One man/one vote, you bet.
One bunch of voting men of color, creed, ethnicity or political persuasion shoehorned together for partisan political purposes, you better not.
Would that THAT were the demographic reality.
Instead, manipulating the boundaries of electoral districts–to maximize the impact of supporters’ votes and minimize that of opponents–is as old as the United States. It just took a while to name it.
For the record, “gerrymander” is actually a blend combining the name of early 19th century Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry, a Democratic-Republican conniving against the Federalists–and the meandrous-shaped salamander.
While not unique to America–democracies that use a single-winner voting system are the most likely to have compromised districts–gerrymandering is hardly the embodiment of American exceptionalism. Especially when politicians, however disguised their back rooms, have an active role in creating voting districts. We’ve seen our share right here in the not always “Sunshine” State.
But periodically we have these pangs of idealism–OK, more like non-incumbent protest, editorial board admonition and judicial oversight–that coincide with redistricting.
We’re in the throes of one of those cycles now. Only it’s turned into a legal imbroglio since a Leon County Circuit Court judge rejected the Florida Legislature’s 2012 congressional map. Judge Terry Lewis ordered that two of this state’s (27) districts be redrawn. As long as we have a Fair District constitutional amendment, reasoned Judge Lewis, we might as well be in compliance with it.
The two recently reconfigured, targeted districts are Exhibits A and B for district anomalies and why it’s so dicey an issue to address.
Take District 10. Por Favor.
That’s the one represented by U.S. Rep. Dan Webster, a two-term Republican from Winter Garden who previously served 28 years in the Florida state legislature. Judge Lewis thinks this Orlando-based district should be reworked to remove the partisan advantage that resulted when lawmakers swapped out Hispanic Democrats for Anglo Republicans.
Or take District 10. Please.
That’s the one represented by U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, an African-American Democrat from Jacksonville who’s seeking a 14th term in Congress this fall. Judge Lewis would like to see her serpentine, sprawling district, which improbably runs from Jacksonville to Orlando, become more compact and follow traditional political boundaries.
Rep. Brown’s situation, however, is more than the usual, self-serving pragmatics. There’s an additional subplot.
Partisans have sometimes defended gerrymandering as the only means of securing any representation for minority groups. Violating local boundaries, in effect, can be seen as an acceptable tradeoff to risking a muted voice for a politically cohesive group. Politics as usual, shall we say, for a greater good. How ironic.
The Legislature said it won’t appeal for now. Most observers think any resultant changes will come after the 2014 elections. Judge Lewis can order up more maps, await a Legislative re-drawing or retain a special master to do the drawing and fine-tuning.
But at some point, both political parties need to be part of a transparent solution. No more salamanders, no more Rorschach-test patterns. Just sanely drawn districts that define meaningful democracy and don’t traffic in demographic herding.
If that is to happen, a key player will be Rep. Brown.
She teamed up with self-serving, pragmatic Republicans to carve out a safe, heavily African-American district for herself, and she doesn’t want to risk losing it. And she’s no fan of Judge Lewis, even evoking the 1964 Voting Rights Act–and contending that it not only protects minority voting rights–but that it “supersedes the state’s Fair District standards.”
But if Judge Lewis’ ruling and subsequent orders carry the day, and re-adjusted, constitutionally-conforming districts–including one that is less African-American–result, Corrine Brown will have ironically helped make it happen.