal level I don't think would be.

[Warren DeMontague]

34. Yeah, unfortunately since the house majority is made up of GOPs put there by Gerrymandering

it's kind of like trying to close the barn door once the horse has already escaped.

Actually, let me rephrase that- it's like trying to close the barn door once the horse has already escaped--- WITH the barn door.

[pansypoo53219]

35. top 2 vote getters instead of left & rite as well.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

44. Louisiana used open primaries for years

to keep the republicans from gaining a foothold, but now the tide has completely turned the other way.

[Chan790]

47. No, this is a terrible idea.

It's a terrible idea everywhere...it tends to magnify the control of the locally-dominant party disenfranchising the majority of the public by allowing the local-majority party to hold both spots on the GE ballot. Top-2-party runoff elections could work...top-2 candidate does not as California's experiment with it has made clear.

Wouldn't you love to live in AZ where your choice in the Senate race would be JD Heyworth or John McCain? It also demonstrably has led to political games where someone runs false flag on an oppositional ticket because their own party is not-viable locally. Hello Ro Khanna!

This might only work perhaps in a GE where any party is still permitted only one line on the ballot. (Translation: the second-place Democrat/Republican in the primary is still out of GE) This would at-least have the effect of perhaps creating viable third-parties if the party with the second-most votes wasn't one of the big two. Knowing they could knock the worst party off the ballot could have the effect of motivating people to vote for lesser parties in order to insure them a spot on the GE ballot.

Imagine a race where the top-two parties were Democratic vs. Working Families.

It could also drive a tea-party/GOP fracture where neither remains viable.

[KamaAina]

58. I'm not sure Ro rises (sinks?) to the level of a repuke.

He did, after all, work in the Obama administration. He is, however, Third Way all the way.

But what top two does do is allow him to attract repuke support, which may be enough to put him over the top next time. This was Abel Maldonado's express intent when he got top two put on the ballot: to get more moderates, of both parties. elected.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

36. What's creepy is how many of these pasty brainless parrots they've got....

I blame right-wing talk radio during a commute.

We have GOT to break up the media too.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

37. What will happen to majority black districts

that are drawn to include majority black voters?

And what will happen when this issue gets to the Supreme Court? Democrats may be net winners, while black voters may become net losers.

[Vinca]

38. Districts shouldn't be drawn to include a majority of anyone.

That's the point. If we don't end gerrymandering the crazies will keep Congress forever.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

39. I tend to agree.

But, with our own American history, there was a need for special black voting districts.

How long shall they continue? And do you think now is a good time to do away with them? I'm not so sure about that.

[Vinca]

40. It's something to consider, but I think black voters know which party has their interest at heart.

The results could be spectacular if you split a black district and they both end up in GOP-held districts. Assuming voting patterns remain the same, it could be 2 wins for Dems. The fair way to do it would be to use already-established lines like county lines. The big problem at this point is getting people who having given up on voting (since the results are now pre-determined) to come out again.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

42. You can't use county lines

if each district is to be comprised of approximately the same number of voters.

Otherwise, one congress critter might represent millions of voters, while another congress critter represents a few thousand.

[Vinca]

64. Senators have huge discrepancies so I don't see the problem.

California has 2 senators and so does Montana. You could probably fit the entire population of Montana into the LA area.

[jmowreader]

84. You could fit them into the LA area without building any new houses...

The population of Montana is 1.024 million. The population of Los Angeles City is 4 million, Los Angeles County 10 million and the LA Metro Area 13 million.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

43. The point was to get black congress persons in Congress

and not just another democrat who would represent them.

[Vinca]

66. Nothing is stopping them from running for office.

Republicans might not vote for them, but they won't for a Democrat anyway.

[HereSince1628]

49. IMO the way to do it is to use census data in standard reporting units and computer programs

that divide states into their assigned number of districts each district having the smallest ratio of perimeter length to area.

The computer should produce some number of competing maps with similar ratio p/a ratios...I'd suggest 3...from which nonpartisan state election commissions must choose or make a reasoned petition for additional maps to choose between.

[Vinca]

67. That would make sense as long as the selection is random and not based on party.

[HereSince1628]

78. I think going with the 3 smallest edge to area rations would be better than random...

But there are undoubtedly many maps which could be within statistical margins of error for that metric.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

80. What about population?

Our representatives are apportioned according to how many citizens live in the state. How do you plan on accounting for population?

[HereSince1628]

81. Yes, sorry I didn't say it, but districts are apportioned to states onpopulation and the

districts should all be close to equal in population. Equal size is currently a fuzzy standard that does get played with in gerrymandering

[Calista241]

50. Doesn't the civil rights act require minority districts be created and maintained? n/t

Last edited Thu May 14, 2015, 11:26 AM - Edit history (1)

[former9thward]

57. Yes it does.

Which is why this bill is going nowhere.

[lobodons]

51. Minorities would still Indirectly still be elected

Minorities would still in some degree be Indirectly elected to office because unfortunately we have self segregated ourselves in this country. Minorities have congregated in certain areas and it would be these districts that would continue to elect minorities.

[sarchasm]

41. States Rights!!

You can bet this will be the republican one-size-fits-all rallying cry. The Civil War never ended for some apparently.

[dpatbrown]

48. Scared?

In what way? Am I missing something? What can the Dems do about? I thought the GOP had control of D.C.?

[3catwoman3]

52. The tortuous shapes of some of these districts...

...would be laughable if the results were not so harmful.

My own district, Illinois 6th, looks like a giant letter C.

[Cosmic Dancer]

59. Typical Democratic delusion

These thugs control 30 states, the house, the Senate and the Supreme Court. It should be the Dems running scared. We think, who could vote for these morons but guess what about half of the country does.

[Gothmog]

61. The GOP can only win elections by cheating

[progressoid]

62. Running Scared???

Is there evidence of this?

They will ignore the bill and life goes on as they like it.

[drray23]

63. that would be a significant step

However, bipartisan commitees are never really able to do anything. The fight will shift towards who gets nonimated to these commitees and result in the same mess we have with the FEC commission. They will be neutered on partisan lines and unable to do anything. The better solution is to do it mathematically but computer algorithms. Make it produce districts that are contiguous and have roughly equal number of people in it or whatever other requirement make sense.

[Jamastiene]

69. What I wouldn't give to have my Democratic county

represented by a Democrat again instead of being lumped in with a highly populated county halfway across the state gerrymandered in just to make my district more Republican. We were doing fine before they lumped us in with that bunch. I mean, really, the 8th district in NC is now a gerrymandered custom made Republican enclave that ignores most of the blue counties in this area. It is not representative of most of the counties in the district. Instead, we are stuck with all Republicans and no Democrat can win this district again. Even the Wiki page on North Carolina's Congressional Districts has a link to Gerrymandering at the bottom of the page. That speaks volumes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina%27s_congressional_districts
Link to Gerrymandering right there on the page under See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina%27s_congressional_districts#See_also

I despise gerrymandering.

K&R

[RR2]

71. What a light bulb moment, to bad the filiment burnt out a couple of years ago....

Gee Wally, wouldn't this have made more sense oh say a couple of years ago when it might have actually had a snow balls chance in hell.

Senate House

Congress Years ----- Total Dems Reps Others Vacant Total Dems Reps Others Vacant

111th - 2009–2011-- 100 -- 57 -- 41 ---- 2 ---- 2---- 435 - 256 - 178 -- — ---- 1

114th - 2015–2017-- 100 -- 44 -- 54 ---- 2 ---- — --- 435 - 188 - 246 -- — ---- 1

Read more: Composition of Congress by Party 1855–2017 http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774721.html#ixzz3a8D69HbS

[MineralMan]

72. I seriously doubt that they're running scared.

They control both houses of Congress. Why would they be scared? This bill is dead before it has a chance.

Now, if we had Democratic majorities in Congress, then they'd have reason to be scared, but the voters didn't come out and vote in Democrats so we'd have that control. Republicans aren't scared of this bill at all.

[jeff47]

73. What a lovely unconstitutional bill.

Makes it seem like they're trying, when they can't actually do this. The Constitution says the states get to figure out how to apportion their districts. As long as those districts don't violate other parts of the Constitution (ie. split up minority votes) then the feds get no say.

You know what would work better and be completely Constitutional? More districts.

We capped the size of the House at 435 members in 1911. There were 93M people in the US. There's now 300M people. Perhaps the legislative body that is supposed to represent "the people" should increase in size as the number of people increases?

Set up "satellite" capitol buildings in other parts of the US for that region's House members. Use videoconferencing and similar technologies to connect them all. This has the added bonus of House members living closer to their districts, and lobbyists having to set up shop in lots more cities.

And it's much, much harder to effectively gerrymander 1,305 districts into a majority.

[LiberalLovinLug]

74. "and Republicans are expected to keep their majority for at least the next seven years.... "

Gawd thats depressing. So even if Hillary (or Bernie!) wins. Its already set in stone that she will not be able to pass much of any legislation, at least not heavily compromised, through most of her tenure.

[KamaAina]

75. Love the graphic!

[Daniel537]

83. Good luck they don't hold on for longer than that.

Right now the Dems have the advantage on the EC, but thanks to gerrymandering and increased straight-ticket voting its hard to see us taking back the House anytime soon barring a Republican getting elected next year and causing the country all kinds of havoc.

[wordpix]

89. what an awful thought that is

[vkkv]

76. There's a better chance of repealing Citizens' United.

This is a long shot at best.

Bottom line:

Idiot voters in the SOUTH need to WAKE UP!!
or SECEDE! PLEASE ! ! !

[madamvlb]

77. Seven more years? OMG

[spanone]

79. out of 50 governors, 18 are democrats

[harrose]

85. Except that the Governor's seats aren't subject to gerrymandering.

Unless you want to change state borders, I don't see how you're going to change that (WRT electoral districts).

[Jester Messiah]

86. I'd love to believe they were running scared, but I don't.

Not without some evidence that this bill won't just be buried and forgotten.

[Autumn]

87. The Democrats will work out a deal and this will never see the light of day

or worse.

[wordpix]

88. it's about time! and...

One way to do this is to create watershed districts, i.e. districts that are redrawn based on location within watersheds. There is still space for manipulation - where lines would be drawn n, s, e and w - but at least there would be some kind of standard. A bonus is this would get people in a district together on issues like water pollution, diversion, irrigation, and enforcement of the Clean Water Act and wetlands protection laws.