Posted on 11/24/2014 9:36:19 AM PST by MichCapCon
In his recent Dome Magazine article, Rich Robinson of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network writes that Republicans won the state House and Senate because of “the power of the gerrymander”:
As old Joe Stalin observed, it’s less important who votes than who counts the votes. Or, in our contemporary situation, how the votes are grouped to be counted.
...Through the magic of drawing advantageous district lines, a pure toss-up state has been turned into a locked-down Red State government. I guess you have to take your hat off to the mechanics in the back room that pulled that off. But this rigged election outcome bears no resemblance to democracy. The principle of one person, one vote has been used for toilet paper.
But that does not actually appear to be the case in this most recent election. Gerrymandering certainly had some effect, but a careful look at election results shows that was not the reason the Republicans control the House and Senate.
Zach Gorchow at Gongwer lays this out:
[H]ere’s the problem with the argument that redistricting gerrymandered Democrats into an impossible task to win the majority. Most of the key House and Senate battles did not take place in these seats. In fact, many of them took place in seats whose boundaries have been largely stable or, in some cases, were made friendlier to Democrats than they were in the 2001 reapportionment plan.
Gorchow points out that Republican “gerrymandering” actually made the toss-up Senate seats more favorable to Democrats – but they still lost them. And regarding the State House, he writes:
[I]n looking at the House, of the four seats Democrats now hold that they lost on Election Day, none – I repeat, none – were designed in a way to tilt the playing field to the GOP. The 62nd District, with Battle Creek and environs, is a seat with a majority Democratic base. Republicans actually made the 71st, lost by Rep. Theresa Abed (D-Grand Ledge), a bit more Democratic when they redrew it, as was the case with the 91st, lost by Rep. Collene Lamonte (D-Montague). The 84th (Huron and Tuscola counties) has had the same boundaries since at least 1992.
So why did the GOP win so big at the legislative level while winning the gubernatorial race by only a few points and losing most “down ticket” statewide elections? Mostly because of where people choose to live.
Voters who tend to prefer Democrats are packed more closely together, often in urban areas. Republicans are spread out, more likely to live in suburban and rural areas. No matter how the lines are drawn in Michigan, Democrats will have the vast majority of the districts where 70 percent or more of voters choose them. There are many more districts that have a 50-60 percent Republican base than districts with strong Democratic support. Therefore, Republicans have better chances to win more districts than Democrats just based on where people choose to live.
That’s the simple math of our current electoral system.
If anything, my district (7th) got more liberal but Tim Walberg still won it.
Cynthia McKinney’s ‘district’ once included a single line that ran down a highway (nothing on either side) connecting pockets of black people. GOP Gerrymandering my ass.
Maryland’s 6th district.
Gerrymandered to death, to favor Dems.
Their argument is invalid.
Michigan districts are relatively squared off. Its the Detroit districts that look like shattered glass.
They sure did in Illinois, home of one-party rule.
Yeah, there’s a map of the 4th district at the site.
`That is precisely the sort of thing you see with gerrymandering - the party doing the gerrymandering can’t usually eliminate all opposition, but what they do is to make sure that the opposition’s support is concentrated in few districts, which become safe sinecures for opposing incumbents - leaving a far greater number of districts which aren’t overkill-safe but safe-enough for the party doing the gerrymandering. The Democrats announce that there have to be some black representatives?The Republicans say, “Well, if you insist" - and create districts as close to 100% black as possible. So Cynthia McKinney has a bulletproof majority in her district, and that allows Republicans to create perhaps two or even three or four other districts have less bulletproof but still comfortable Republican majority districts as a result.
Madness.
They gave us a mighty chunk of wretched Montgomery county for the sole purpose of defeating very popular Roscoe Bartlett.
It’s also why Bongino lost.
Rat bastards.
In Michigan the largest blue district is largely empty in the north but those who do live there are the ones who got screwed. There weren’t quite enough people in Saginaw and Flint to make a district.
They are talking here about the Michigan state House of Representatives, not the federal Congress.
The Muskegon County district (currently district 91) used to always elect a democrat. So, Holly Hughes winning for the GOP by 58 votes is an upset win. (I grew up next door in Newaygo County, which at one time the ‘Rats included with Mecosta and Clare counties in central Michigan (this was always a GOP district).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.