Skip to main content

View Diary: What if legislators didn't have to draw majority-minority districts? Democrats would lose big (71 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not a bad argument... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Newt, Odysseus

    CA's "model" was mentioned in the diary. That model begins with the 2010 census redistricting. In 2000 the state was gerrymandered not for partisan advantage, but to preserve whatever incumbents were in place at the time (the D governor at the time, Gray Davis, was astonishingly weak - I voted against the recall of course but his recall should not be surprising). This resulted in some very bizarre boundaries, given the "need" to exclude Hispanic voters from Republican districts in the Central Valley, which overall is heavily Hispanic. And even then, thankfully, the execrable Richard Pombo was still tossed out on his ass.

    My original observation was MI - I remember Dems objecting to GOP "arguments" that the VRA required two Detroit-area Majority-Minority districts, despite the fact that Detroit itself doesn't fully merit a single district. Of course the claim was horseshit, as the entire point was: "the two majority black districts in Detroit already being optimally drawn for packing in Democrats", thereby excluding Democrats from any neighboring districts.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site