State GOP: stop fighting redistricting! ... by gimleteye

"... lawyers for the Legislature, which has spent more than $8.1 million in legal fees defending its redistricting efforts, told Reynolds they are not prepared to accept that lawmakers were at fault in the Senate maps."

The Miami Herald can't say for certain how many millions of taxpayer dollars have been spent by GOP leaders to fight redistricting in Florida.

For a second time, the state supreme court ruled that the Congressional district map in Florida, drawn by state republicans, is illegal. Illegal, as in "violates the law". Republicans are fomenting anger and resentment among voters. An important election year is on the horizon. To come: another legal battle along the same lines decided by the supreme court on Senate district boundaries in Florida.

There are a few explanations for the continued intransigence by Republicans. 1) The fight against redistricting has become a cottage industry for top consultants and party insiders, generating fees that ensure the fighting doesn't stop, 2) The state GOP sees fairly drawn districts as an existential threat, 3) There is no GOP leadership, only a thirst for power and wealth, and 4) GOP leaders aren't afraid of alienating voters, because the GOP does a better job motivating their base and the GOP base doesn't care about districts.

Whatever the case, the GOP should be concerned how the redistricting fight, ignoring the state supreme court, is affecting the party's chances in the 2016 election. The GOP primary circus festival has already robbed dignity from the key voting bloc of Hispanics. This is the advice from a critic: drop the battle axes and get your own house in order.

Florida Republicans snarling at state's voters ... by gimleteye

The Orlando Sentinel publishes an excellent editorial-- too calm by half-- that gently ties the "tea party" nonsense last week to the underlying political corruption of gerrymandered districts-- without irony. Right now, the Republican majority in the Florida legislature is ramming through a new bill to disenfranchise state voters in ways never considered before. The issue is echoing throughout the nation and attracted our attention immediately. Our readers are paying very close attention to the corruption wafting through Tallahassee right now. Republican leaders and their 'think tanks' are digging in their heels the same way they did for House Speaker Ray Sansom, recently indicted. Click 'read more' for the full editorial. Please sign the Fair Districts petition here!

OrlandoSentinel.com
What we think: Give voters a choice
April 20, 2009
Organizers of last week's "Tea Party" protests billed them as a bid for participants to "take back" their country. Floridians have another, more practical opportunity to take back their state -- one that doesn't involve tea bags. This one is a statewide campaign to restore some integrity to the now-corrupt system of drawing legislative and congressional districts.

Florida lawmakers go through the redistricting process every 10 years, supposedly to adjust the boundary lines to population changes revealed by the census. But the party in control of the Legislature seizes the chance to design districts that serve only to protect its majority.

Wielding elaborate databases on voter behavior and sophisticated computers, the party in charge creates as many districts as possible with a majority of voters inclined to support its candidates. They corral likely opponents into as few districts as possible. In a way, lawmakers wind up choosing their voters, instead of letting voters choose them. Because this process places partisan politics above all else, it often leads to freakishly shaped districts that divide communities with common interests.

Look at state Senate District 27. Shaped much like a barbell, it runs through five counties and 115 miles in South Florida to take in its 400,000 residents.

Look at Seminole County, one of Florida's more compact counties. It has a population smaller than what's called for in a U.S. House district, but it's divided among four representatives.

This rigged and ragged approach to redistricting helps explain why Republicans have kept their strong majorities in the Florida Legislature and in the state's congressional delegation, despite a slight edge in voter registration for Democrats. When Democrat Barack Obama won the 2008 presidential race in Florida, no incumbent Republican legislators lost their seats.

Naturally, those who support maintaining the current system of gerrymandering districts portray efforts to change it as a power grab for Democrats. But the redistricting process in Florida has always been manipulated by whichever party holds the majority. When Democrats controlled the Legislature, they drew districts to benefit their candidates (and we were unhappy about it then, too). If given the chance, they'd do it again, unless voters change the system. A group of state leaders, chaired by Republican lawyer Thom Rumberger, has mounted a statewide petition drive to put on next year's ballot two proposed constitutional amendments.

The amendments -- one for legislative districts and one for congressional districts -- would bar legislators from drawing lines that favor an incumbent or political party, or disfavor a minority group. Wherever possible, legislators would be required to create compact districts that follow existing political or geographical boundaries.

Opponents have argued that redistricting plans adopted under the proposed rules would lead to a flurry of lawsuits, but Mr. Rumberger says litigation has been routine under the current process. He also says the standards called for under the reform have been well-defined in state court decisions. As both a participant and a close observer in previous rounds of redistricting, he speaks with credibility.

Organizers don't need tea bags -- they need almost 700,000 valid signatures from registered voters for each amendment by Feb. 1 to put it on next year's ballot. The signatures need to be certified, but organizers believe they are already about a third of the way to their goal. Anyone interested in supporting this worthy effort can read more about it at the campaigns' Web site, fairdistrictsflorida.org.

We hope it succeeds so Floridians can fix this broken system.

NAACP: Speak out but clean house first! By Geniusofdespair

The problem I have with the Women's Political Caucus is the same one I have with the NAACP. The support of women for political positions, just because they are women, and the support of inferior black politicians just because they are black -- both are just plain wrong.

The NAACP held a march yesterday: Black marchers call for resignation of Dade officials. Well, how about a resignation of that embarrassment, Commissioner Dorrin Rolle? And, many of the others are not much better. These Commissioners use the County as their feifdoms. There is is an absence of improvements or progress in places like Liberty City or Overtown and these black Commissioners have been governing there for years and years. Victor, Brad: Do you have to get hit over the head with a sledge hammer? As long as the NAACP remains silent on the crappy leaders that are in power in Miami Dade, the NAACP has no place criticizing the Mayor or others.

The NAACP becomes part of the problem when it looks the other way at the failings of the black leadership in government positions. Clean house!

I can embrace the NAACP request for proportional voting over at large voting but district voting (what we have now) has produced some of the worst candidates I have ever seen. It has got to go.

Proportional Representation as a Miami Dade County charter change? By Geniusofdespair

(Presdient of the Miami Dade Branch of the NAACP Bishop Victor T. Curry)

The NAACP is advocating for some form of proportional representation (instead of districts or at large seats). I like the idea but it is almost impossible to explain because it comes in many forms.

According to Rob Richie and Steve Hill of the Center for Voting and Democracy,

"National groups recently endorsing proportional representation include the Sierra Club, US PIRG, Alliance for Democracy, and NOW, while state affiliates of Common Cause and the League of Women Voters support IRV legislation. The League of Women Voters is conducting national studies of voting system reform, as are four state League chapters. The NAACP, the ACLU, and other civil rights groups are studying alternative voting systems as a means to preserve minority representation in the upcoming round of redistricting."

Richie and Hill say about our form, Districts: Contrary to their reputation, single-seat districts don't represent geographic interests very well.

In a nutshell with proportional voting:

1. You decide which candidates you would like to see elected.
2. You rank those candidates in order of preference -- knowing that a lower choice will never hurt the chances of a higher choice.

That's it! Your vote will be counted toward the highest candidate on your ranked list who can be helped by your vote. As many people as mathematically possible will elect one person -- most voters will help elect one of their top two choices.

This is what Brad Brown of the NAACP said about this subject at the Charter Review Meeting on August 15th:


"There are a plethora of issues related to possible revisions of the Miami-Dade Charter but none more important than achieving solid citizen representation on the Board of County Commissioners. Suggestions have been floated to add at large commissioners under the theory that districts representation is not effective in looking at county wide needs. (Think of how this logic would apply to our current Federal system with district and state representatives asked to vote on national wide issues like national security). At large elections have been seen to lead to a tyranny of the majority and thus have often lost in court under voting rights law challenges to district elections. District elections themselves have problems. While they may provide minority representation and ensure neglected areas can have a voice, demographics are not a constant. The appeal of members of the Haitian community for changes in the number of commissioners is a testament to this reality. Changing districts specifically to ensure minority representation can run into constitutional challenges.

There is however an alternative that has proven itself around the world. It is proportional voting. There are a number of forms that this can take and one or another form is used in 21 of the 28 countries in Europe. It is found throughout the world in numerous other countries such as Australia, Israel, South Africa, and Brazil. It has been credited with being a significant factor in stopping the violence and achieving peace between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland as it helped ensure that everyone felt represented. The possibilities for representation in proportional voting leads to much better voting turn outs in the 75 to 90% range in contrast to the U.S. where turnout is usually less than 50%.

In the United States an good example is the City of Cambridge Massachusetts which established a form of proportional voting in 1941 in order to create opportunities for Black representation on the city council and it has been successful for over 65 years. Proportional voting offers an opportunity for minority representation and allows members of such a group to feel represented no matter where they live but it is not focused on a criteria such as race or ethnicity as is often districting. In reality it is common interest groups that define themselves, the candidates they run and who they vote for. While race and ethnicity often are seen as shaping a common interest, persons concerned about an issue like affordable housing, water supply etc can coalesce throughout the voting area and have an excellent opportunity of gaining a voice on the governing body.

I urge the Taskforce to think out of the box and review voting alternatives that not only will provide for representation that would encourage larger turnouts, and fairer representation today but would continue to do that as the population changes and areas where people live shift and groups defined by common interests change."