It's no secret that the Democratic Party has fallen upon tough times. With the reelection of President Bush, a Republican-controlled House and Senate and a GOP-heavy Supreme Court, the Democrats' inability to win influence over the nation has rendered them as impotent as Bob Dole before he discovered Viagra.
And while Republicans are seemingly doing everything in their power to ensure a 2006 Democratic majority in Congress, fortunes can drastically change in one year — just ask Walter Mondale. Rather than pursuing the same strategy that has only served to increase Republican representation in congress, Democrats should take a page out of Tom DeLay's playbook and focus on redistricting, sans the alleged money laundering.
While it is exceptionally painful to admit, the embattled House Majority Leader was enormously successful in his bid to redraw Texas congressional lines, despite his subdued ethics.
In order to compete with their Republican counterparts, Democrats should begin by drastically increasing the amount of money spent on elections for the Wisconsin State Senate and Assembly. Even though a state Legislature affects its citizens significantly more than their national counterparts, neither party pays much attention to non-national races. As a result, turnout in state elections is low, as is interest.
Since the Legislature decides how to redraw district lines, Democrats should be able to create favorable districts if they win a majority of the seats. Congressional lines are traditionally redrawn every ten years after a census. While Tom DeLay opted to buck tradition and gerrymander in 2002, waiting until 2010 would give Wisconsin Democrats three elections in which to gain a majority and would make the process less controversial.
While the Legislature is currently dominated by the GOP — who enjoys a 60-39 advantage in the Assembly, a well-funded coordinated campaign could considerably alter this composition. Thirteen Republicans won seats in the Assembly last November by eight percentage points or less. If Democrats can find high-quality challengers and pump truckloads of money into these districts, they could conceivably win these districts and constitute a majority.
However, spending the extra money on state elections comes with a price. Unless the Wisconsin Democratic Party somehow manages to triple their fundraising, they're going to have to engage in some creative money management.
Several of the U.S. House congressional districts as they stand today simply are not competitive; Democrats would be hard pressed to find a candidate who could win in Districts 6 and 8, while Republicans have little chance of picking up a seat in Districts 2, 4 or 7.
Democrats could take money donated to the Wisconsin Democratic Party that traditionally would be spent on these races and instead allocate it towards Assembly contests. If no viable challenger runs against incumbent Sen. Herb Kohl next November, the party could easily take general funds away from the senator's reelection campaign and spend it on state races. Of course, all such reallocations would have to be in accordance with campaign finance reform restrictions, avoiding any possible indictments.
After Democrats regain control of the Legislature, they can redraw districts in hope of increasing the number of Democratic representatives. While District 1 — representing southeastern Wisconsin — went to Republican Paul Ryan in a 2-to-1 vote last November, redistricting efforts could result in a Democrat representing that area by 2012.
Rep. Ryan's district is partially surrounded by the Madison’s District 2 and Milwaukee’s District 4, both of which lean heavily Democratic. If lawmakers were to redraw the lines and include a portion of Districts 2 and 4 in District 1, a Democrat could easily walk away with a victory. Similar measures could also be used to redraw District 5 lines.
Such a strategy by no means guarantees victory, and it appears Democrats in the state Legislature may be less than willing to take such action. Proclaiming the evils of partisan redistricting, earlier this year state Sen. Spencer Black introduced a bill aiming to take redistricting power away from the Legislature and place it in the hands of a non-partisan commission. As popular as this notion may sound, such a bill is unlikely to pass as the controlling party — of which Sen. Black is not a member — would be unlikely to give up the power to gerrymander.
Over the last few years, Republicans have shown they are willing to do what it takes to win elections while Democrats have sat with their tail between their legs hoping to avoid a slaughter. While an argument can be made in favor of non-partisan redistricting, the Supreme Court ruled in Easley v. Cromartie that partisan redistricting does not necessarily violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965. If Democrats hope to be the dominant party, they are going to have to fight fire with fire.
Robert S. Hunger ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science and journalism and is editorial page content editor of The Badger Herald.
