LIKE CHRISTMAS in April, Republican lawmakers in Richmond are enjoying visions of spoils resulting from newly redrawn district lines in the Commonwealth. The redistricting process that takes place once a decade in Virginia is a prime example of the partisan deal-making process that earns the contempt of so many disenfranchised citizens. Virginia needs to follow the lead of other progressive states and remove the partisan logrolling tendencies involved in carving up the state's population.
Last week, legislators in the House of Delegates redistricted the Commonwealth in an effort to intensify the power of incumbent Republicans. They sent their proposal to Gov. James Gilmore III (R) last Friday, who is expected to sign it into law.
Republicans ousted the Democrats' House leadership last year for the first time in over a century, and the Republicans have not yet forgotten the days when Democrats were calling the shots around redistricting time. Ten years ago, Democrats attempted to redraw the district lines in order to guarantee the dominance of Democratic leadership. The recent change of power in the House would indicate that this effort backfired, and the Republicans are out for retribution. Several Democratic representatives soon will be sent house-shopping because of the new district lines.
Gerrymandering, the skewing of district lines to manipulate the voter demographic in the district, has been practiced since the inception of our districting laws. However, challenges over districts such as the 12th Congressional District in North Carolina have been heard in the Supreme Court. The Court ruled Wednesday to uphold the district, which creates a near majority of black voters. This particular district has been the subject of nearly continuous litigation since the last census in 1990.
In prior litigation, the court ruled that race could not be the "predominant factor" in how a congressional district is drawn. North Carolina responded by creating a district that was plurality, not majority, black and somewhat more compact than its snake-like predecessor. A lower court ruled that race was still a consideration and struck down the new lines. The Supreme Court overturned this ruling with a 5 to 4 vote.
This gives a green light to lawmakers, like those in Virginia, to draw the Commonwealth's 11 congressional districts according to race this summer. This means that Republican leaders will have much more leeway in preserving the Commonwealth's only black congressional district, represented by Democrat Robert C. Scott, which stretches from Richmond to Norfolk.
Again, Republicans across the state are smiling due to the side effect of black districts: a dilution of Democratic support in adjoining districts. Virginia is one of several states with a history of racial discrimination. The Commonwealth is required under the Voting Rights Act to prove to the U.S. Justice Department that it is not aiming to reduce black voters' political influence with its redistricting plan. Federal attorneys have indicated the best way to get the Justice Department's approval is to preserve all of Virginia's 17 black majority districts used in determining the House of Delegates, assuming legislators will consider race. Due to black voters' tendency to vote Democratic, the politics of redistricting again rises to the top.
|
In Iowa in 1980, legislators kept politics out of redistricting by making the process impartial. They established a congressional redistricting process that gives the state's nonpartisan legislative bureau authority to redraw the district lines. The bureau is required to follow objective criteria, such as population equality among districts, and to ignore political criteria, including voter registration, partisan voting patterns and the political needs of the House incumbents. State legislature members would only get involved if they rejected the bureau's first two map proposals.
If Virginia used a similar process, it might prevent the partisan animosity incurred between parties. Redistricting no longer would be a tool for holding power in the chamber and would be out of the control of legislators. The partisan battles that stem from these disputes often make it difficult to agree on other issues outside of redistricting.
This past week in Richmond, after the redistricting debate, Speaker of the House Vance Wilkins Jr. (R-Amherst) needed votes on the Joint Rules Committee to defeat the Senate's request for $75,000 in order to achieve the 70 percent car-tax cut this year. Wilkins called former Speaker of the House Thomas Moss(D-Norfolk) to vote against the proposal. Moss refused. The next morning, he received a one-sentence letter from Wilkins announcing his removal from the committee. ("Redistricting plans pass House and Senate, while budget dispute leads to dismissals," The Virginian-Pilot, April 19)
These petty political moves are shaking citizens' faith in their local leadership. The Commonwealth needs to take steps to ensure that important constitutional rights such as that of equal representation are not wielded by a few power-crazed state lawmakers. Virginia needs to follow Iowa's lead and develop a nonpartisan process.
(Preston Lloyd is a Cavalier Daily viewpoint writer.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 14 hours agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | YesterdayAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 5 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
