Imagine the NFL passed a new rule in the offseason, rewarding the Super Bowl champions Green Bay Packers by allowing them to set the order for the upcoming draft. Would you expect the Packers to be fair and set up the draft based on record? Of course not. They would do two things: improve their position in the draft and hurt the position of key rivals.
Everyone in the league would be furious, asking why the league is giving more power to the team that is already in charge. Now imagine there are only two teams in the league, the Elephants and the Donkeys. The Super Bowl is an election and the reward for winning is redistricting.
Letting political parties redraw their own districts doesn’t make sense because a majority party has no incentive to do anything but try to create an advantage for themselves. The redistricting website says the purpose of redistricting is to “provide representational equality for all potential voters.” Which sounds nice and everything, except for the caveat given on the site is about “uncertainty of judicial standards.”
The state Supreme Court is set to take up a lawsuit filed by Republicans to have the newly drawn lines included in any potential recall elections next fall. The changes wouldn’t affect a possible Walker recall, but there are four more Republican state senators who may be ousted. The Democrats have responded with motions of their own, of course, and at this point, it seems unlikely that the Republicans will be able to get the districts changed because the Legislature already agreed this summer that the districts go into effect Nov. 1, 2012.
The recent lawsuit is just another to add to the list of judicial uncertainty. A Latino rights group is arguing that changes to Milwaukee maps affecting their community are unconstitutional. All this litigation has added up to a more than $400,000 tab for the Wisconsin taxpayer. It’s obviously a contentious issue, and Republicans saw this coming, so they switched out a legal team that had been hired by a Democratic majority for one of their own.
It’s clear the redistricting map will help the Republicans and hurt the Democrats. So my question is: How do we not have a nonpartisan group drawing district lines? In a government based upon the idea of checks and balances, it is a huge liability. If either side has a complete majority every 10th year, they get unchecked access to who everyone can vote for.
The Republicans were not subtle. This was a clear power grab, but really in this scenario I think the fault lies in the structure of our government, not the current players. The Republicans in power have showed they are not only willing to play hardball, they love it, and it is what they are good at. Giving them this opportunity and expecting them to do anything other than give themselves the best chance to win is na?ve.
That’s their job, that is the sport they are playing, that is American politics today. Create a majority by whatever means necessary and execute partisan objectives within that majority. This has been evident in Wisconsin over the past 24 months.
The point is not that the Republicans are doing anything I wouldn’t do in their position. I don’t like it, just like I wouldn’t want the Bears to be able to decide the draft order – however, if my team had the power I’d like it a lot more. In an era of very accurate population statistics, redistricting has become a powerful political weapon. The people’s voice should not be altered for a decade in a specific party’s favor.
Wisconsin needs a nonpartisan group to decide redistricting. Like previous records decide the draft order in football, an impartial group should look at the changes in the census and look to maintain a balance of voices. The first objective of every politician is to get re-elected; it is time to take the power to decide where and whom they run against out of their hands. Duh.
John Waters ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in journalism.
