Alas, the Texas Legislature has tackled redistricting this Session with the same approach they have used on the budget and school finance – with little regard for the consequences.
Redistricting has been a favorite topic of this blogger for some time. Last year, I published a series on redistricting that explained the process and the purpose of the need for new maps.
Over the last couple of decades, as computers entered the redistricting process, most representative districts have become more and more partisan. As the decade progresses and populations shift, some districts may become more competitive but they were not originally drawn that way.
In Texas and much of the U.S., districts are drawn to benefit one party or the other. This eliminates competition in the general election. It is true that primaries are competitive. Voters get to choose the farthest of the right or the left to somewhat moderate candidates. The nature of primary voters, however, is that they are the most partisan of all and often value party loyalty above reasonableness or moderation.
The voters in the general election, who usually significantly outnumber primary voters, are left with a party nominee who often doesn’t even face an opponent. And, even if they did face an opponent, the district is designed in such a manner that only one party could ever win election.
The Texas Legislature has designed new State Representative, State Senate and now U.S. Congressional maps for Texas. If it is possible, they are even more partisan than in the past. The proverbial “swing” district (meaning either party could win) only exists in a small number of opportunities.
Folks, this is the root of the breakdown of our governing systems and a hard knock on democracy. Without competition, we do not truly have a democracy. We must have choices and options for those choices to win if we are to have a thriving democratic environment.
While we espouse the spirit of “free elections” and the “spread of democracy” around the world, we may want to pause and look in our own backyard. Both parties are guilty of designing districts to protect their power base and limit competition.
Let’s tell them we want our right to select from two or more candidates and to bring debate back into the competition for political office!
Over the past 3-5 years many states have adopted legislation or constitutional amendments that allocate redistricting responsibilities to independent, bipartisan commissions. How independent and bipartisan are the commissions in reality? I am not entirely sure. However, for the State of Texas it is probably worth a look. Either that or the Supreme Court will need to step in and mandate a remedy to this problem.
With such a bias, the one person one vote principle is being violated. In other words, those with minority views have less power in the political process than the majority. Yes, we do have majority rule in this country- that is democracy. However, under the modern American model, the process itself should carry no bias.
(notice I still follow what I learned in Women in Politics class and said “one person and one vote” and not “one man one vote.”)