One would think that congressional Republicans and Democrats have enough to fight about these days, what with Social Security, judicial nominations, budget deficits and the occupation of Iraq on their plates. It appears, though, that both sides are gearing up for a new series of battles over congressional redistricting, battles that promise to be partisan bloodbaths if they aren't nipped in the bud.
Typically, redistricting occurs once a decade when state legislatures redraw their states' congressional district lines to reflect the demographic changes shown in the latest census. It's a politically polarizing process that nonetheless is usually resolved to the general satisfaction of most by bipartisan compromise or court order.
During Texas' last redistricting in 2001, the Republican governor and Democratic Legislature could not agree on a new map, so the state supreme court drew a map with districts largely resembling the current ones. But when Republicans took over the Legislature after the 2002 elections, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Tex., prodded the new Republican majority to take the unprecedented step of drawing a second map for the sole purpose of electing more Republicans to the House.
Democratic legislators hid in Oklahoma to prevent Republicans from achieving a quorum, and DeLay tried to get Federal Aviation Administration officials to return them to Texas by force. While DeLay was later admonished by the House ethics committee for pressuring the FAA, one Democrat finally caved, giving Republicans the quorum they needed to pass the new map. As a result, six Texas Democratic members of Congress lost their seats in 2004.
As it turns out, Texas was only the beginning. Now U.S. Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., the former state senate minority leader, is spearheading an effort by Georgia's new Republican Legislature to redraw that state's districts to be more favorable to Republicans. In response, Democrats have threatened to redraw the lines in Democratic-controlled states such as Illinois, New Mexico and New York if the Georgia plan is implemented.
Meanwhile, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger is strongly pushing a plan that would take California's redistricting out of the Legislature's hands and give it to a bipartisan panel of retired judges. However, Schwarzenegger also does not want to wait until the 2010 census, and he wants the districts redrawn for the 2006 elections.
The political implications of this controversy are enormous. Redrawing congressional districts each time there is a shift in state legislative power must not become standard practice. It would be a massive diversion of time, energy and money from important issues and would cause voter confusion as well as decreased accountability among elected officials. Clearly, there needs to be a federal law outright banning between-census partisan redistricting.
A second step would be something similar to Schwarzenegger's proposal for a panel of judges to draw the districts instead of state legislatures. While total impartiality is impossible, judges and other outside figures have proven significantly more adept than legislatures at drawing fair districts. For example, Iowa's nonpartisan legislative research office drew the state's lines expressly without looking at which areas the incumbent members of Congress represented. Thanks to that, all four incumbents ran in competitive races.
From a political standpoint, the Democrats are in a tough spot. Republicans have shown they are completely willing to bend both laws and ethics to pick up seats. Talking reason simply does not work with a party that draws one congressional district stretching in a straight line from Austin down to the Mexican border some 250 miles south. Retribution, though, by redrawing lines in other states, is not only stooping to the Republicans' level but is also a distraction both from governing and from going out and actually convincing people to vote Democratic.
Instead of becoming embroiled in the redistricting debate, Democrats should rise above it. Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean should go down to Georgia to talk about the real issues facing Georgians and how the Republicans are too busy dealing with redistricting to deal with job losses. Of course, the downside of going straight into Republican territory and trying to convince them to vote Democratic is that it would take time, and meanwhile, Democratic representatives would be losing seats. The temptation to retaliate in other states may simply be too great for Democrats to resist given their short-term peril.
Either way, Congress must reach a bipartisan compromise to keep congressional redistricting in a lockbox that can only be opened once every 10 years. If it doesn't, this issue will get very nasty very quickly.
Nick Barbash is a sophomore majoring in political science and international studies. Send comments to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
