from p. 7
GOP Schemes to
rapidly in this handful of states. Pennsylvania, for example, saw Republicans gain a maximum edge of 11-10 in the 1990s, 12-7 in the 2000s and 13-5 in the most recent election, despite Democratic House candidates winning 83,000 more votes statewide. Democrats challenged the 2002 redistricting all the way to the Supreme Court—unsuccessfully, thus paving the way for the even more lopsided districts today. Similarly, North Carolina went from 7-6 Democrat in 2010, to 9-4 GOP in 2012, despite Democrats doing 7 points better statewide in 2012. Third, Republicans have openly bragged about their prowess in gerrymandering.
REDMAP—The GOP’s $30 Million Gerrymandering Scheme
unfair advantage in presidential elections as well. Their initial efforts appear to have been shelved, due to bad publicity, but they can easily be taken off the shelf at a moment’s notice. Virginia’s Senate showed just how easily on Jan. 21, when Republicans took advantage of the fact that state Sen. Henry Marsh, a 79-year old long-time civil rights lawyer and activist, went to Washington to attend Obama’s inauguration. With Marsh absent, the Republicans temporarily enjoyed a 20-19 majority, which they used to rush through a re-apportionment of their own districts, drawing a map that makes a 27-13 GOP super-majority a distinct possibility. The redistricting process normally takes months and happens only once a decade, after the census. This took only hours, and came out of the blue. If Republicans do renew their efforts, we should expect a lot slicker sales pitch than Carrico managed. Michigan State Representative Pete Lund, who first introduced a district-based bill there in 2011, shows how this might be done. “It’s more representative of the people,” Lund said in a story reported by Mlive.com last month. “A person doesn’t win a state by 100 percent of the vote, so this is a better, more accurate way.... People would feel voting actually matters. It’s an idea I’ve had for several years.” Of course, some folks might dispute the claim that giving the loser twice as many votes as the winner is “a better, more accurate way.” But as long as Republicans are the only ones playing this game, they can pick their spots, move quickly, frame the debate well enough to keep opponents disorganized and off-balance for the brief time it takes, and thus steal our democracy. There is another way, of course. Democrats could fight back by mounting a high-profile push for a truly fair system—one that would equal-
ize all the votes of all Americans by tying the Electoral College to the national popular vote. This plan, known as the national popular vote, has already been relatively quietly approved by states casting 132 electoral votes—close to half the total needed, including California. Once the threshold of 270 votes is reached, all the states who have approved this proposal will cast all
their electoral votes for the national popular vote winner. All states approving it so far have been Blue states, but it has received bipartisan support, which illustrates the power of the concept once people hear about it. With such a system in place—or at least prominently advanced so that no one could ignore it—GOP appeals of the sort Lund has crafted would readily be seen as the cheap knock-offs they are.
The Local Publication You Actually Read
The day after the 113th Congress was sworn in, the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) posted a summary report of its “REDMAP” strategy, a “review of its strategy and execution of its efforts in the 2010 election cycle to erect a Republican firewall through the redistricting process that paved the way to Republicans retaining a U.S. House majority in 2012,” The report explained that even before the 2010 Census, the RSLC was planning a strategy to focus on winning control of states expected to lose or gain seats in Congress—states where new district maps could be most radically redrawn. “Controlling the redistricting process in these states would have the greatest impact on determining how both state legislative and congressional district boundaries would be drawn,” the report said, which in turn “presented the opportunity to solidify conservative policymaking at the state level and maintain a Republican stronghold in the U.S. House of Representatives for the next decade.” For the effort, the RSLC raised $30 million. The results were impressive, the report noted: “After Election Day 2010, Republicans held majorities in both legislative chambers in 25 states – and, in most cases, control of redistricting – up from 14.” A comparison chart showed that Republicans controlled the districting of 193 seats compared to just 44 under Democratic control, with 191 under split control, or a non-partisan commission. This was roughly double the 98 seats under Republican redistricting control in 2001, compared to 135 seats under Democratic control that year. With the sort of attention, focus and big money spending already devoted to fixing elections in the House, it’s hardly surprising that Republicans would take the next step, and try to use this
Left, Virginia Sen. Charles W. Carrico Sr., R-Grayson County. Above, Michigan Rep. Pete Lund, introduced a district-based Electoral College bill there in 2011. File photos.
February 8 - 21, 2013
17