Northeast Georgia Black Leadership Council Forum
Presenter remarks
Clyde “Jocco” Baccus, President
The Learning Tree, Inc.
Good morning and thank you for the invite to discuss an issue that’s close to my heart. Special thanks to Pastor Rose Johnson-Mackey, Johnny Smith and the rest of the Northeast Georgia Black Leadership Council team. Thanks for answering the call to empowerment. This type of discussion has to be repeated in all quarters of the state.
This morning I’ll attempt to give a varied overview of redistricting targeting the grass roots’ voting rights practitioner.
The U.S. Census Bureau has a hard deadline of December 31, 2010, to deliver the state population counts to the country. By that same deadline, they are also charged with the task of doing the arithmetic of determining how many seats in the House of Representatives each state should have. That announcement has many folks awaiting the results of the 2010 Census. Researchers and demographers, especially, state legislatures in all 50 states will feast on the details of the data released.
Some of the most important contests this fall will be way down the ballot, state legislative races. Control of the state legislature matters because that will determine which party controls redrawing congressional district lines after this year's census report is released. Redistricting also has huge financial implications.
What is redistricting? Simply said, it’s a process that divides voters into districts the controlling political party thinks it can win. After redistricting, incumbents often face significant numbers of new voters—voters that were previously in a different incumbent's district.
Census population data can be manipulated by looking at past voter patterns that favor the majority party thus creating an opportunity to increase the majority voting strength. Each potential configuration of political boundaries has social (and political) implications for representation.
It comes as no surprise that tens of millions have and will be spent on state legislative races nationwide. The power to reapportion rests with the legislative authority.
The redistricting process evokes major questions about representative democracy, fairness, and political accountability. Redistricting in America is rotten. Across the country, for elections of every level, district lines are drawn in such a way that fundamental democratic values are subverted.
Locally, county commissions, school boards and city councils are creatures of the state. As such, the best evidence suggests that the same standards that apply to states also apply to local government. Without a firm understanding of what representation should mean, meaningful discussions of this important idea to redistricting will be limited.
Sadly for us here in Georgia, there is close to zero chance of a Democratic takeover in the legislature and an outside chance, depending on the African American voter turnout, of snagging the open governor's mansion, as the Democratic bench has become thinner and thinner since the state GOP's rebirth in 2002.
With the Atlanta area providing the vast majority of growth in the state, a new 14th District is likely to be carved out of suburban counties and should lean Republican given who will be drawing the lines.
One wrinkle to the GA plan that concerns all of us: the Supreme Court's ruling in Bartlett v. Strickland means that the 2nd (Sanford Bishop), 12th (John Barrow), and 13th (David Scott) Congressional Districts, all with black populations around 40-45%, will not be considered protected by the Voting Rights Act for purposes of redistricting. But one question stands out, will GOP mapmakers gerrymander John Barrow's district for a white Republican or for a black Democrat? Given the sensitivity of the issue and the GOP’s desire not to spread their votes too thin, I'm guessing the latter option would be more likely compromise.
Barrow's seat should stay Dem-leaning, probably getting even more so as its black population is boosted. Bishop, Johnson, Lewis, and Scott will properly be protected by a GOP-drawn map.
How did we get into the Re-Redistricting Crisis
Typically the process of redistricting has been brutal and unfair, but should only occur once every decade. Then came House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's infamous drive in 2003 to undo his home state of Texas' incumbent-protection gerrymander with a Republican plan adopted over the objections of Democratic state legislators. The Democrats' flight to neighboring states drew national attention, but it was Texas Republicans' successful unseating of four Democratic House seats through the re-redistricting process that caused party leaders to salivate.
In Georgia, in the wake of taking control of state government in 2004, Republicans in 2005 redrew the Democratic plan. They vigorously defended the proposed lines as more compact, but their primary motivation is clear: two more Republican House seats in 2006.
I’ve only scratched the re apportionment surface so stay alert. They have changed the rules and modified the process for the DOJ pre-clearance 2012 redistricting plan.
Rules: Traditional Criteria
} Communities of interest
} Visible (Natural & man-made) boundaries
} Compactness & contiguity
} Continuity in office
} Population growth
} Existing districts
Pre-2001 Laws
} Equal Population among districts
◦ Total population: not voting age population,
citizens, or voters
◦ Federal Voting Rights Act
◦ Section 2 – Ensure equal power to elect candidates of choice
◦ Section 5 – Avoid retrogression
◦ AZ Statute 9-473.B. (Cities and Towns only)
◦ “Each district shall contain a nearly equal number of inhabitants at the time of the redistricting and shall consist of contiguous territory in as compact form as possible.”
New Laws I
Larios v. Cox (Georgia) June 30, 2004
Population balance “safe harbor” is gone
League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry (Texas)
Limits on “community of interest” definitions
Bartlett v. Strickland (Georgia)
◦ “Protected Class” must be 50% of VAP to qualify for Section 2 status
◦ NAMUNDO v Holder (Texas)
◦ Allows any local jurisdiction to “bail out” of Section 5 coverage after meeting certain criteria
New Laws II
} Congressional Reauthorization
◦ H.R. 9: Fannie Lou Hamer, Rosa Parks, and Coretta Scott King
Voting Rights Act Reauthorization and Amendments Act:
– Extends Section 5 through 2032
– Overturns Georgia v. Ashcroft, which opened the door for
“influence” districts
} New Draft DoJ Regulations
– Currently out for public comment.
– Shifts some powers from Chief of the Voting Rights Section at DoJ to the individual attorney reviewing a given request.
We all need to be involved in the process. We should stay informed of plans to redraw federal, state, and local district lines; attend meetings where plans are presented and evaluated; contact organizations willing to evaluate proposed plans and offer alternatives; write letters of support or opposition to elected officials and the Department of Justice; and seek needed legal advice. The goal of redistricting is to provide fair and effective representation for all. We can help achieve that goal by actively participating in the redistricting process.
Redistricting is not something best left to the politicians and the experts. Every voter has a vital stake in redistricting because it determines the composition of districts that elect public officials at every level of government. Given the advances in modern map drawing technology, it is now possible for everyone to participate directly in the redistricting process. But to be an effective player, you need to know the rules of the game.
The ACLU’s Voting Rights Project put together an excellent pamphlet titled: EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT REDISTRICTING, BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK. It’s available online for download: http://www.aclu.org/voting-rights
Print a copy before the next meeting and be ready to ask the hard questions.
Remember, he who controls redistricting can control Congress….The Future started yesterday and we’re already late.
Thank you
Your posted comments are welcomed!
