Shocking! Redistricting is Political
Acting like teenagers who’ve found out that the WWE is scripted, Texas Democratic legislators recently shrieked and ran away in fear and anger after discovering that drawing the lines and boundaries of Texas’s congressional seats is a political process. Even partisan!
Thankfully, they fled to the safe confines of Chicago, Illinois, where their congressional lines are drawn up by a committee of Buddhist monks and members of a cloistered convent of Catholic nuns, and presented on stone tablets to the citizens of Illinois by a descendant of Moses. Ahem…
The anger is all theater.
Worse, it’s another episode of Democrats engaging in both transference and gaslighting. Democrats have been far more hyper-partisan and have used power politics to gain seats in the US House, that’s why they are yelling so loudly and theatrically. They’re pretending like they’re genuinely outraged — that the GOP is doing something never done before. A “threat to democracy!”
For better or worse, redistricting is a political exercise. “Gerrymandering” has been around since Elbridge Gerry — then Governor of Massachusetts — signed a redistricting law that drew a salamander-shaped district. In 1812.
At the start of each decade, as required by Article 1, Section 2 of the US Constitution, the allocation of the US House of Representatives to the states is done following a national census — counting the residents of each state.
Thereafter, based on its state’s allocation, each state has a process for “redistricting.” That is, re-drawing the boundaries of its congressional districts, whether the state has gained or lost House members, or even if its state allocation has not changed. (This process is moot in states with only one member elected to the US House — e.g., Delaware.)
Each state used to redraw its line once a decade. Recently, some states are redrawing their congressional lines more than once a decade for a variety of reasons — including (not so shockingly to anyone being honest) partisan political politics. Rightly or wrongly, redistricting is a political process whereby one party seeks to gain control over the other party. Or other political considerations are made, including “protecting” powerful congressional committee chairmen — as has been happening in New York State where it seems like a team of geographers, mathematicians and political scientists are summoned to make sure that Democrat Jerry Nadler never loses his seat in a primary, let alone a general election, since he was elected in 1992.
The only thing more political than redistricting — is Democrats pretending to be outraged that the redistricting process is political. It’s often a blatant, overtly partisan power play.
In fact, in 2017, Obama’s former Attorney General — Eric Holder — created a SuperPAC for the sole purpose of maximizing (“gaming”) each state’s redistricting process, so that the Democrats could control the US House.
Enter Pennsylvania.
People’s exhibit number one. In Pennsylvania, our lines are (or were) drawn transparently by actual legislation. A bill is introduced, works its way through the usual committee process and is subject to amendments and debate — and even compromise. Ultimately, when the bill passes both the Pennsylvania House and Senate, it’s presented to the Governor — just like any other bill.
After the 2010 census, Pennsylvania was allocated eighteen members of the US House. Senate Bill 1249 — which passed the State House with an overwhelming 136-61 vote — became Act 131 of 2011, setting the congressional boundaries in place. (Democratic Congressman — and Philadelphia Democratic Party Chair — Bob Brady publicly approved of the legislation.)
As had been the law and custom for decades, Act Number 131 of 2011 created the districts that were used in 2012 — and 2014 and 2016. And were set to be used in 2018, until…
Taking their lead from Holder’s SuperPAC, “disgruntled voters” filed a lawsuit arguing that the lines were suddenly “unconstitutional.” Why? Too many Republicans were winning.
Shockingly, the elected, Democrat-majority Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that the lines were “unconstitutional.” Ultimately, through other partisan gamesmanship, the Court itself actually took the unprecedented step of drawing the lines. (Wonder who supplied them with the new lines?)
The 2018 elections were held and — to the shock of no one paying attention — the new eighteen-member delegation flipped from thirteen Republicans and five Democrats to…nine Democrats and nine Republicans. (Just like God and Thomas Jefferson would’ve wanted.)
It was political. It was overtly partisan. Just like there not being one state in New England having any GOP members in Congress, due to gerrymandering. Or, Maryland having only one out of eight. California having only nine out of 52. Or the pillar of virtue — Illinois — having only three Republicans out of seventeen.
When we elect Members of Congress in Heaven, it will be a fair, impartial and unbiased process. In America, it’s a process done by politicians — or those chosen by politicians. A citizen’s duty is to be vigilant, and to demand transparency and accountability.
Apparently, the Democrats’ duty is to use all the tools at their disposal to inflate their numbers, gerrymander seats, protect powerful incumbents, and shriek and run to Illinois and make TikToks if the GOP fights back.
It’s theater of the absurd.
Guy Ciarrocchi writes for Broad + Liberty and RealClear Pennsylvania. A Senior Fellow with the Commonwealth Foundation, you can follow Guy at @PaSuburbsGuy.
