Recognize this scenario? In a state where one political party has controlled the state’s House, Senate and governorship since the Reconstruction, the majority party now finds itself losing power, while the opposing political party continues gaining strength.
To maintain its lock on the state legislature, the majority party uses the 2000 national census data to redraw state and congressional voting districts. These new districts dramatically increase the likelihood that the majority party’s candidates will be chosen in future elections.
The minority party cries foul, accusing the majority party of blatant gerrymandering, while the majority party insists it only was only trying to “insure that the process [was] fair.”
On the heels of the Utah Legislature’s knock-down, drag-out congressional redistricting battle?in which Democrats accused Republicans of changing Utah’s congressional districts to hamper Democrats’ chances for election?most Utahns would identify the above scenario as Utah’s own. It is not.
The preceding description comes from Georgia, where the people seething over unfair redistricting are Republicans, and the nefarious and domineering majority party?which is full of creative “redistrictors”?is the Democratic party.
This should surprise nobody. In states where legislatures redraw voting districts, redistricting has always been an exercise in maintenance of power. Democrats in Georgia make no pretenses about it.
Democratic Representative Calvin Smyre told National Public Radio’s Josh Levs, “We all know what this is all about, this is about whether or not one party or another remains in control of the power?in the state of Georgia. So, there are no non-partisan [actions] in redistricting, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.”
Plenty of irate Utah Democrats certainly disagree with Smyre?a fellow Democrat?on that point. Many Utah Democrats resurrected Democrats’ year 2000 “word of the year”?disenfranchised?to describe their feelings about the redistricting. Others used more creative language. Letters to the editor to The Salt Lake Tribune accused state Republican legislators of committing “political deception” and “gerrymandering,” while one writer called them “raw partisans.”
Legislators and citizens across the country are similarly deriding the political parties that will most benefit from redistricting.
Georgia’s Anne Mueller, a Republican state legislator from Savannah, told NPR her district, which Georgia Democrats recently redrew, resembles “an amoeba that’s on steroids,” adding, “it just sticks out everywhere?it’s crazy, it’s pathetic.”
The scenario is the same everywhere?Democrats are thrilled and Republicans are outraged in states like Georgia and Maryland, where Democrats will redistrict to their advantage. Inversely, Republicans are happy and Democrats are upset in states like Utah, Pennsylvania and Florida, where Republicans look to benefit from redistricting.
Would the Salt Lake City writer who called Utah Republicans “raw partisans” say the same of Georgia’s Calvin Smyre, who openly admits redistricting is a partisan power play? Probably not, since Smyre’s donkey and pony show will likely help Georgia elect more Democrats on both a local and national level. Were the writer a Georgian instead of a Utahn, he would more likely be celebrating Georgia Democrats’ raw power, rather than bemoaning their raw partisanship.
Would Georgia’s Mueller complain about an amoeba shaped district if the change were going to help her win an election? Most likely, she would not.
The truth is this: In redistricting, both Republicans and Democrats love the system when it helps them, and they hate it when it hurts them. Were Democrats in the majority in Utah, Utah Democrats would not be grumbling about redistricting. But few people seem honest enough to admit as much.
Since partisanship will apparently always rule redistricting, some states have taken redistricting power away from state legislatures. New Jersey, for instance, appoints a commission of five Democrats, five Republicans and a nonpartisan member appointed by the chief justice of the State Supreme Court. This nonpartisan member has the power to break tie votes.
While the system theoretically takes the partisanship out of redistricting, those who the system recently shafted?this time Republicans?don’t think so. According to the New York Times, after each party submitted its own redistricting map, the nonpartisan tiebreaker vote went to Democrats. The unsurprising reaction from New Jersey Republican legislator John O. Bennett was this: “I believe we had an uphill fight from day one?It’s almost like we were set up.”
The Salt Lake Tribune recorded that after Utah’s most recent redistricting battle, Rep. Karen Morgan, D Cottonwood Heights, proposed handing Utah’s redistricting duties over to a “seven member independent committee.” Concerning the change, Morgan told the Tribune, “I just want to do what is best for the people and best for the process.”
Utah House Minority Whip Patrice Arent similarly said, “I’m not sponsoring this resolution to retaliate against the majority party in any way. It’s just that I believe the process is flawed.”
While Morgan and Arent likely have good intentions, in today’s world of self interested politics, Utah Republicans can be excused for second-guessing their motives. And with Georgia, New Jersey and other states using redistricting for partisan purposes, perhaps Utah Republicans can also be excused for that.
Mike welcomes feedback at: [email protected] or send letter to the editor to: [email protected].