The court case that could reshape US democracy

[T_i_B]

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=472097

It bears the utterly uninformative title of Veith et al vs Jubelirer (docket number 02-1580). But the case, which the US Supreme Court heard yesterday, deals with the explosive political issue of gerrymandering - and its ruling next year could literally reshape America's democracy.

Veith et al vs Jubelirer involves only Pennsylvania. The state's Democrats have challenged what they say is a rigged and unfair plan to redraw congressional districts, a move approved by Pennsylvania's Republican-controlled legislature after the 2000 census.

But the case's implications are nationwide. At stake is not only control of the House of Representatives in Washington, but the very health of democracy. "This is hugely important," says Sam Hirsch, an attorney for the Pennsylvania Democrats. "Gerrymandering on this scale is corrupting US democracy. This was not what the framers of the US constitution intended."

Democrats have been as guilty as Republicans. But the growing Republican dominance at state level, combined with the wizardry of computers that draw districts to reflect voting patterns down to the tiniest street, has created an unprecedented problem. By law, districts must be exactly the same size. The idea therefore is to pack as many of the opposing party's votes into as few districts as possible, leaving as many seats as possible in your party's hands. In closely balanced Pennsylvania, Democrats are fighting a scheme which gives a million Republicans control of 10 House seats and the same number of Democrats control of five.

[La_Serpiente]

1. This article is right on

So many things are changing here in the US right now. Getting kind of scary.

[Robb]

6. Sort of reminds me of the guy

...getting towards the end of his last two weeks, stocking up on post-it's and computer paper.

At least I hope that's what it reminds me of. ;)

[jamesinca]

2. This and Texas

Both are up for court review. I hope the correct thing is done.

[dusty64]

5. Me too.

Fingers crossed, but I don't have much faith in the courts anymore.

[bearfan454]

8. The Tx case goes before the court in Tyler Tx that had drawn up the

original districts. It could turn out okay for us.

[Lexingtonian]

3. interesting

I was reading up on this one tonight. I have to admit I'm not optimistic about a verdict coming down for the plaintiffs, but in either case there's going to be some rejiggering of what "equal protection" means in voting. This lawsuit is really a symptom of how bitter politics and how partisanly rigid voters have been (or, forced/needed to be) in the past 20-30 years.

I'm not as pessimistic as the punditry about Democrats taking back the House- sure, doing so in the 2004 elections looks very unlikely. But gains of ~10 seats per election for the next four cycles doesn't look unreasonable and relatively few of those are going to go to Blue Dogs. (Yes, I think we'll win the Texas lawsuit.) I'd say 2006 is looking about right for us in Congress- Democratic majorities in both chambers, and at least in the Senate not dependent on the conservative members. Probably House majorities not dependent on Blue Dogs a cycle or two later.

[papau]

4. the 86 decision gives them a chance to follow one man-one vote to

election fairness.

Why am I, like yourself, not that optimistic ???

:-(

[bearfan454]

9. Wow do i hope you are right.

[loudnclear]

7. Good article, but gerrymandering is only as effective as "red-lining"

policies are allowed to be. If the laws against "red-lining" are strictly enforced, the issue of gerrymandering will not be as important because people of diverse political persuasations will be able to live anywhere they can afford. The Dems should really be looking at "red-lining" as a key issue in some key states like FL.