Friday, November 18, 2011
Politics Will Tennessee Republicans Listen to the 70 Percent When It Comes to Redistricting?
Posted by Steve Haruch on Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 7:06 AM
- The Daily Kos
- The 5th, in fourths?
Every 10 years, the state legislature uses information from the U.S. Census to draw new boundaries for districts in the state house, state senate, and in Congress. How important do you think it is that communities and cities are placed in the same district as much as possible when redistricting?
The results: 37 percent responded that it's "very important," and 35 percent responded "somewhat important." By contrast, only 8 percent responded "not very important, and 6 percent responded "unimportant." That would indicate that over 70 percent of likely voters seem to favor some attempt to preserve "communities and cities" in the redistricting process.
State Republicans have been drawing up the new districts behind closed doors, and the Black Caucus has said they already have a lawsuit ready for when the doors open, should they deem the new map to be in violation of the Voting Rights Act. We won't get to see the actual outlines until January, but the Daily Kos has drawn up a map of what they might look like, which includes the slicing-up of Nashville into four safely Republican-voting zones — a wholly feasible prospect.
Hey, remember when TNGOP chair Chris Devaney said that state Democrats, by voicing support for Occupy Nashville, were showing how "out of touch they are with everyday Tennesseans"? Wonder if Republicans will show us how in touch they are with the 70 percent who say they'd rather not see cities — and "communities," however you want to define that term — carved up unnecessarily in the name of political expedience.
Comments (16)
Showing 1-16 of 16
Just when one wishes that Pith would write about anything other than the Occupy {your city here} movement, someone posts an article like this and you start missing the coverage of the protesters.
Steve, when in the history of redistricting have the Democrats ever made their redistricting process open? How about Never!
The suggestion that Republicans will split the 5th in that manner is ludicrous even by the standards of Kos. Such a plan would be risky and 7-2 is the smart move anyway.
As for the Black Caucus, it is hard to take them seriously when they talk about having a law suit ready before even seeing the plan. For example, even if the Republicans were to split the 5th District, since the Democrats have never nominated a black candidate for Congress or Mayor, it seems hard to see it as a minority district.
"Wonder if Republicans will show us how in touch they are with the 70 percent who say they'd rather not see cities — and "communities," however you want to define that term — carved up unnecessarily in the name of political expedience."
Again, when did the Democrats ever follow that? Where was this concern in 2001? The hypocrisy of this stinks to the skies. Blaming Republicans before they even present a plan in light of the dubious history of Democratic redistricting... Why not just reprint Chip Forrester's press releases like the Tennessean used to?
like
dislike
It's hard to dispute that districting calls have been means of control and revenge in the hands of both parties, when and where possible. It's also hard to dispute that it would be grossly unfair, inappropriate, and mindlessly harsh for the city of Nashville to be deprived a Representative that means to represent its interests and population and gleefully treated as if it doesn't exist. Which it still does. Well, we'll see..
"Steve, when in the history of redistricting have the Democrats ever made their redistricting process open? How about Never!"
Please point to where I say the Democrats have ever made their redistricting process open and I will gladly retract that statement.
@Mark Rogers: "Where was this concern in 2001? The hypocrisy of this stinks to the skies."
Here it is, much as I hate to interrupt your well-rehearsed tirade. From the Nashville Scene, Dec. 27, 2001:
"The Party Line
Confusing voters and reaming opponents—all in the name of democracy
by Bill Carey
"December 27, 2001 News » Features
"At a time when many argue that the legislature needs more openness and new blood, its leaders are secretly working on a plan that would keep the same folks in office. In other words, it’s redistricting time.
"The planning for new state House and Senate districts is bound to cause a fairly major stink, when you consider some of the possibilities. For instance, the largely white, wealthy Green Hills area may soon become part of a majority-black state House district. The Memphis area may soon include six state senators (the entire Senate only has 33 members) when the census shows only five are justified. Meanwhile, the plan is being written by Democrats, and it’s anybody’s guess how they will stick it to Republican Williamson County when it comes to congressional redistricting.
"Every 10 years, lawmakers must redraw all districts in the state legislature and the U.S. Congress to make sure they’re roughly the same population. In a perfect world, the legislature would have a computer develop the district lines and let the chips fall where they may. But that’s not the way it works.
"Instead, leaders from the majority party—and that happens to be the Democrats right now—work out a plan that meets the legal requirements of redistricting. As well, the plan’s authors do everything possible to protect incumbents and the party in power. It’s a complicated process affecting every voter in the state. And it generally happens in secret. ..."
http://www.nashvillescene.com/nashville/th…
Mark, you're right, they may decide not to mess with it and leave it at 7-2. But not because of the Republicans magnamity. They'd most certainly do it if the risks were smaller. The fact that people like me like living in a more urban district that is more progressive and would like to keep my representation that way does not factor in their thinking.
And the Democrats have always done it is not a defense.
"to the need for governmental regulation in order to strengthen the economy (40 percent favored "more regulation," 32 percent favored less). "
That right there is sufficient proof that 40% of the people polled are economic morons.
Gee the Ultra Liberal Daily Kos has drawn a map that is more compact and keeps regions of the state together more so than anything the Democrats have ever done in the 100 years that they controlled the process. It is clear that the libs are fine with drawing districts that stretch from Memphis to Nashville and from Virginia to Mississippi as long as it those evil Republicans that are getting gored. But try to touch their liberal hamlet of Nashville and it is the coming of the antichrist!
The hypocrisy is amazing, even for them.
Mr. Pink,
The article from 2001 is a balanced and almost reasonable explanation that does not suggest that the Democrats might ignore the interests of select counties and communities in search of political advantage. There is no hint of wrongness that the Democrats would draw up their plan in secret.
Mr. Haruch's article contains the ominous line "State Republicans have been drawing up the new districts behind closed doors,"making it seem like there is something unusual and corrupt about the Republicans' plans.
The first article was written by a professional journalist, the new article is propaganda pretending to be journalism.
Steve,
As I said to Mr. Pink, the problem is that your article implies that the Republicans are doing something wrong or unethical. You might have equally called into question the motivations of the Black Caucus in threatening law suits before the first draft of the lines is even announced.
You refer to the Kos article as "wholly feasible" although I believe that it is illegal to divide a county as large as Davidson into more than three districts without having one be a whole district.
Finally there is this interesting line:
"Wonder if Republicans will show us how in touch they are with the 70 percent who say they'd rather not see cities — and "communities," however you want to define that term — carved up unnecessarily in the name of political expedience."
Hmmm. Did you and Pith make a similar argument about repealing the drivers' licenses for illegals law during the Sundquist Administration? Repeal was probably even more popular than 70% so should Democratic legislators have listened to the people then? How about the original carry permit bills {ones that didn't involve restaurants and bars} which were hugely popular with the people but which were regularly stopped by Speaker Naifeh through legislative maneuvering?
To paraphrase Rick Blaine, "It's not a biased journalist I mind, it's a cut-rate inconsistent one I object to."
Chris,
"And the Democrats have always done it is not a defense."
True. But hypothetically if the Republicans drew up a non-partisan plan and by 2021 the Democrats are back in control, do you think for one second that they wouldn't go back to partisan redistricting?
That is what we call unilateral disarmament and if you want to know how that works out, ask the city fathers of Carthage.
"Did you and Pith make a similar argument about repealing the drivers' licenses for illegals law during the Sundquist Administration?"
Um, no, Mark. Check the dates on our archives for a possible explanation why.
As for the "no hint of wrongness," I'll leave everyone else to assess the tone of, "In a perfect world, the legislature would have a computer develop the district lines and let the chips fall where they may. But that’s not the way it works. Instead, leaders from the majority party—and that happens to be the Democrats right now—work out a plan that meets the legal requirements of redistricting. As well, the plan’s authors do everything possible to protect incumbents and the party in power. It’s a complicated process affecting every voter in the state. And it generally happens in secret."
That doesn't sound like tacit approval to me, but then you're much better at parsing these things than I am. See, when I read, "The article from 2001 is a balanced and almost reasonable explanation that does not suggest that the Democrats might ignore the interests of select counties and communities in search of political advantage," what I see is, "Gee, I hope nobody notices I didn't know what the hell I was talking about."
You know, as much as I hate the idea of the GOP being in charge at all, much less being in charge of redistricting, I will say what I have consistently said about this subject:
The Republicans won. They get to draw the lines. There are consequences to elections, and this is one of them. Democrats sitting on their hands during the last election led to this. There is nothing illegal or unconstitutional about dividing Nashville in this way. There probably would be a violation of the Voting Rights Act if this was tried in Memphis, but I suspect there is no violation for doing it in Nashville, since there cannot be a majority-minority district in Middle Tennessee, no matter how you draw one, and the motivation here is political rather than racial.
Drawing Congressional District lines to achieve a political goal is not illegal.
So, we Democrats are just going to have to strap on a pair, belly up to the buzzsaw, and do the best we can with whatever lines the Republicans draw. It may well be that the Republicans overstep themselves and look up deeper into the decade and find themselves in trouble in several districts. While I would be content with a pretty safe 7-2 majority for the next 10 years, they may feel differently and try for an 8-1 split, even if maintaining it might be iffy. And the GOP incumbents might not be too comfortable with adding Davidson County Democrats to their districts. We'll see. I suspect the ambitions and demands of Bill Ketron and the other incumbent Republicans (except DesJarlais) will drive this process, not any concerns about the Black Caucus.
But all the bitching, moaning and complaining in the world won't help anything. The bottom line is, the majority in the General Assembly gets to draw the lines. We just have to live with it.
Mr. Pink,
After a decent night's sleep, I see your point. I was being somewhat unfair to the author. Of course, if Pith didn't consistently take a prejudiced view on political issues...
I do consider it interesting that Pith has devoted so many posts to this issue in comparison to, say, Governor Bredesen's TennCare cuts and the protest in the Governor's Office by TennCare patients. Pith has made far more of the Occupy protesters than of the protesters on an issue that led to the deaths of people. Color me shocked that the Scene/Pith {Scith? Would that make Woods the Dark Lord of the Scith?} regards the actions of a Republican Governor toward a tiny mob of protesters more critically than the actions of a liberal Democratic Governor taking critical health care services from the seriously ill.
Perry,
Excellent comments.
As I recall, Bredesen greeted the TennCare protestors in the hallways, brought some of them food, knew several on a first-name basis, and never had the THP throw one of them out of a wheelchair to drag him to jail.
And "liberal Democratic Governor"? Really? Are you serious? The very fact that there were TennCare protestors in the Capitol puts the lie to that nonsense. If you listen to Rush, you might be deceived into thinking that Democrat always equals liberal. However...
I am a liberal. I know lots of liberals. Liberals are friends of mine. And, believe me, Mark, Phil Bredesen is no liberal.
He was, however, other things that Bill Haslam is not. Thoroughly competent, thoughtful, his own man, a success rather than an embarrassment in business (and not pushed into politics by his tycoon daddy to get him out of the way), and smart enough to hire people for press and political strategy to avoid disasters like the Occupy Nashville arrests.
If I'm still in congressional district 4 after the redraw (sounds like a western), I'll seriously consider voting for Eric Stewart. I've had it with DesJarlais and Ketron.
I heard talk about the redraw slicing through Columbia. I hope that doesn't happen. Not in our interests at all. Maury County should be drawn in with adjacent relatively rural counties, not with Williamson or Rutherford, which would dominate to the exclusion of our own interests.
