Dem
47
GOP
53
There were dribs and drabs of news from many different quarters yesterday, as America marches toward gerrymandering perfection—a nation where 0 of 435 districts are actually competitive. Donald Duck could end up kicking Goofy's ass from sea to shining sea.
Starting in Texas, which remains the focal point of this story for another day or so, state Rep. Nicole Collier (D) decided she did not much care for the idea of being escorted to and from the state capitol by law enforcement, and being surveilled during the time she spent at home. So, she decided not to leave her desk at all, and to sleep in the state House chamber. This produced another wave of headlines drawing attention to the shenanigans in Texas, and so several of Collier's colleagues joined in on... pretty much the weirdest slumber party ever. They will presumably be able to head home today, as the vote on the new Texas maps is scheduled to take place this morning.
Meanwhile, over in California, the vote on a "temporarily gerrymandered maps" ballot initiative is expected to take place on Thursday. Local media is taking it as a given that the Democratic-dominated legislature will give it their blessing. Keeping in mind that the state is quite blue, there's a good chance the initiative will pass in November, even with all the billionaire money and the Governator opposing it. This means that the Republicans' best chance is to kill the measure before it can get before the voters. State Assemblyman Carl DeMaio (R) is leading the charge, it appears. He has asked the nonpartisan Legislative Counsel's Office to declare the measure illegal. If that doesn't work, then he plans to file a lawsuit (which would presumably be in addition to the lawsuit that some other Republican legislators have already filed). DeMaio has described the redistricting effort with a whole bunch of unflattering terms, like "illegal," "corrupt" and "unconstitutional."
The problem here is that DeMaio (and the Republicans) don't have a legal leg to stand on. Amending the state Constitution is kind of the state sport in California (the Golden State has the second-longest constitution in the world; behind only India). The law that creates a redistricting commission was put into the state Constitution with a referendum approved by California voters. That means that California voters most certainly have the power to impose a permanent or temporary vote change to the rules.
And then there is Indiana. It is driving the White House nuts that such a red state has two blue districts. And so, the administration is twisting any arms it can find, to try to persuade/force Indiana's leadership to gerrymander their map. If the Hoosiers bow to pressure, the target will undoubtedly be IN-01, which is in the northwest corner of the state, and has a lot of Black voters and some Chicago exurbanites. It's D+1 and is currently represented by Frank J. Mrvan (D-IN).
Finally, for readers who are interested in theoretical maneuvers, Matthew A. Seligman and Aaron Tang have written an interesting piece for Slate. They propose that the blue states that have redistricting commissions should keep them, but should adopt a provision that if red states adopt gerrymandered maps, the blue states will automatically, and by law, respond in kind.
This proposal has two upsides from the Democrats' perspective. First, it might forestall red-state game-playing, since a counter-response from the blue state(s) in question would be automatic. Second, it would be good optics, by making it very clear which side was the aggressor. This said, it would be none too easy to come up with a clear set of rules as to what "triggers" the blue state response. Is it enough for, say, Florida to steal one seat? Or does it require something more expansive? On top of that, it would appear that this particular cow has already left this particular barn, and that the time for such clauses was 10 or 20 or 200 years ago. Still, it's an interesting idea. (Z)