Arizona: Redistricting Commission immune from grilling for decisions | The Verde Independent

Members of the Independent Redistricting Commission do not need to answer certain questions from those who are suing them, a federal court has ruled. The judges accepted the argument by commission attorneys that its members are entitled to the same immunity from having to explain their decisions as state legislators. That allows them to rebuff inquiries from those who are suing them. But the judges hearing the case set for trial next month cautioned the commissioners they may want to think twice before asserting that privilege. They ruled any claim of privilege is an all-or-nothing prospect. The ruling — and the warning — could ultimately affect the outcome of the case.

Arizona: Legislature ponies up $500K for redistricting map panel | Arizona Daily Star

State lawmakers grudgingly approved $500,000 Thursday to keep the Independent Redistricting Commission in business – and help it fight the Legislature. The funding, given final approval by both the House and Senate, falls short of the $2.2 million the commission sought in supplemental funding for the balance of this budget year, which runs through June 30. But Senate President Andy Biggs, R-Gilbert, said the amount will provide enough to pay the commission’s lawyers to be ready for a trial set to begin in March in federal court challenging the maps the panel drew for legislative districts. He said the rest of the funds the commission wanted are unnecessary – at least for the time being.

Editorials: Why Section 5 survives | Abigail Thernstrom/The Great Debate (Reuters)

“The smart money is on the court striking down [Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act] as an improper exercise of congressional power,” Rick Hasen has warned in his introduction to this forum. That bet is a poor one. The “experts” may well be proven wrong ‑ as they were in 2009 when the Supreme Court found no reason to rush into a constitutional judgment on the constitutionality of pre-clearance. “Our usual practice,” Chief Justice John Roberts said then, “is to avoid the unnecessary resolution of constitutional questions.” And that is just what the court did. Today, however, those worried about the future of the Voting Rights Act nervously point to a remark by the chief justice in a 2006 congressional redistricting case. “It is a sordid business,” Roberts said, “this divvying us up by race.” The remark suggested race-driven maps would not survive another review of Section 5’s constitutionality, and yet the enforcement of the pre-clearance provision has long involved race-conscious districting. To forbid “divvying up” is to insist that the Justice Department and the courts craft very different remedies for electoral discrimination than the familiar ones ‑ though a commitment to those race-based districting plans has long been a civil rights litmus test.

Virginia: Redistricting, electoral shuffle, voter ID bills aimed at boosting sagging GOP prospects in Virginia | The Washington Post

Virginia’s not the only electoral battleground with a Republican-ruled legislature where President Barack Obama mopped up last year en route to re-election. But it is the first to act on an ambitious menu of Republican legislation aimed at preventing another Democratic triumph. The result beckons partisan paralysis of the state Senate and a budget stalemate for the second consecutive year and the death of important education and transportation reforms. The long-term consequences, however, are more sobering. First, let’s review. Democrats turned out in huge numbers in Virginia last fall despite the state’s brand new voter identification law, creating waiting lines of four hours or more at some jammed polling places. So this year, Republicans propose even tougher identification standards, including one bill that would compel voters to present photo identification.

Editorials: Finding a way out of Virginia redistricting trap | The Washington Post

Sen. Richard L. Saslaw got wind Thursday that House Democrats might force a vote on a bill to redraw Senate lines across the state, so he dashed from his chamber to make sure that didn’t happen. Republicans had rammed the measure through the Senate on Monday in a sneak attack that Saslaw had compared to Pearl Harbor. And ever since, the Senate Democratic leader from Fairfax has been quietly pressing House Speaker William J. Howell (R-Stafford) to do away with it, according to legislators and Capitol staffers. Even though they were in close contact, Saslaw was not sure where Howell stood on the bill, which the speaker could kill with a procedural move. And with good reason.

Virginia: Republicans’ redistricting maneuver draws criticism | The Washington Post

The secret plan began unfolding about two weeks ago. Senate Majority Leader Thomas K. Norment Jr. went to Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling with a way to redraw Senate districts and make them more favorable to Republicans. But Bolling rejected the idea, fearing that it would set a bad precedent, according to two people familiar with the meeting but not authorized to discuss it publicly. Bolling, who would be needed to break a tie vote in the evenly divided Senate, also thought the move would so inflame partisan passions that lawmakers would lose sight of such priorities as transportation and education. It presented itself on Inauguration Day, when Virginia Democrats basked in their second straight presidential win and one in particular traveled to Washington to witness President Obama’s swearing-in: Sen. Henry L. Marsh III (D-Richmond).

Virginia: House Speaker holds key to redistricting vote | The Washington Post

The fate of a surprise state Senate redistricting plan that has Democrats in an uproar and threatening to derail a transportation funding fix lies, for the moment, in the hands of one man: House Speaker William J. Howell. All 100 delegates technically have a say on the bill when it comes up for a vote on the House floor, perhaps as early as Thursday. Senate Republicans muscled the measure through without notice Monday. But in his role as speaker, Howell could very well decide the matter on his own through a procedural move. He has given little indication of how he views the bill, and most House Republicans were tight-lipped Wednesday about the way forward. And when the matter appeared on the House calendar for the first time on Wednesday, it was quickly scuttled for the day — leading some to conclude that House Republicans were stalling.

Voting Blogs: Governor McDonnell Should Veto Virginia’s GOP Redistricting Gambit | Brennan Center for Justice

The 20-20 divided Virginia Senate took extraordinary action to drastically rewrite the district lines for 45 percent of Virginia’s residents on Inauguration Day.  On January 21, 2013, State Senator Henry March—a Civil Rights Activist—left the state to attend the inauguration of President Barack Obama. The Virginia Senate quickly moved to take advantage of his absence and introduced, amended and passed an amendment to a House bill making technical changes to the 2011 redistricting lines. By the time the temporarily Republican-controlled Senate was done with the technical fixes presented by the House, it had fully rewritten a number of senate districts—displacing almost 2 million Virginia residents into new districts.  While the current Senate is evenly split with 20 Democrats and 20 Republicans, some estimates suggest that the newly-proposed lines might result in a far more lopsided chamber even though there has been no significant change in the makeup of VA’s electorate in the 19 months since the previous lines were approved. The proposal could put Republicans in position to win 27 seats in the Senate at the next election, which would give Republicans a veto-proof supermajority in the chamber. This bill, as amended, passed on a party-line vote, 20 to 19, with Sen. March absent.

Voting Blogs: Tying Presidential Electors to Gerrymandered Congressional Districts will Sabotage Elections | Brennan Center for Justice

Recently Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Virginia introduced legislation to make the distribution of electoral votes for president dependent on the votes in each congressional districts instead of statewide results. Legislation to that effect has been introduced in Michigan, Wisconsin, andVirginia, and there are serious discussions in Pennsylvania. Legislators in states like Florida and Ohio also may introduce similar legislation. Currently, only Maine and Nebraska (a state with a unicameral, bipartisan legislature) allocate their electoral votes in a similar fashion. Most critics of this plan identify it as a scheme by the GOP to rig the election to improve its chances to elect a president. But there are a number of reasons to object to this proposal beyond its partisan intent or impact. Significantly, it would import into the presidential election process the dysfunction that plagues the congressional districting process. The problems with redistricting include not only partisan gerrymandering but also citizen exclusion from the redistricting process, imbalanced districts based on prison-based gerrymandering, and chronic problems with Census undercounts.

Virginia: McDonnell displeased with GOP redistricting push | Fredricksburg.com

Gov. Bob McDonnell said yesterday’s surprise redistricting effort from the members of his party in the state Senate was something he only learned about right before it happened. Senate Republicans used the absence of one Democrat in the 20-20 chamber to push through an amendment that would redraw state Senate district lines, creating a new majority-minority district but also lumping two senators together and making changes to other districts that Democrats say would favor Republican candidates.

Virginia: Redistricting Plan ‘Shameful,’ Says State Sen. Henry Marsh | Huffington Post

A key Democratic lawmaker said Tuesday it was “shameful” for Virginia Republicans to take advantage of his absence to push a redistricting plan through the state Senate. State Sen. Henry Marsh III is one of 20 Democratic members of the state Senate, which is currently evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. His attendance at President Obama’s second inauguration Monday — held on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day — allowed Republicans to push though their plan by a vote of 20-19. “I was outraged and I was saddened yesterday afternoon to learn that the Senate Republicans had used my absence to force through radical changes to all 40 Senate districts,” Marsh, a 79-year-old civil rights veteran, said in a statement Tuesday. “I wanted to attend the historic second inauguration of President Obama in person. For Senate Republicans to use my absence to push through a partisan redistricting plan that hurts voters across the state is shameful.”

New York: Cecilia Tkaczyk, Democrat, Ekes Out 18 Vote Victory in Republican Senate District | NYTimes.com

Hoping to pad their narrow majority in the State Senate, Republicans used the redistricting process last year to draw a new, Republican-friendly district in the Albany area. They expected that George A. Amedore Jr., a state assemblyman whose family has a successful home-building business in the capital region, would have no trouble making the jump to the Legislature’s upper house. Democrats sued to block the creation of the seat, but failed. Yet on Friday, 73 days after Election Day, Mr. Amedore conceded defeat to a little-known opponent: Cecilia F. Tkaczyk, a Democrat who, in addition to serving as vice president of the local school board, is also the vice president of the Golden Fleece Spinners and Weavers Guild. Ms. Tkaczyk (pronounced KAT-chik) was ahead by 18 votes — out of more than 126,000 cast — after a batch of contested ballots was counted in Ulster and Albany Counties. (Another uncounted ballot was found in Montgomery County, but it remains unclear whether it will be counted.)

Virginia: Republicans push re-drawn district map through Senate | The Washington Post

Senate Republicans pushed a re-drawn state political map past flabbergasted Democrats on Monday, pulling off what would amount to a mid-decade redistricting of Senate lines if the plan gets approval from the House and governor and stands up to anticipated legal challenges. The bill, approved 20 to 19, would revamp the Senate map to concentrate minority voters in a new Southside district and would change most, if not all, existing district lines. Democrats, still scrambling Monday night to figure out the impact, said they thought that the new map would make at least five districts held by Democrats heavily Republican. The map puts two sitting senators, R. Creigh Deeds (D-Bath) and Emmett W. Hanger Jr. (R-Augusta), into a single district.

Virginia: Virginia GOP Pulls ‘Dirty Trick’ On Inauguration Day | TPM

Democrats in Virginia are accusing state Republicans of taking advantage of a prominent civil rights leader’s trip to Washington for the presidential inauguration to pull a “dirty trick” in order to take control of the state Senate in the 2015 elections. The state Senate is split 20-20 between Republicans and Democrats. On Monday, while state Sen. Henry Marsh (D) — a 79-year-old civil rights veteran — was reportedly in Washington to attend President Obama’s second inaugural, GOP senators forced through a mid-term redistricting plan that Democrats say will make it easier for Republicans to gain a majority. With Marsh’s absence, Senate Republicans in Richmond had one more vote than Senate Democrats and could push the measure through. The new redistricting map revises the districts created under the 2011 map and would take effect before the next state Senate elections in Virginia and would redraw district lines to maximize the number of safe GOP seats.

Editorials: The House GOP can’t be beat: It’s worse than gerrymandering | Salon.com

Congress is broken, and everyone knows it. Its approval ratings hover around 10 percent, and a recent poll from Public Policy Polling found that Congress is currently less popular than cockroaches, lice and traffic jams. It has difficulty getting any sort of business done, let alone address our nation’s major challenges, like climate change, immigration, poverty and fiscal policy. But amidst the partisan fingerpointing and bickering, one core aspect of the way our government works gets a free pass. We hear a lot about campaign finance and gerrymandering, but single-member district elections – that is, having each House member represent one congressional district – are without doubt the single greatest cause of what is broken about Congress. They are the key reason why Republicans easily kept control of the House despite losing the popular vote to Democrats, and why the political center has lost out to partisans on both sides of the aisle. They turn four out of five voters effectively into spectators who have absolutely no chance of affecting their representation in Congress. They help keep women’s representation in the House stalled at less than 18 percent, and grossly distort fair representation by party and race.

Alaska: Redistricting board wants high court to reconsider | ADN.com

The Alaska Redistricting Board wants the state’s highest court to reconsider its decision that requires Alaska’s political boundaries to be redrawn. Attorneys for the board said in a petition filed this week that the court misconstrued or overlooked important facts in the case. They say the court – whose review of the plan is limited, they say, to ensuring the plan is not unreasonable and is constitutional – ignored its duty in failing to answer whether the plan adopted by the board was constitutional.

Editorials: Why ‘gerrymandering’ doesn’t polarise Congress the way we’re told | Harry J Enten/guardian.co.uk

You ever hear a point of view that is so infuriating that you want stick your head out the window and yell? I go bananas when I hear an opinion that goes against well-established political science literature. That happened this past weekend when respected television journalist Tom Brokaw said the House of Representatives is becoming increasingly polarized because of gerrymandering. Don’t get me wrong, I love Brokaw. It just so happens that he is wrong, and posts about the effect of gerrymandering on redistricting have been written over and over again in past months. It could be that Brokaw doesn’t quite understand what gerrymandering is. For those who don’t, gerrymandering is the manipulation in the drawing of House districts to ensure a desired result. Brokaw’s assumption is that politics is becoming more polarized as the result of gerrymandering in districts in which Democrats and Republicans are increasingly safe from worrying about a competitive challenger from the other party. While it is true that House districts are increasingly “safe”, this is the case even when controlling for redistricting. Last week, Nate Silver noted that there was an 8% increase in polarization independent of any effects of redistricting in 2012.

Alaska: New District Maps Fail to Pass Muster | Courthouse News Service

For a third time, the Alaska Supreme Court emphasized deference to state law while nixing the latest congressional district lines. Alaska’s redistricting board began redrawing congressional districts in 2011 after receiving data from the 2010 U.S. Census. A federal voting rights expert urged the board to draw district boundaries with a focus on creating “effective” Native districts that give Natives the ability to elect candidates of their own choosing. But when this map led to a slew of lawsuits, a Fairbanks superior court judge threw it out and found that four of the proposed House districts unnecessarily deviated from state constitutional requirements.

National: Supreme Court will revisit the Voting Rights Act | Voxxi

The New Year is likely to amass a wave of issues that will affect Latinos including a pending case in the Supreme Court that revisits a key provision of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). In Shelby County vs. Holder, the Supreme Court justices will be deciding whether it makes sense to pursue section 5. The provision requires that lawmakers who want to enact changes to voting laws are obligated to seek permission from the federal government in states with a history of discrimination. Advocates argue that without this key provision, federal judges would not have been able to block voter ID laws in Texas and South Carolina. It also voided district maps in Texas and prevented early voting in parts of Florida. Yet, critics claim the provision is outdated.

Texas: Days before hearing over Dallas’ newly drawn city council map, plaintiffs drop their federal redistricting suit | Dallas Morning News

On Friday, the federal lawsuit over the Dallas’ city council district map died a quiet death. According to a single-page filing, plaintiffs Renato de los Santos and Hilda Ramirez Duarte — who claimed in a July lawsuit that the recently redrawn council map discriminates against the city’s Latinos by diluting their voting strength — said they “no longer wish to pursue their claims” against the city. Their attorneys, and those representing the city of Dallas, have signed off on the Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice, which means the case can’t be refiled. And so, just like that, what had been expected to be a contentious, drawn-out and expensive battle over the city’s district boundaries is no more.

Arizona: Redistricting commission wants to be blocked from answering questions | Havasu News

Members of the Independent Redistricting Commission want a federal court to block them from being questioned about the legislative maps they drew. In legal papers filed in U.S. District Court, attorneys for the five commissioners said their actions are protected by “legislative privilege,” a legal concept that generally prevents lawmakers from being questioned or sued about how they reached a decision. And they want a three-judge panel hearing the case to preclude lawyers for the challengers, from being allowed to ask them about it in pretrial depositions. But Joe Kanefield, one of the commission’s attorneys, said this is just the first step to asking the federal judges to bar challengers from putting the commissioners on the stand at trial to get them to explain why they did what they did.

Texas: Court battles on Texas election issues go on and on | Star Telegram

Believe it or not, it’s not too early to start worrying about whether the 2014 party primary elections might be delayed because of the ongoing court fights over redistricting and other issues. That’s right, the same legal battles that delayed this year’s primaries from early March to late May. That’s not a prediction — just saying it could happen. It’s probably more productive for now to get up to date on where the ongoing court battles stand. A lot has happened since spring. The primaries were held, runoffs came in July and there was a pretty big national election in November.

National: Redistricting Helped Republicans Hold Onto Congress | NYTimes.com

Wisconsinites leaned Democratic when they went to the polls last month, voting to re-elect President Obama, choosing Tammy Baldwin to be their new United States senator and casting more total votes for Democrats than Republicans in races for Congress and the State Legislature. But thanks in part to the way that Republicans drew the new Congressional and legislative districts for this year’s elections, Republicans will still outnumber Democrats in Wisconsin’s new Congressional delegation five to three — and control both houses of the Legislature. Pennsylvanians also voted to re-elect Mr. Obama, elected Democrats to several statewide offices and cast about 83,000 more votes for Democratic Congressional candidates than for Republicans. But new maps drawn by Republicans — including for the Seventh District outside Philadelphia, a Rorschach-test inkblot of a district snaking through five counties that helped Representative Patrick Meehan win re-election by adding Republican voters — helped ensure that Republicans will have a 13-to-5 majority in the Congressional delegation that the state will send to Washington next month.

Minnesota: Minneapolis’ Election Day filled with hitches and glitches | MinnPost

The 2012 election should have gone off without a hitch in Minneapolis. For starters, the city clerk and his staff studied turnouts from the last two elections following redistricting, and they looked at the last three presidential elections and they monitored absentee voting beginning in September. All of their research indicated turnout would be smaller than in 2008 when 71 percent of the city’s eligible voters cast ballots. They were prepared for a 71 percent turnout, but what they got was 81 percent, or 2l5,804 voters.

Minnesota: Minneapolis election official offers ways to fix voting problems | StarTribune.com

First, City Clerk Casey Carl apologized to Minneapolis voters for last month’s voting snafus, then he recommended how to keep them from recurring. The city’s top election official told the City Council on Monday that hours-long lines, voters showing up at wrong precincts and late reporting of results arose from a number of factors: an extraordinary turnout with huge numbers of Election Day registrants, redistricting, precinct changes and technical problems ranging from balky pens to misprinted ballots. Carl recommended working with Hennepin County to buy new voting machines, changing state law to allow early voting for any reason and voting at centralized kiosks, plus mobilizing more City Hall workers to form a rapid-response team of election judges for Election Day.

Ohio: Split Ohio Supreme Court says redistricting map is constitutional | cleveland.com

A legislative map drawn in 2011 by the state apportionment board is constitutional, a deeply divided Ohio Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday. The 4-to-3 court ruling means the once-a-decade drawn map, which currently tilts heavily in favor of Republican candidates who would vie for seats in Ohio’s 99 House districts or 33 Senate district, will remain in place. The map was drawn by the Republican-controlled apportionment board in September 2011.

Pennsylvania: How gerrymandering helped GOP keep control of House | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Republicans misread polls in the run-up to Election Day, depended on glitchy get-out-the-vote technology and failed to get their presidential candidate elected despite the worst unemployment rates since the Great Depression. They sure know how to draw congressional districts, though. Building upon their 2010 midterm election wins, the GOP had a bulwark Nov. 6 that helped them hold onto the U.S. House even as President Barack Obama cruised to re-election and his party added members to the Senate. In Pennsylvania, U.S. Sen Bob Casey and three fellow Democrats for statewide row offices joined the president in wins.

Editorials: Arizona’s nonpartisan redistricting creates fairer election outcomes | Arizona Daily Star

As Arizona’s election results become final, the benefits of nonpartisan redistricting become clear – at least if one believes that election results should reflect the will of the electorate. Compare what happened in Arizona’s congressional elections with the results in three states that were heavily gerrymandered. In Pennsylvania, 2,723,000 votes were cast for Democratic congressional candidates, while 2,652,000 were cast for Republicans. Had these votes been evenly divided among Pennsylvania’s 18 congressional districts, each party would have won nine. But instead, Democrats won only five seats, all in overwhelmingly Democratic congressional districts that they won with an average of 76.9 percent of the vote. Republicans, who the Republican-dominated legislature distributed more evenly among the other thirteen districts, won all thirteen with a much lower average 59.3 percent of the votes cast.

Editorials: In Texas let’s be thankful for Section 5 | San Antonio Express-News

Let’s talk turkey. In San Antonio, Texas, I’m thankful for Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. I know. If it comes up at my Thanksgiving table, my answer to the traditional question — what are you thankful for — will surely get me some puzzled looks. There is a good chance, however, I’ll be unable to give the same answer next year. Section 5 requires certain jurisdictions with histories of discrimination — Texas among them — to get preclearance for any changes to voting or election laws. The burden is on those jurisdictions to prove they did not act with the intent to discriminate. The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to look at claims that this section is anachronistic, though Texas has just demonstrated that attempted discrimination against minority voters is as trendy as breakfast tacos.