The Rape
of the Body Politic
I hate Gerrymandering. The artificial allocation of voting district demographics to fulfill a predetermined political outcome, in my opinion, is nothing more nor something less than the Rape of the Body Politic.

So when I saw in the Washington Post this article,
_Justice Staff Saw Texas Districting As Illegal ,_it grabbed my attention. Gerrymandering is a vicious and venal practice that politicians AND voters cannot seem to resist. Greed is pernicious.

To blame these excesses totally on politicians would be simplistic. It is not unknown for the public to vote down redistricting referendums, to avoid the risk of the loss of political power by the Party in Control.


While I by no means agree with the political agenda of NOW I will have to admit that the information on redistricting issues and methods found here are quite helpful.
REDISTRICTING FOR ACTIVISTS 101 Here are the worst offenses.

Gerrymander: The drawing of political boundaries to give one group or party an advantage over another.

Packing: A form of vote dilution – unlawful under the Voting Rights Act - in which minority voters are concentrated in districts at levels higher than necessary in order for the minority voters to elect their preferred candidate.

Cracking: A form of vote dilution in which a geographically compact minority community is divided into two or more districts, illegally diluting the community's voting strength.

You do not have to consider yourself an "activist" to support fair and impartial redistricting, that should be the hallmark of a good citizen.

Read and ponder these statements.

"The court ruled that, in fact, the new congressional plan created a sufficient number of safe minority districts given the demographics of the state and the requirements of the law," Holland said. He added that Texas now has three African Americans serving in Congress, up from two before the redistricting.

"This result quite plainly indicates a reduction in minority voting strength," Rich wrote in his concurring opinion. "The state's argument that it has increased minority voting strength . . . simply does not stand up under careful analysis."


The complexity of the arguments surrounding the Voting Rights Act is evident in the Justice Department memo, which focused particular attention on seats held in 2003 by a white Democrat, Martin Frost, and a Hispanic Republican, Henry Bonilla.

Voting data showed that Frost commanded great support from minority constituents, while Bonilla had relatively little support from Hispanics. The question to be considered by Justice Department lawyers was whether the new map was "retrogressive," because it diluted the power of minority voters to elect their candidate of choice. Under the adopted Texas plan, Frost's congressional district was dismantled, while the proportion of Hispanics in Bonilla's district dropped significantly. Those losses to black and Hispanic voters were not offset by other gains, the memo said.

"This result quite plainly indicates a reduction in minority voting strength," Rich wrote in his concurring opinion. "The state's argument that it has increased minority voting strength . . . simply does not stand up under careful analysis."


Let me add one more component.

One person, one vote: Constitutional requirement that each district in a legislative body contain roughly the same number of people.

One person, one vote. To me that is vital. Contrary to the wishful thinking of some, the Constitution does not support rights to groups but rights to Individuals! There is a vast difference.

This statement bothers me. "new congressional plan created a sufficient number of safe minority districts

The creation of safe minority districts should not be a consideration in redistricting, My position is that it should be done in an impartial and colorblind method, with the only considerations being, the population distribution, and any changes whatsoever, no matter how well intentioned
are a violation of the very principles on which this Republic was founded.

If you will notice in one of the statements above,

a white Democrat, Martin Frost, and a Hispanic Republican, Henry Bonilla.

Voting data showed that Frost commanded great support from minority constituents, while Bonilla had relatively little support from Hispanics.

Yes the VOTERS did not support a candidate merely because of the color of his skin.

Here is to my eyes the pernicious part of the procedure.

Frost's congressional district was dismantled, while the proportion of Hispanics in Bonilla's district dropped significantly. Those losses to black and Hispanic voters were not offset by other gains, the memo said.


Gains or losses to any particular minority group should never be an issue unless the redistricting process artificially deny them of representation.

The creation of "safe minority districts" by the altering of district lines is no different than a gerrymandering to artificially dilute their votes.


If Gerrymandering, to create a false degree of power and power for any particular group or political power is the Rape of the Body Politic, then in like vein Gerrymandering to "protect safe minority districts" can be described as a rapist who says.

But she wanted it she enjoyed it.

Rape is rape, you cannot oppose Gerrymandering and support the artificial creation of "safe minority districts" both are a perversion and a corruption of our political process.

To do so is to abrogate the rights of the individual.

I do not care how well intentioned the action is.

Linked to
Peakah's Provocations at Open Bar All Weekend!
Stuck On Stupid at Grandma Hoists Baby Jesus & Link Fest
The Uncooperative Blogger at Weekend Open Trackback Party!
Open Trackback) Weekend Round-Up
Oblogatory Anecdotes at Weekend Open Trackbacks
Colbert Report at Election Week 1 Open Trackback Party
MacStansbury.org at OPEN TRACKBACKS 10
NIF at It's the weekend

|