GOP Looks To Redistrict Itself Back Into Power

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - GOP Looks To Redistrict Itself Back Into Power stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 07- 7-08 08:51 AM   |   Updated: 07-15-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Govs

For months, a sense of dread has been percolating within Republican circles over potentially massive congressional losses in 2008. Facing the possibility of a more pronounced minority status in the House and more than a couple seats lost in the Senate, the GOP has begun setting its sights on a contingency plan: redistricting.

Republican officials now believe that the party's best hope for retaking seats in Congress may come during gubernatorial elections in 2010. Should the GOP win back the majority of these seats (Democrats currently occupy 28 state capitols), they would be extremely well positioned to influence the redistricting of the political map that will come after the 2010 census.

"The 2010 elections are almost as important or equally important as the elections this year. After redistricting in 2011, the governors are going to have a huge influence in determining the political makeup of this country," said Chris Schrimpf, a spokesman for the Republican Governors Association. "We could feasibly see 25 to 30 congressional seats swing as the result of redistricting. And the state legislatures and governor could determine that swing. Can the National Republican Congressional Committee make a statement like that with a straight face? It would be harder for them."

The suggestion that the elections of 2010 could be as important as those in 2008 may seem like hyperbole or distraction from a Republican Party bracing for big losses. But Democratic officials are also smarting to the premise. One insider, who described the idea as a "pretty sad reflection of the Republican Party's state of affairs," nevertheless conceded that it was on everyone's radar.

Brian Namey, spokesman for the Democratic Governors Association described Democratic governors as "a formidable line of defense against Republicans who would like to Tom DeLay us out of congressional seats."

An abundance of seats are in play. There will be 36 gubernatorial races in 2010, compared to 11 such elections this cycle. Of those 36, 19 are for state houses currently held by Democrats. And of those 19, ten will involve Democratic governors who won't be running for reelection (either because of term limits or retirement).

Because redistricting follows the 2010 census, each state will be reevaluating its congressional map in 2011. And in almost every one of these states, a tremendous amount of authority for this endeavor is placed in the governor's hands.

In 28 states, the governor has the authority to veto any redistricting plan. In eight separate states, the governor can veto only a congressional plan. In another five states, the governor is responsible for appointing members to the redistricting board. And in three states -- not separate -- the governor is directly involved in redrawing the district him or herself. In only eight states does the executive body actually not play a role. As both Democratic and Republican officials readily acknowledge, the partisan makeup of a newly shaped congressional district will almost certainly reflect the politics of the sitting governor.

"The odds are, if it is a Republican in the governor's chair, the seat will end up in GOP hands," said Schrimpf.

Story continues below

So what, exactly, are the stakes at play? Namey calculates that of the 36 gubernatorial races in 2010, 32 will involve governors who will impact their state's redistricting in some way or another.

Meanwhile, because of shifting populations, there is likely to be one more congressional seat added in Georgia, California, Nevada and Utah; possibly two more added in Florida and Arizona; and the chance of four more seats added in Texas. Every state on this list, except for Arizona, currently has a Republican governor. All but Utah will hold a gubernatorial election in 2010. If Republicans hold their power they will be well positioned.

Conversely, Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, and Pennsylvania all seem likely to lose a congressional seat as a result of diminishing populations. New York and Ohio could lose two. Every state on this list, except Missouri and Louisiana, is both run by a Democrat and will have a gubernatorial election in 2010.

Of course, in almost every state, the legislative chambers will have a say into how the congressional districts are re-drawn. And in this regard the governor's power is limited. Oftentimes, in fact, redistricting plans get sent to state courts to adjudicate disagreements.

In 2010, there will be more than 1,150 state senate races and more than 4,950 state house races held nationwide. Here, too, Democrats and Republicans are cognizant of any edge.

"A flip of 50 state seats in key chambers could mean a gain -- or a loss -- of 15 Democratic Congressional seats in the next round of redistricting," said Michael Sargeant, executive director of the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee. "We need to continue winning statehouses so that we can be at the table when these district lines are drawn."

With all these elections coming at once, Republicans are clearly looking to the states as a golden opportunity to make national advances. And with a political brand that is, by their own accounts, poisonous, and with the odds currently favoring the possibility of a Democratic White House, the gubernatorial races of 2010 could very end up representing the GOP's lifeline.

"In the worst case scenario, 2010 would be the first, most important evidence that there is life in the Republican Party," said Craig Shirley, a longtime Republican strategist. "The elections that year will be vitally important because it will put on stage the worst creative skills of ever politician... Members of Congress aren't bright about handling Social Security, Medicare and the budget but they are astonishing bright at self-preservation... and drawing favorable [political] districts."

For months, a sense of dread has been percolating within Republican circles over potentially massive congressional losses in 2008. Facing the possibility of a more pronounced minority status in the Ho...
For months, a sense of dread has been percolating within Republican circles over potentially massive congressional losses in 2008. Facing the possibility of a more pronounced minority status in the Ho...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
290
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (9 pages total)
- bgregs I'm a Fan of bgregs 4 fans permalink

Can we PLEASE go back to the good old days when Gerrymandering was declared to be ILLEGAL!!! The only reason that they are allowed to do this is because of the claim that the SCOTUS made that we can redistrict to ensure that minorities get represented in Congress, but this is MAJORLY backfiring!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:37 PM on 07/07/2008

Republicans run the GOP as a business, with foresight and planning. Democrats are grade-school children at perpetual playground recess. I hav e been involved; I am accurate:
Call your local R office, tell them that you are interested; then call your local D office, tell them that you are interested. Compare the respnses.

Bernie

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:36 PM on 07/07/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 65 fans permalink

What an utterly absurd comment to post.

To suggest that any politician or political organization does not use "foresight and planning" is the height of ignorance. That there may be different approaches, or different priorities, or different vision between the parties is plausible if not likely, but no "foresight and planning"? Ridiculous!

I hope you are not really an Attorney. If you are, I'd go back to the school that you received your degree from and tell them you want your money back. They may have taught you "LAW" but they failed miserably to teach you to "think critically".

In addition to the absurd notion that the Democratic Party lacks intellectual vision, the suggestion that the Republicans even possess a greater amount is, again, absurd! After 8 years of the "Republican Vision" being implemented exactly as the Party wanted it, the Nation ends up broken, the Military decimated, the economy in ruins, the housing market reeling, and the citizens ready to revolt.

That is some "Republican foresight and planning" for you!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:55 PM on 07/07/2008
- PATina I'm a Fan of PATina 255 fans permalink
photo

Back in 1988 I described the DNC as sitting in a broke down car arguing what kind of gas they should buy... while the republicans had a smoorth running sedan driving the country straight to hell. Seems I was right. The Democrats are still arguing over putting gas in a car that doesn't work (moving to the center to win)... and the Republicans have gotten us to the precipice of the abyss.

As an independent I registered with both the DNC and RNC websites. Every week, I got an email from the RNC. I didn't start getting emails from the DNC until this year... and they aren't regular.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 07/07/2008
- PATina I'm a Fan of PATina 255 fans permalink
photo

One more thing... the Dems could do much better. I truly beleive that they could garner more followers if they came up w/ a concret agenda... worked w/ their politicians... and planned for winning. If you count women, AAs, the elderly all tend to lean democratic... not to mention they also appeal to homosexuals, hispanics and other immigrants... there's no reason for them to fail except they only 'hope' to win... instead of planning to win.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:36 PM on 07/07/2008
- Destin I'm a Fan of Destin 55 fans permalink
photo

redistricting here in georgia is as common as changing underwear unfortunately. we went through 3 in a 5 year period, with a 4th for the 2006 elections making 4 in 7 years. Course, 3 of those came immediately following the 1 by a Democrat. So yeah, the GOP is happy to redistrict and use any dirty trick to win an election, to stay in power and grant themselves huge and favorable land deals. ;)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:35 PM on 07/07/2008
- ejay579 I'm a Fan of ejay579 9 fans permalink
photo

Why so often in such a short period of time? Is there something quirky about Georgia law which allows this or is it the case that successive plans were thrown out by the courts?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:01 PM on 07/07/2008
- beekeeper I'm a Fan of beekeeper 24 fans permalink
photo

Cant win the good old fashioned way so they have to bend rules. Perhaps bending policy is the better choice.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:20 PM on 07/07/2008
photo

The GOP is so closely related to a Cult, whose aim is to attain power and undermine the rights and freedoms of the people.

After the two questionable elections in 2000 and 2004, the Republicans will likely adopt the very same sleazy tactics in an attempt to find a way to cheat the system, whether it is hanging chads, a cry of desperation to the Nine Supremes, or redistricting..

Sometime ago I heard or read this apt description of the two parties: “Republicans are the EVIL of two LESSERS”.

The utter contempt I feel for the GOP is about as equal to the lack of confidence I have for the Democratic Party, who, for the past seven and a half years has pandered up to this inept and corrupt Bush Administration. If these gutless Democrats had demonstrated even a shred of courage and opposed the despicable action against Iraq, we would not have found ourselves in such an untenable situation.

Madam Pelosi should reinforce some authority and begin IMPEACHMENT proceedings NOW before GW/ Cheney & Co. drag their worthless carcasses to some safe haven.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:46 PM on 07/07/2008

Simple solution: NEVER vote for ANY candidate with a (R) . . . . R=REMOVE REJECT

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:18 PM on 07/07/2008

Let me suggest that there is a structural problem that libertarians/conservatives/moderates/progressives,etc.(except the neocons) could get behind and that is actually having representative government.
The Iraq parliament consists of 275 lawmakers for 27M people; the U.S. has 535 lawmakers for 300+M people. The Senate populace is enshrined in the Constitution at 2 Senators per state but the Constitution’s language is ambiguous about the number of Representatives. Such has been set by the House at 435 members since 1941.
U.S. population in 1941 was 133,402,471 (source= http://www.demographia.com/db-uspop1900.htm

So we now have about 2 1/2 times the number of citizens and the same amount of Representatives; anyone else see what’s wrong with this picture?
I suggest a push- and Obama ,if elected, should be pushed- to rectify this; ESPECIALLY in view of the technology advances since 1941.
From: http://www.thirty-thousand.org.....onment.htm
“1992
— Overruling a U. S. district court decision, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled against Massachusetts on technical grounds involving “the separation of powers and the unique constitutional position of the President.” (The President is charged with calculating and transmitting the apportionment to Congress.)

And for more background: http://bryanbrickner.blogspot......quals.html

Is it any wonder ‘progressives’ have such a hard time getting people elected?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:16 PM on 07/07/2008
photo

You're implying there is a difference between libertarians and neocons.

Actually these 2 groups are one in the same.

All neocons are also corporatist libertarians. They are GLOBALISTS, classical liberals in the European sense.

True libertarians like Ron Paul are "constitutionalist libertarians".

Big difference!

Progressives shouldn't confuse these two very different groups by using a blanket term "libertarian". Let's break it down accurately and state whether they are corporatists or constitutionalists!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:39 PM on 07/07/2008
- PATina I'm a Fan of PATina 255 fans permalink
photo

I beleive the Libertarians have their own party outside of the Republican party.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:42 PM on 07/07/2008
- PATina I'm a Fan of PATina 255 fans permalink
photo

I think our whole system needs an overhaul. While they are correcting the number of representatives... they could also work out another constitutional amendment abolishing the Electoral College.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:41 PM on 07/07/2008
- SCG I'm a Fan of SCG 110 fans permalink
photo

Same old republican scummy tactics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:15 PM on 07/07/2008
- Grunty1 I'm a Fan of Grunty1 228 fans permalink

I used to argue that JUDGES, not politicians, should perform any necessary redistricting.
But that was before the GOP packed the courts with partisans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:04 PM on 07/07/2008
- Sarahjan I'm a Fan of Sarahjan 6 fans permalink

why the narrow choice? Why not make it as bot both and and question?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 PM on 07/07/2008

"CHANGE" ... ROFLMAO

Vote Democrat!!

"The same corrupt crap you hate at twice the cost!!!"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:00 PM on 07/07/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 65 fans permalink

Twice the cost?

I'm not sure I understand your calculation method.

IF (and it's a big IF), the Democratic Party IS Tax & Spend; THEN they will raise taxes in order to pay for services. That is $1.00 of service for $1.00 in tax collected.

IF the Republicans (NOT a very big IF) are spend and BORROW; THEN they will spend an equal amount of money on services (if not more), and BORROW the money to pay for it, WITH INTEREST!

That is $1.00 of service for $1.00 plus interest in money borrowed, that will eventually have to be paid back to whoever they borrow from.

So, how does the Democratic system cost more?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:36 PM on 07/07/2008
- billw8017 I'm a Fan of billw8017 40 fans permalink

Two points: The federal government borrows from the federal reserve which, then, turns its IOUs into bonds and may sell them through the banks. It may, also, hold them; so, it is not necessary to "borrow" from civilians in order to print money. That is, we do not actually borrow, but just print the money to cover otherwise unfunded ex;penditures. Obviously, borrowing would be limited to discretionary civilian money.

Raising money by exercising the government's power to print it also has limits. Clearly, there is an ideal amount of money that balances recompense and purchase. So, increasing the amount of money to meet an increase in productive workers is useful to sustain that balance. When the measure of money increase beyond that, a certain inflexibility in prices and wages resists the inflation that would be expected just from the laws of supply and demand, but the American experience has been that inflation occures over a stretch of, perhaps, three to four years. That is to say, the rise in prices, $4 gas and all that, may be a speculative bubble, but it is basically the form that Bush taxation takes.

Because taxes are all about accessing resources. You will pay your taxes, and you will pay them in the now. It is not possible to eat today bread baked tomorrow.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:32 PM on 07/07/2008
- ez14livin I'm a Fan of ez14livin 4 fans permalink

because there are only 3 types of republicans:

1. those as old as mccain, who will be dead long before the bill comes due (making the bill unreal)

2. those who are ultra rich and able to jet away to their tax havens when this country crumbles (again, the bill is unreal because they won't pay)

3. those who are continually stupid enough to vote against their own economic interests but would rather believe that clinging to a gun and bible is more important than feeding the multitudes: no abortion at any cost, but no funds for raising these ba$tards either

these are the brainwashed, dumbed down, easily amused masses; overly ready to believe a campaign based on fear as opposed to real change

none of these people have a sense of humor (unless it is racially attacking someone) or any sense of their own absurd existences. but there certainly are a whole lot of these folks.

why else would we even be assuming this election could be anything other than a landslide for obama?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:41 PM on 07/07/2008
- raker I'm a Fan of raker 92 fans permalink

With Gramma Nancy, Gampa Harry, Our Savior Barrack, and the DLC, who needs Republicans? Bring on the road blocks, voter ID requirements, purged voter rolls, fixed Diebold machines, fascist cororate government, and add DeLay-esque redistricting, and we'll be Orwellian proles in no time, and the impotent Democrats will continue to pretend that they're working to protect the Constitution.

Nader was exactly right. There's not an iota of difference between a Republican and a Democratic politician. Look no further than Hillary "Patriot Act" Clinton. Our political campaigns are a charade.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:00 PM on 07/07/2008
- indypete I'm a Fan of indypete 161 fans permalink
photo

Thanks... I think I'll go and hang myself now!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:37 PM on 07/07/2008
- billw8017 I'm a Fan of billw8017 40 fans permalink

Really? Do you think Al Gore would have invaded Iraq? Would Kerry have appointed Roberts and Aliota to the Supreme Court. Under Clinton, NAFTA did not prevent our United States from adding 100s of thousand of jobs every month and gaining a real rise in wages among the working public.

Our political campaigns are not a charade. They are a patriotic ritual that may have a real effect in disposing the government to consider the public interest. Being one among millions is not that big a deal, but it is possible to love your country and want to see its institutions work. Egocentricism is not reallism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:47 PM on 07/07/2008
photo

Redistricting should follow county lines as much as possible and be designed by independent

cartographers and demographers, not gerrymandered by scheming politicians and their parties.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:57 PM on 07/07/2008
- BruntLIVE I'm a Fan of BruntLIVE 9 fans permalink
photo

This article tells you the Republican Party can't beat you straight up, they need trickery, smoke and mirrors. It is a TRUE reflection of Republican men who were most likely nerds in high school and now have some money and want to get back at those people they think wronged they (pretty women, athletic blacks, etc...), thank God they are dying out and their kids aren't following them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:56 PM on 07/07/2008
- jdmccl I'm a Fan of jdmccl 4 fans permalink

I am thinking the GOP can beat the Dems on issues but are washed out by the siren song "Change" (Insert angels singing). Most issues they have you beat without tricks. How about the biggest trick of them all BHo is saying nothing. This trick will work and brace yourselves for all the posta about "Where is the change promised?) Like Pelosi and Reid, nothing every really changes. And yes, some kids are getting brainwashed in college for the Dems but as they grow up, that programming will be replaced by typical evaulation of the issues that occurs in the 30's and they will become more conservatiive. Watching Gloria burn her bra at 70 just doesn't make sense.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:07 PM on 07/07/2008
- NYCTV I'm a Fan of NYCTV 4 fans permalink
photo

Wow I never saw it like that before. Thanks for clearing up my world view. It's so simple JSmcbush will fix everything.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:15 PM on 07/07/2008
- PATina I'm a Fan of PATina 255 fans permalink
photo

I disagree. I think if the Democrats could (or would) actually organize themselves... come up w/ an agenda spelling out their platform on the issues... and present them to the people in a way the people could understand it... the republican party would lose hands down. The republican party's take on the issue only benefits them... not the general populace... so they use push button issues (like late term abortion) to get people to riled up.

Let's take taxes... while most Americans are against higher taxes on principle... if the Democrats could show them how paying a little more in taxes could make their lives exponentially easier and better... most people would go along w/ it because we understand the concept of getting what you pay for. But since the Democrats don't frame the issue of taxes on that bases... the "no taxes' republicans win.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:02 PM on 07/07/2008

People are fleeing Democrat states for Republican ones? No surprise there...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:50 PM on 07/07/2008

Am I to belive that Democrats never used redistricting to their advantage?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:45 PM on 07/07/2008
photo

No, but you can believe that the GOP will face redistricting losses

just like in every theatre, thanks to the treasonous neocon actions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:51 PM on 07/07/2008
- PATina I'm a Fan of PATina 255 fans permalink
photo

yeah they did... and the Republicans beat them up over it. But of course... now that they feel they can use it to win... they're all for it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:04 PM on 07/07/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next › Last » (9 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect