Wednesday, April 4, 2001
|
Wednesday, April 4, 2001 |
|
Redistricting: actions louder than words By DAVE HAMRICK All the figures from the 2000 U.S. Census are now available and in the hands of Georgia lawmakers, who are wishing they had a ten-foot pole to handle them with. With new population figures comes redistricting, and redistricting is about as much fun as sliding down a razor blade into a pool of alcohol. A special session for the entire Legislature to deal with all this won't start until Aug. 6, but special committees are already at work with special computers drawing up special maps that if the past is any indication will undoubtedly be thrown into a special trash can once the full Legislature convenes. As a result of our growth in population, in addition to redrawing their own districts the legislators will be dividing Georgia into 13 congressional districts, two more than we now have. District lines for county commissioners and city councils also will have to be redrawn, though in Fayette that probably won't be too traumatic commissioners here are elected county-wide, though they must live in the districts they represent. As they wade into the process, you can bet that one question is uppermost in every state representative's and every state senator's mind: "How can I come out of this process with a good chance to win reelection?" A term you will hear often during this process is "gerrymander," a word coined by combining the name of a long-ago governor of Massachusetts, Elbridge Gerry, with the word "salamander," which, it's said, was the shape of one district in that state after Republican Gov. Gerry got through redistricting in 1812. Legend has it that one member of the opposing Federalist Party, looking at the map of the new district, voiced the comparison to a salamander, to which another replied, "No, better call it a 'Gerrymander.'" Republicans this summer will inevitably accuse Democrats of gerrymandering, dividing the districts in such a way as to mass Republican voters in a small a number of districts while spreading Democrats around so as to create a large number of districts, each with a small Democratic majority. In the past, blacks and Republicans have found themselves strange bedfellows in redistricting fights, for the obvious reason that both are in the minority. Both have fought for redistricting that would give them a better chance of controlling more districts, and both have pointed accusing fingers at the majority white Democrats. This particular redistricting year promises to be more interesting than most, because the Democratic majority is smaller than it's ever been. The GOP has already issued press releases claiming that if the districts are drawn fairly, they'll have a solid chance of climbing into the driver's seat next election. The state grew by 26 percent during the 1990s, much of that growth occurring in areas with Republicans in the majority. GOP Chairman Chuck Clay put it this way: "Overall, the Census data confirms what we Republicans have been saying all along; that Democrats retain a majority in each chamber because of outdated district lines." And yes, the press release does use the "g" word. Democrats, of course, will maintain that their only concern is to redraw the districts properly and get the standard 45,000-odd people in each House district, about three times that in the state Senate districts, and around 500,000 in the U.S. House districts. It will be complicated enough just to draw the lines so that major thoroughfares and natural features form most of the boundaries, they'll say. And they'll turn the tables on Republicans and blacks, complaining that they're under tremendous pressure to gerrymander in favor of the minorities. You'll be able to tell the sheep from the goats if you watch the process and see how things end up. If it's done fairly and objectively with no political motivation, there are going to be some incumbents black, white, Democrats and Republicans who are going to find that they are no longer in the districts where they had enjoyed easy reelection. They'll have to move or face likely defeat next election. What you're more likely to see is that almost all incumbents of all races and party affiliations will be left in pretty good shape, and you can bet that negotiations behind the scenes played a bigger role in that outcome than any of the press releases and public posturing. And Gov. Gerry's legacy will remain intact.
|
||