QUOTE
Some people have accurately framed the issue this way: These days, the politicians are picking their voters, rather than voters picking their politicians.
I have posted the entire six parts of that series in the Ohio forum. I will post the links at the bottom of this editorial. We need to wake up while we still have some democracy left. Please take the time to read this series. You may be surprised how threatning this is to democracy.
EDITORIAL — NO VOICE, NO CHOICE
Old system screams out for change
By the Dayton Daily News
We live in the age of the political scream. Every issue has some people — typically on both sides — screaming bloody murder about the horrors that will befall the nation if the other side gets its way.
Most often, the screams are absurd exaggerations, and there are respectable cases to be made for going in either direction.
Occasionally, though, the time comes for a great big scream.
And when American democracy is being stolen, it's time to scream.
Outrages can't be denied
What the politicians are doing to steal democracy across the nation cannot be denied and cannot be defended.
It's being done by both sides — Republicans in Ohio, just for an example, and Democrats in California, just for an example.
And it's denounced rightly by Democrats in Ohio and Republicans in California.
Specifically, the politicians — armed with computers and reams of data about past voting patterns — are designing legislative districts that are so lopsidedly in their party's favor that no sophisticated opponent will challenge them. The only challengers who step up are people who don't understand how thoroughly the system is rigged.
If the leaders of the old Soviet Union had understood the tricks of modern politics, they wouldn't have had to stage one-candidate elections. They could have just put up naive, hopeless losers and pretended there was real competition.
American voters would like to think they are unpredictable, that they can't be taken for granted. But if a certain precinct has voted strongly for one party in five consecutive presidential elections, and if its makeup is stable, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to know how it will vote the sixth time.
The degree to which politicians can use such information — loading up districts with voters they like — to eliminate real competition is stunning.
In 2004, only 13 of 435 U.S. House seats switched parties. And there were only that many because legislative maps in Texas had been redrawn precisely to take seats from the Democrats, who lost six. (Typically, new maps are drawn once a decade, after the national Census.) That process is called redistricting. Texas, however, has redrawn its maps twice since the 2000 Census.)
This series has demonized politicians, treating them as thieves of democracy. In fact, they are not demons. But redistricting brings out their worst. It puts them under enormous pressure.
Redistricting is, after all, the most partisan, most blatantly political of all acts of government. It's all about the well-being of parties. A politician who wants a future cannot cross his or her party on something so fundamental.
The result is a sad irony. People who have a special soft spot in their heart for democracy — who have entered the democratic fray enthusiastically and have been rewarded with victory — are the ones assaulting it viciously.
When criticized, they say they're not doing anything that the other party wouldn't do and hasn't done.
True enough. That's why the rules must change, in states across the nation.
Not a partisan issue
Changing the rules probably will not result in net gains for either party nationally. Democrats and Republicans have almost exactly equal numbers of state legislators. That's as is should be, given their relative standings with the public.
But the equality masks what's going on: They cheat equally. Egregious Republican cheating is balanced by egregious Democratic cheating elsewhere.
In Congress, the current rules might be helping the Republicans, but not much. Since taking control of the House in 1994, the GOP has made gains in only two elections. Both times the reason was redistricting: in 2002, after nationwide redistricting, and in 2004, after Texas.
Overall, however, the Republicans have not made significant gains in a decade. And they have never had more than 232 of the 435 seats. That slim 53 percent majority can't be considered far out of line with the party's standing with voters.
The point of right-minded redistricting reform would not be to redistribute power between the two parties, but to move power from the politicians to the people.
This shouldn't even have to be said: The people should be dominant in picking their representatives. Winning office should not be a simple matter of currying favor with party leaders. That's not democracy.
Candidates should have to sweat. They should have to worry about the views of their constituents (even if they should not always bend to them).
If districts were not drawn, as they are, to eliminate competition, representatives would be more accountable to the American mainstream. Most incumbents would still win. But they'd have to worry more about explaining themselves in public. And they'd be less free to play to the national right or left and to party leaders.
American politics used to have a center, rather than just a Democratic view and a Republican one. That was back when districts were not so overwhelmingly tilted to one party. (Mapmaking was not a refined science then.) As a result, representatives were not so completely Democratic or Republican.
It's up to the people
In Ohio, term limits were supposed to shake up the Legislature by fostering real elections. However, because of modern methods of redistricting, the partisan makeup of the Legislature is more stable today than ever.
Everybody seems to assume mapmaking is permanently in Republican hands. In fact, however, state legislative districts are drawn by whichever party has two of the following three offices: governor, secretary of state and auditor. Each office is on the ballot next year, with no incumbent running.
Republicans will not have the great advantage they've had in most state elections lately: the better-known candidate. So nobody knows who will be in charge of redistricting next time.
One thing is sure, though: If Democrats take control, they will lose interest in reform.
Nor will Republicans enact reform if they keep full control.
It's up to the people.
Changing things will not be easy. It will take putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot. That requires getting 323,000 signatures on petitions. The last time somebody moved to change the redistricting rules — the League of Women Voters in the late 1990s — the measure never even got to voters.
These days, all manner of ballot measures are in the air. There are proposals to allow casinos, to require super-majorities in the Legislature to raise taxes, and more. This general trend is an unfortunate step away from the representative democracy that serves this country best.
But sometimes there is no choice. The Legislature is the wrong place to look for redistricting reform, because the politicians are the problem.
Moreover, the outrage to be corrected is far greater and far more fundamental than any of the other issues voters might be asked to consider.
What's at stake is whether Ohioans will settle for being bit players in democracy.
Some people have accurately framed the issue this way: These days, the politicians are picking their voters, rather than voters picking their politicians.
Ohioans cannot stand for that.
Find this article at:
http://www.daytondailynews.com/opinion/con...417mapsend.html
NO VOICE, NO CHOICE
1) The National Scene:When parties rule, democracy dies
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...topic=25937&hl=
2) The Ohio Scene:Parties cut out swing voters, independents
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...topic=25938&hl=
3) The Local Scene:Voters barely matter in Miami Valley politics
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...topic=25939&hl=
Part 4:Obstacles await reformers
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...topic=25957&hl=
Part 5:Reform can foster real democracy
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...topic=25959&hl=
Part 6:League offers intriguing plan for maps
http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...howtopic=25960#