REDISTRICTING MAPS REAPPORTIONMENT UPDATE - NEWSLETTERS October 24, 2011 WHERE ARE WE NOW? On October 6, 2011, Gov. Nathan Deal and Attorney General Sam Olens filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking pre-clearance of the House, Senate, and Congressional maps that were passed by both chambers of the legislature during the August 2011 Special Session. In this lawsuit, Georgia’s Republican leadership has also challenged the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, and has requested that it no longer be enforced. Additionally, Gov. Deal has announced the intent of the Republican leadership to simultaneously seek pre-clearance through the Department of Justice’s administrative process. An initial filing was made on October 11, 2011, and an additional submission letter was mailed on October 21, 2011. As you know, a handful of jurisdictions, including Georgia, with histories of discriminatory voting practices cannot implement any change impacting voting without first obtaining “pre-clearance” under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Pre-clearance requires the state to demonstrate that a proposed voting change is not retrogressive and does not have the purpose or effect of discriminating based on race. States can seek pre-clearance through the Department of Justice, or through the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, with the Justice Department evaluating the maps as a party to the case. Georgia has opted to do both – which means we will be monitoring the courts and the DOJ. WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT?
Now that a federal lawsuit has been filed, there will be filings in response outlining why the maps decrease the ability of racial minorities to obtain effective representation. Those who make these filings will want to include letters and statements from individuals and organizations. Please forward these types of documents to: comments@georgiafairdistricts.com
Additionally, concerned citizens may voice their opposition to the proposed maps and the re-segregation of Georgia by contacting the Justice Department directly. Complete contact information for DOJ is the last item included in this document. Please encourage your constituents to submit comments to DOJ. DOJ must respond by December 11, 2011, so the earlier comments are submitted, the better. If you have leaders in your community who think the maps are unfair and who would like to get involved, let us know! Allies and others will be filing with the courts to explain their concerns, and they will want to include letters and statements from individuals and organizations. Please forward these types of documents to: comments@georgiafairdistricts.com.
If the maps fail to obtain pre-clearance, the Georgia General Assembly will have to revisit the maps in the 2012 legislative session. Pre-clearance is required before any map can take effect, so the legislature would have to redraw the maps to fix the issues that prevented pre-clearance. If the maps are pre-cleared by DOJ or the Court, the maps could still face another court challenge. This subsequent litigation would involve any legal challenges to the maps other than retrogression under Section 5 of the VRA.
You can help us gather information from concerned constituents and community organizations. Please forward any and all information you gather to: comments@georgiafairdistricts.com If any elected official would like to personally submit comments to DOJ, please forward them – prior to submission to DOJ – to comments@georgiafairdistricts.com. If you have additional questions, please call (404) 849-1258. Also, please visit www.gafairdistricts.com to stay up-to-date with maps and updates. Encourage your friends and community leaders to do the same. OTHER STATES What has happened in other states protected by Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act? There have been two significant developments with respect to pre-clearance in other states: In Alabama, Shelby County sued the federal government regarding the Voting Rights Act earlier this year, arguing that they should no longer be subjected to Section 5 of the VRA. In response, a federal district court judge in Washington, DC upheld the constitutionality of the Voting Rights Act, citing the history of racial discrimination in Alabama and its continued presence as a continuing justification for congressional action to protect the voting rights of racial minorities. Additionally, the judge rejected Shelby County’s arguments that the procedural requirements of the voting rights act were burdensome, and applied unfairly to select states, and showed great deference to the 2006 Congressional reauthorization of Section 5. Though an expedited appeal of this decision has been filed, this decision is valuable for proponents of Section 5 of the VRA. In Texas, the DOJ recently filed an objection in the U.S. District Court case regarding the Congressional and state House maps passed by the Texas legislature this year. In their filing, DOJ lawyers questioned the legality of the maps for the Texas House and for the state's congressional seats, saying they "deny that the proposed Congressional plan, as compared with the benchmark, maintains or increases the ability of minority voters to elect their candidate of choice in each district protected by Section 5." The Justice Department used the same language with regard to the plan for the 150 Texas House districts. Texas is seeking pre-clearance through the courts; the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. must now determine if these two maps meet the Section 5 requirements of the VRA. WHY OPPOSE THESE MAPS In this decade, with these maps, we see race being used to single out white Democrats in an attempt to ignore emerging population trends and to destroy the ability of people to build multi-racial coalitions within their communities. This is not only morally wrong, it is unlawful. Thirty percent of Georgia’s population identifies as African-American, 8 percent Latino and 3.5 percent Asian and the 58 percent as White. None of these Georgians will be fairly represented under these new maps. Redistricting is fundamentally about voters, and in Georgia, minority voters comprise fully 42 percent of the population. More importantly, in many districts, these populations have built multiracial coalitions to build political power. Under the recently approved House Maps, Republicans have paired 20 percent of Democrats and 7 percent of Republicans. The pairings pit black Democrats against white Democrats in four contests, white against white in another and eliminate multi-racial coalition voting across the state. When the dust settles, between these pairings and the creation of GOP-leaning districts, Republicans stand to knock off 10 white Democrats – half the total number of our current delegation. Moreover, the only pairing in the Senate Map involves an incumbent white Democrat paired with an incumbent black Democrat, and destroys an effective crossover district where multiracial coalitions have been able to elect the candidate of their choice. Under these maps, the GOP has potential to pick up seven new House seats, for a total of 123 Republican seats, 56 Democratic seats and one Independent. In the Senate, one Democratic seat will trend Republican and a second will be eliminated. This would give Republicans a constitutional majority in the state of Georgia; in other words, they will be able to pass any piece of legislation without opposition. DOJ CONTACT INFORMATION: If you want to continue the fight against resegregation in Georgia, voice your opposition to the redistricting maps with a letter to the Department of Justice! Mailing address: Mr. Chris Herren Chief, Voting Section Civil Rights Division Room 7254 - NWB Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20530
If you would like to send your letter through an overnight express service such as Airborne, DHL, Federal Express or UPS, then your letter should be addressed to:
Mr. Chris Herren Chief, Voting Section Civil Rights Division Room 7254 - NWB Department of Justice 1800 G St., N.W. Washington, DC 20006
You may also email your letter to vot1973c@usdoj.gov. Please enter “Georgia Redistricting” in the subject field.
If you would rather not send a letter or email, you may also call the Department of Justice at 1-800-253-3931 and ask to speak to the Georgia Redistricting team.
You can also Fax 202-616-9514 and on your cover page, please reference “Georgia Redistricting” If you have additional questions, concerns, or would be willing to share your letter, please contact at: comments@georgiafairdistricts.com
Maps Are Retrogressive Against Latinos Atlanta, GA (8/17/11) - After not being allowed to provide full commentary and limiting all community members in their reactions on the proposed redistricting legislative maps, Georgia Association of Latino Elected Officials (GALEO) wanted to release this statement that will be delivered to the Georgia Legislature for the official record and to be considered during the pre-clearance process: To begin with, I would like to object to the fact that we were only allowed one minute to provide testimony as reaction to the proposed Georgia Legislative maps for redistricting. I believe this was a violation of the principles set forth by the committee to ensure there was adequate time for response from community members. Obviously, the room was packed and lots of people wanted their opportunity to provide feedback and reaction to the proposed legislative maps. The one minute time limit severely limited the opportunity for that feedback and limited severely the opportunity for public reaction and analysis of the proposed maps. In addition, the Voting Rights Act (VRA) of 1965 and the reauthorization of the Act has various sections. I will focus upon two sections. In my view, Section 2 of the VRA prohibits the general discrimination with any voting changes and deals more substantively with the process. Chairman Lane referenced a significant importance and care was done to ensure compliance with this particular section in discussing the majority-minority districts that were created. This section of the VRA is important and should be respected and adhered to in order to ensure minority communities are able to fairly select their candidates of choice. However, Section 5 of the VRA also ensures protections for minority communities but the burden of proof is on the state to demonstrate that the proposed voting change, i.e. redistricting, does NOT have the effect of discriminating based upon color or race and that there should be no retrogression on minority voters' ability to select their own candidates of choice. Section 2 applies to a certain threshold to determine majority-minority districts. Chairman Lane explained that this was considered very seriously in the proposed districts. However, this analysis alone does not meet Section 5 requirements for some of the proposed Georgia House Legislative districts with respect to the Latino community. The state has the burden to prove that the proposed legislative maps for redistricting do not make worse or dilute the Latino community's ability to influence a district elections outcome and select their candidates of choice. Georgia has considerable anti-Latino bias and anti-immigrant sentiment. Vice Chairman of the Georgia House Reapportionment Committee, State Representative Matt Ramsey (R-Peachtree City), authored and led efforts to usher in HB87, Georgia's version of an Arizona-style law currently being litigated in the federal courts. HB87 is a manifestation of the existing anti-Latino and anti-immigrant sentiment amongst some elected officials within our state. HB87 was designed to rid the state of "illegal immigrants", clearly knowing that many immigrant households are mixed status familes (i.e. some family members may be undocumented immigrants while others may be legal immigrants or even U.S. citizens). Another example of anti-Latino and anti-immigrant hostility exists with another member of the Georgia House Reapportionment Committee. During the 2010 election cycle and facing opposition, Georgia State Representative John Yates (R-Griffin) suggested a solution for our failed immigration policy and urged for a "shoot to kill" policy at the U.S./Mexico border. When he was pressed by a Fox 5 News reporter, George Franco, during his television news interview about this policy advocating the shooting of innocent women and children, Georgia State Representative John Yates (R-Griffin) reaffirmed his support for a "shoot to kill" policy at the border. Rep. Yates never apologized for the deplorable comments nor was he repudiated by any Georgia Legislative leadership. (News segment is here: http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/georgia-lawmaker-defends-shoot-to-kill-comment-101410) Finally, Georgia Senator Renee Unterman's (R-Buford) speech in the Georgia Senate during the debate of HB87 on April 14th clearly demonstrated some of the same hostility and anti-Latino bias that exists in our state. On August 16, 2011, all committee members of the Georgia House and Senate Reapportionment Committees received a DVD copy and transcript of Unterman's speech for the official record for the federal courts or the U.S. Department of Justice's pre-clearance analysis. (YouTube.com video is posted here: http://youtu.be/HOyrxLaJlUc). Given this context of existing anti-Latino and anti-immigrant bias in our state, GALEO would like to express some serious concerns about the proposed Georgia House Redistricting maps by the Georgia General Assembly. Because of the anti-Latino environment that is clear with some elected officials, we do not believe the state has met the burden to prove they have not redrawn Georgia's legislative proposals in a non-discriminatory manner with respect to the Latino community. Here are some examples of serious concern to be raised during the legislative process and especially issues of concern for the pre-clearance process. The concerns are serious concerns of retrogression for the Latino community based upon the proposed maps by the Georgia Legislative leadership. In the City of Dalton, District #4's Latino population was diluted from 44% (existing district with 2010 Census numbers) to 41% with the Latino Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) being diluted from 37% to 34%. In the City of Gainesville, District 26's Latino population was broken up from 48% (40% CVAP) into two districts, #29 and #30, diluting the Latino population to 34% (28% CVAP) and 38% (31% CVAP), respectively. In addition, the African American population was at 15% and was diluted to 9% and 8% for the districts #29 and #30, respectively. In DeKalb County, two districts drew some attention. To begin with, District #80's Latino population was diluted from 27% (23% CVAP) to 21% (18% CVAP). Also, District #81 was also diluted from 49% (45% CVAP) to 39% (35%CVAP). This also lead to the breaking up of the Cities of Chamblee and Doraville. These two cities are commonly known to have large immigrant populations. In Gwinnett County, District #96's Latino population was diluted from 44% (39% CVAP) to 34% (30% CVAP). In addition, this district is currently represented by the only Latino legislator that has been outspoken against anti-Latino and anti-immigrant legislative initiatives. Georgia State Representative Pedro "Pete" Marin is well known within the Latino community and is well-respected as a vocal and representative spokesperson of the Latino voice in the Georgia Legislature. Diluting the Latino population in this instance is clearly an attempt to diminish the Latino community's ability to influence the outcome of the elections in this district in selecting the community's candidate of choice. Also in Gwinnett County, much has been commented on the first Latino majority-minority legislative district in our state. Some legislators have erroneously claimed that they have created the first Latino legislative district. The fact of the matter is that demographic changes lead to the designation of the district as a majority Latino district. Without moving the lines at all and taking into account the 2010 Census numbers, District #99 stands at 58% (54%CVAP) Latino population and the proposed redrawn legislative district dilutes the Latino population to 56% (52% CVAP). Finally, in Gwinnett County, District #100's Latino population was diluted from 41% (37% CVAP) to 38% (35%CVAP). This is not a complete analysis of the proposed legislative maps. Given the fact that these maps were released on Friday and testimony was needed by Tuesday for the committee hearings, we prioritized the legislative districts based upon the highest density of the Latino community. Given that the Latino population growth accounted for 28% of the state's overall population growth, the Latino community should be respected in this process. Unfortunately, the proposed maps do not respect the Latino community in many of the instances we presented, and there may be more serious concerns upon further analysis. Not enough time was provided in the hearing yesterday for me to be able to present our preliminary analysis and raise our serious concerns of retrogression against the Latino community. These may seem like subtle changes, while some of these examples are glaring dilution cases which retrogress against the Latino community. The identified proposed legislative districts could have been drawn to maintain the Latino community's ability to select candidates of their choice. Clearly, the state legislative body has anti-Latino bias based upon the actions of some of the elected officials and the newest anti-immigrant law, HB87. Given this context, I do not believe the state has met the burden to prove that the proposed legislative maps do not discriminate against the Latino community. Further, I would say that the proposed legislative maps make the situation worse for the Latino community to be able to influence the outcomes of elections with their candidates of choice and should not be given pre-clearance. This is clear retrogression for the Latino community and should not be allowed based upon the Voting Rights Act's protections of Section 5. Jerry Gonzalez, Executive Director of GALEO |
|
|
Redistricting GADisproportionate Representation
1-1 of 1 |
HOME   |
