The significance of the Supreme Court case on extreme partisan gerrymandering

Roll Call ^ | 10/10/17 | Rep. Rod Blum

[iowamark]

It is a privilege to live in a country where someone like myself, raised by parents with 10th grade educations, can live the American dream. I am a small businessman, a coach, a father, a husband -- not a career politician. I ran for office because I believe in the American dream -- the faith that education, initiative, and hard work can earn anyone a better life in this country -- is a dream worth defending. I was raised to believe that in America, the greatest country on Earth, each of us has a voice in our government. This is guaranteed by our Constitutional right to vote, but excessive partisan gerrymandering poses a threat to the responsive, accountable, and representative government we hold dear.

The Declaration of Independence guarantees that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed." The Constitution assures this through Article IV’s Guarantee Clause -- the promise of a republican form of government. It is this Constitution, which we as members of Congress, take an oath to uphold the day we assume office. It is time for Congress to defend this sacred oath and ensure our legislature properly represents constituents from every corner of the country rather than the interests of political parties.

Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, too many politicians don’t want a free and open system where those who are governed -- the voters -- have a truly free choice for those who represent and make laws for them. Instead, Democrat and Republican politicians alike often game the system so, to the extent possible, they can choose their own districts and ensure they stay in power. Today’s powerful technology and voter information allows lawmakers to rig and game the system in ways that never before could have been imagined.

A recent survey conducted by a bipartisan team of pollsters shows that the American people are fed up with politicians manipulating the maps to design their own districts, and want the Supreme Court to act. By an overwhelming margin of 71 percent - 15 percent, Americans want the Supreme Court to place limits on lawmakers’ ability to manipulate voting maps. This includes 80 percent of Democrats, 68 percent of Independents and 65 percent of Republicans. What’s more, by a margin of 62 percent - 10 percent, voters are less likely to support a candidate who is supportive of partisan gerrymandering and by an even greater margin (73 percent - 14 percent) prefer removing partisan bias from redistricting, even if it means their preferred political party will win fewer seats.

On Oct. 3, 2017, the Supreme Court will hear verbal argument in the Gill v. Whitford partisan gerrymandering case. I was proud to join a bipartisan group of 36 past and current members of Congress in signing an amicus brief in support of eliminating extreme partisan gerrymandering.

When I started a software company seventeen years ago, one of the first things I learned was: if I didn’t listen to my customers, I wouldn’t have a successful business. I am honored to represent a competitive district drawn by a nonpartisan redistricting commission. Furthermore, Iowa’s system has led to some of the nation’s most competitive races. In a country where the vast majority of members of Congress coast to reelection, most of Iowa’s congressional races are perennially close. The competitive nature of my district requires me to listen to all my constituents and take their views into account, much like a small businessman must listen to his customers.

My ability to maintain an independent voice -- joining my party when it makes sense, and breaking away when it’s the right thing to do for my constituents -- is supported by these non-partisan practices. Yet too many states allow the political party in charge to cut and slice the maps in ways that benefit them.

We have crucial decisions before us in Congress. We need to reform healthcare, strengthen our immigration system, implement tax reform and drain the swamp, but too many Americans don’t trust Congress to act in their interest and do the people’s work. To win back the public’s trust, reforming the way Congress does business needs to be front and center.

Having supported several bills to eliminate congressional perks, such as taxpayer-funded first-class flights, Cadillac pension plans, and luxury car leases for members, I personally know how difficult it is to find members of either party willing to support efforts which benefit their constituents rather than their own careers. I’m especially proud to have joined Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) in co-founding the House Term Limits Caucus to ensure our legislature is made up of citizens, not a ruling class of political elites.

If the Supreme Court limits the most extreme partisan gerrymandering, it will be a powerful step in the direction of restoring trust, and ensures the promise of America that Abraham Lincoln reminded the citizenry of at Gettysburg, "government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

[Jacquerie]

Judicially decreed districts began with Gomillion v. Lightfoot, a 1960 Scotus decision that found an electoral district with boundaries created to disenfranchise blacks violated the 15th Amendment. Huh? While abhorrent, racial gerrymandering doesn’t violate the 15th Amendment. Both Section 2 of the 14th Amendment and the 15th Amendment use the terms ‘deny’ or ‘abridge’. If racial gerrymandering constitutes denial or abridgement of the political right to vote (it doesn’t), Section 2 of the 14th Amendment commands Congress to punish errant states.

On the Right to Vote Part V.

[Wayne07]

It doesn’t affect any state that can put propositions on the ballot, and if 71% of the people really care (I don’t think they do), then you can’t gerrymander your way around that.

[SierraWasp]

Ya but... When will the Supremes correct the crippling decision that “Cows don’t vote?” Rural areas all over these United States have taxation with the most rotten level of representation and it’s glaringly obvious when a rural county is adjacent to a big metrosexual area like the huge costal cities. The “one man, one vote” concept has thrown all the State Senates (except NE’s) into an insidious imbalance! Mob rule reigns in the US until this erroneous decision by the Earl Warren led Supremes!!!

[Repeal The 17th]

They can’t do the touch-screen thing because of those hooves.

[SierraWasp]

Ya but, they can sling more crappola than the Trump haters can!!! (talk about a mooving experience)

Haven't you seen some of those Chic Fil A billboards? It's amazing what cows can do!!!

[Impy]

This lawsuit was brought but butthurt democrats in Wisconsin. Blum is extremely misguided in supporting it.

[pepsionice]

When you stand back to admire the gerrymandering landscape...you start to notice that this topic usually only comes up after a Census change, and then you notice that three states lost population, and three states gain population....all relating to a requirement to draw the lines again in six total states. You can probably find a dozen states which haven’t discussed the need to redraw districts since the 1950s.

You might also notice efforts after a GOP-friendly gerrymandering episode, where several county or city boards have approved low-rent apartment zoning situations, and in five years, they’ve added 1,000 registered Democrats into that district, and changed the outcome of future elections.

Personally, I think it’s time to just say lines can only be drawn along county lines that already exist, or to just push the federal folks or federal judges out of the whole game entirely.

[markomalley]

Maryland's version of gerrymandering is impressive. Note the 6th CD: they specifically re-engineered the district to drop part of it down into heavily Democratic Montgomery County. The result -- long-time Republican Rep. Roscoe Bartlett was defeated. He mysteriously went from an average of 60-65% of the vote to 40% of the vote.

The same thing happened in 2000 with the 8th CD: it was re-engineered to unseat Connie Morella.

I would imagine that they will re-engineer the 1st CD after the 2020 Census to bring enough of Baltimore City into the 1st CD in order to unseat Andy Harris (MD's last remaining Republican Congressman).

[Freee-dame]

Maryland’s gerrymandered districts have gott to be the worst. In some places they run for long distances along a single street to pick up the right number of Dem voters while remaining “contiguous.” Good governing (government “for the people”) has nothing to do with Maryland politics.

[foreverfree]

MD 1st Dist. bump

[Freee-dame]

Below is what Maryland voters saw on the ballot. There was much futile fighting by Republicans to use language that gave any hint about the gerrymandered districts. Dems control all politics and MSM (Baltimore Sun and WaPo) in Maryland.

Referendum Petition

Congressional Districting Plan

Establishes the boundaries for the State’s eight United States Congressional Districts based on recent census figures, as required by the United States Constitution.

Who could be against having districts defined as written by the US Constitution? /s

Maybe the advances made in internet-driven communications will allow more people today to see a legislative map without having to do an internet search. The MSM carefully avoided having the general public see any images of the outrageous maps.

[Freee-dame]

Iowa’s congressional districts certainly do look like they are designed for citizens to have some kind of local common interests addressed...the opposite of Maryland where Dem power is all that matters to pols.

[discostu]

But who’s putting things on the ballot? The parties that both think gerrymandering is awesome. Of course even if the citizens pull it off going around the parties it’s still going to be the state legislature (the parties) the ENACT the law... or don’t.

[newgeezer]

I tend to agree with those who say the Constitution does not grant the federal government these powers and, therefore, the individual States can decide.

But, I also tend to think there would be many more agreeing with this opinion if the federal government were still operating within its Constitutional bounds. As the federal government grabs more power over all our lives, how the various States elect their representatives to Congress increasingly affects the whole nation. Thus, I’m increasingly sympathetic to the idea that gerrymandering should be outlawed, preferably via Amendment.

Regardless, I frankly couldn’t care less about opinion polls, since (1) they and/or their respondents are too easily manipulated (or bungled) to produce (un)intended results, and (2) the real issue here is not what the people want, it’s what the Constitution says (or doesn’t).