MyDD :: An Opportunity On Gerrymandering

Heavily revised from an earlier version--Chris

Yesterday, laddy pointed out some ugly sides to the California redistricting plan that clearly reveal it to be a Right Wing Power Grab. Even though he is absolutely right and the plan that currently is being proposed cannot be tolerated, somewhat suprisingly, it would appear that the main opponents of Arnold's plan to redraw the maps are Republicans:

National Republican Party leaders -- even Schwarzenegger's closest ally in the congressional delegation, U.S. Rep. David Dreier (R-San Dimas) -- are pressing the governor to exempt Congress from his map-making.

The fear is that tinkering with the California congressional boundaries could jeopardize Republican control of the U.S. House. By some estimates, the state's 20-person GOP congressional delegation opposes the governor's effort 4 to 1.(...)

Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman has told the governor's aides that he would like to see California's congressional voting districts untouched until after the 2010 census -- the normal timetable for the decennial redrawing of voting districts -- according to a person close to the Schwarzenegger administration. Tracey Schmitt, an RNC spokeswoman, declined to discuss such a conversation, saying, "We're still in the information-gathering stage."

I have to wonder why Republicans in California are so gutless. Last month, laddy pointed out a couple of provisions in the California bill that are probably intentionally poisonous to Democrats so that they will be unable to support it:

(c) Every district shall be contiguous and as compact as practicable. With respect to compactness, to the extent practicable a contiguous area of population shall not be bypassed to incorporate an area of population more distant.

(e) District boundaries shall conform to existing geographic boundaries of a county, city, or city and county, and shall preserve identifiable communities of interest to the greatest extent possible. A redistricting plan shall not cross any common county boundary more than once and shall create the most whole counties and the fewest county fragments possible, except as necessary to comply with the requirements of any other subdivision of this section.

Democrats tend group together in fairly contiguous, densely populated urban areas. Drawing a map that is so focused on contiguous geographic boundaries could result in a map not entirely unlike Pennsylvania's, where two 80-90% Democratic districts are surrounded by a sea of districts that are 50-55% Republicans. In Pennsylvania, this has allowed a state that is lean-Democratic in both voter registration and Presidential voting tendencies to send a 12-7 Republican delegation to Washington for two consecutive cycles. Democrats might even receive more total votes for Congress, but Republicans end up with more congressmen.

I think we need to support non-partisan redistricting, but it does not need to be so heavily based on geography, which inherently supports Republicans and reinforces still rampant de facto segregation. We need to all come out in favor of taking the power to draw maps out of partisan and incumbent hands, but we also need to emphasize reform that serves people, not zip codes and other abstractions. We certainly do not need reform that is simply yet another Right Wing Power Grab.

So, what are Democrats to do? Opposing yet another "reform," no matter bad or blatently pro-Republican a reform it is, will porbably make us look like the party of the status quo. Our two options are porbably to either immediately propose a counter redistricting bill of some sort, or to oppose Arnold's plan. Personally, I would like to see maps taken out of the hands of partisans and incumbents, but with a bad Republican plan already out there and Arnold seizing the "reformer" high ground, any hope for positive change might already be gone.