|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
Democracy USA
Advisory
TEXAS REDISTRICTING TWO-STEP EXPOSES BANKRUPT PROCESS New Dubious Democracy Report Shows Highly Non-Competitive Elections State Spotlight: Controversial Texas
redistricting bill could swing six or more seats to Republicans and
further shield remaining incumbents; Iowa and Illinois offer models of
reform Washington, DC – July 29, 2003 – The dramatic battle over congressional districting in Texas has taken two new twists. After failing to pass a new plan in a highly unusual special session that ended Monday, Texas Governor Rick Perry called for a second special session. In response, eleven Democratic state senators – enough to prevent a quorum – have fled to New Mexico.
“‘Re-redistricting’ in Texas exposes just how bankrupt the process of drawing legislative lines has become,” commented Rob Richie, executive director of the Center for Voting and Democracy. “In many states, one party is grossly over-represented due to its control over redistricting, while incumbents in nearly all states were protected to an unprecedented degree. Redistricting has led directly to the worst ‘no-choice’ elections this nation has ever seen.”
The Center for Voting and Democracy’s new Dubious Democracy report (www.fairvote.org) provides an exhaustive state-by-state analysis of competitiveness in congressional elections from 1982 to 2002. It shows that the post-redistricting elections in 2002 were far less competitive than those in 1992. Fully 81% of U.S. House elections were won by margins of 20% or more. Only four incumbents lost to non-incumbent challengers – the lowest in history. The Center already has projected winners and likely victory margins in more than 350 races for Nov. 2004.
Texas is a prime example of state legislators’ power in redistricting. Through redistricting the legislature can turn the current 17-15 Democratic advantage into 21 solidly GOP districts. State and local elections are also distorted by redistricting. Texans for Public Justice (www.tpj.org , 512-472-9770) recently issued a report on the pervasive lack of competition in state elections.
Andrew Wheat, research director of Texans for Public Justice, comments, “New technologies have given mapmakers the power to do exactly what they want. The public was vociferously opposed to redistricting in hearings across the state, but their voice had no impact on legislators.”
Iowa and Illinois provide two alternatives for providing more choice and better representation in congressional elections. Iowa’s nonpartisan Legislative Services Bureau draws districts based on clear criteria, and its U.S. House races are among the most competitive in the nation. Until 1982, Illinois elected its state House of Representatives in three-seat districts with a full representation method that gave voters better choices and more diverse representation. Leaders in both parties, including former governor Jim Edgar and former Congressman Abner Mikva, support its revival, and the governor last week signed legislation to allow counties to use full representation. Democracy USA is a new initiative designed to protect, enhance and exercise the power of the right to vote. Coordinated by the Center for Voting and Democracy, its November conference has backing from several leading national organizations. For more information, visit www.DemocracyUSA.org. - End - |
