The 2002 Reapportionment-Another View
This morning, I wrote that the seeds for defeat for Saturday’s Special Election in the 37th RD were sown with the reapportionment of 2002, and the Republican gerrymandering and Democratic acquiescence that took place in Sussex County and elsewhere. Following that piece, I was contacted by someone with intimate knowledge of the House D’s approach to that reapportionment, and they maintain that I did not adequately nor accurately describe their position at the time.
Accordingly, in the interest of fairness, I submit their basic points w/o (as best as I can exercise discipline) my responses:
1. The House Democrats’ plan to gain control in 2002 resided in an attempt to increase the size of the House from 41 to 45 members. Under that scenario, changing demographics would have made it likely that the D’s would have gained control long before 2008. While many Democratic leaders were supposedly on board, my contact claims that President Pro-Tempore Tom Sharp shot down that proposal, along with a Senate Republican proposal to increase the size of the Senate to 23.
2. The contact maintains that the district drawn for Melanie George Marshall was done by the Republicans WITHOUT any attempt on the part of Democratic leadership to influence the decision. This was allegedly done b/c (a) Marshall had made clear that she would run; and (b) if she did so, she would almost inevitably take out either Terry Spence or Bruce Reynolds, depending on whose district she was drawn into. Thus, allegedly, the Barbell District was born.
3. Rep. DiLiberto likely would have been OK if he hadn’t moved into a house a long way from the base of his district. The R’s viewed DiLiberto as a potential statewide threat (he had been mentioned, along with John Carney and Dave Sokola as a possibility to be Minner’s Lt. Governor choice). So, when the opportunity came to remove him from the House through redistricting, Wayne Smith couldn’t resist the opportunity. (FWIW, having been to DiLiberto’s new house, I believe this to be true.)
Finally, my contact believes that, had there not been a Republican surge following 9-11, the D’s still could have taken the House in 2002, and almost certainly would not have lost both the Price and Schroeder seats by such narrow margins.
I have to head out to work, so I will withhold comments until later. I want to thank my contact for being so polite and even-handed in their remarks. I DO believe that, while they see this a little differently from me, my contact sincerely believes that their view of things is fair and accurate. I thank them for contacting me.
Tags: House Democrats, Reapportionment
regarding the 37th, what are the registration numbers? D’s, R’s & I’s/others
your source is trying to rewrite history, the Melanie George deal was common knowledge among political insiders (D&R) before the maps were final and voted on.
#1 was true. Not sure about 2 and 3. Marshall probably has one of the most politically safe representative districts in the state.
I continue to believe that packing Joe Booth into Venables’ district, and giving Simpson the Bridgeville/Greenwood metropolis, is the right play, by opening up a new beach-area district.
If that leads to a Senate with Bunting and Robinson, so much the better.
37th District Democrats Republicans Others Total
Total 5,524 5,293 3,051 13,868
Last Updated On 09/01/09 00:40:50 http://elections.delaware.gov/reports/e70r2601.shtml
your complaint is that 231 votes isn’t a big enough head start?
The D’s didn’t come out and vote in the 37th on saturday. Right wing radio station WGMD has heavey listenership in the district. Many members of SCOOR also live in the district. R’s rallied, D’s didn’t.
How many bloggers were working for either of the candidates in the traditional sense of the word?
How many of Delaware’s ‘gerrymandered’ districts fail to meet the traditional mandate of ‘compact and contiguous’? Would Democrats be any more ‘fair’ in redistricting than their opponents?
Look at the map of the district created by the eponymous Elbridge Gerry for an example of what was once deemed the worst sort of a boundary.
Look at the Congressional District lines in Maryland to show what Democrats in absolute power can do. I call especial attention to the Third District, where blobs are linked with necks that are often a mere 100 yards wide. Anne Arundel County is effectively disenfranchised by this scheme.
Art, first of all, we’re talking about Delaware rep. districts, not Congressional districts. Second, what Wayne Smith did went well beyond violating ‘compact and contiguous’ requirements, which are, after all, subject to court scrutiny.
In his (at the time) own Rep. District, Smith divided up several developments, another big no-no, and something that the State Senate hasn’t done. Here’s a partial list: Ashbourne Hills, Chalfonte, Radnor Green, Indianfield, Chatham, S. Graylyn Crest, and Windybush.
He did this in several other rep districts. The Democrats had the chance to challenge this plan in court, and I think they would have prevailed, but they chose not to do so. By making that choice, leadership in effect chose to remain in the minority for six more years.
The Democrats had the chance to challenge this plan in court, and I think they would have prevailed.
No they would not have prevailed in court. Just look at the redistricitng shenangans in Texas that withstood multiple court challenges. it happens all the time and the courts do not intervene on the federal or state level. But now that the dems have control of Congress and most state governments, I believe you will see payback time and a lot of whining from the right when all is said and done.
Here’s my typical Smitty take:
The next election is 2010. Both major parties know what’s at stake. Both will put everything they can into either retaining the majority (D’s) or taking the majority (R’s). Now that the D’s have taken the R’s redistricting in 2001-2 as their own via the majority, they own their to-be legacy. If they blow it, then shame on them. If the R’s can’t reclaim it, then shame on them (the R’s). What shouldn’t happen now, and is absolutely bizarre to me that it is, given that the D’s own the majority, is the protesting of districts. The R’s lost the majority in ’08, it’s done, over. If they retake the majority in ’10, will this be the reason, that it’s because of district lines drawn in ’02? Eff that! Mind your political acumen and get your person re-elected. At this point, given the change of power, I’d expect this argument to be moot. Why in the hell even worry about 2002 when much more is at stake in 2010? Look forward, for crying out loud! Oh, and to go on topic, primary MGM, sheesh!
Here’s my typical ‘Bulo take. I started out discussing how the seeds of defeat in the 37th RD were sown. That election took place last week and, since I believe that the 2002 reapportionment helped cause the defeat, it seems relevant to me.
Smitty’s right that all the focus will be on 2010. However, just as he claims that I have a blind spot when it comes to Dick Cathcart, Smitty has a big one when it comes to Melanie George Marshall. To quote the Smittster: “Oh, and to go on topic, primary MGM, sheesh!”
Melanie Marshall would be nowhere near the top of the list of House D’s that should be primaried. In fact, I can see no earthly reason why she should be. She really is one of the more effective and thoughtful legislators in Dover, regardless of the circumstance on how she got there. Nonentities like Bill Carson and John Viola? Absolutely. Dennis E. Williams, if he doesn’t shape up? Of course. But just b/c she pissed off Smitty’s boy, Dick Cathcart, is no reason to primary her. Last I checked, Cathcart is the House Republican leader. Why should a D primary George for that? Other than that Dogfish Head IPA, you ain’t got no case, Smitty.
😆
Actually, ‘bulo, I based that primary call on ramblings (consistent ones at that) I have heard from friend-Democrats. Granted, they were ramblings, but if that is my barometer (it is), I’d have to conclude that she doesn’t have a long list of true supporters (meaning beyond her being a D). Her fortunate circumstance is a far shorter list of challengers. Again, that is what goes in the ears from, for what it’s worth, mostly out-of-her-district people. Yes, I will concede a grain of salt in a wound, too, but it’s not all contrived. I will ask you this, though, are you saying that if a Dogfish Head IPA case suddenly appeared with a love note (a love-the-beer note, that is) from me, a primary is worth considering? Think about it for a few, ‘bulo, think about it!!! 😉
BTW, on John Viola…guess what wingnut wants to challenge him in the General? Hint: he’s on your banned list. I just need confirmation that he’s in Viola’s district, but from what has been tossed around, he is.
“Just look at the redistricitng shenangans in Texas that withstood multiple court challenges.”
Those pointing to other states are off-base. This is a Delaware law at issue; what other states’ laws say about redistricting have no bearing.
FOR CRYING OUT LOUD… Check the Department of Elections’ Polling Place Finder to determine whether someone’s in a given district. elections.delaware.gov. Everyone knows about this site, right? So no more wondering whether Mr. Wingnut is in Viola’s district, or whether Robinson is in Venables’ district? Check first? Please????
Sorry, that kind of talk just really aggravates me when it’s so easy to check.
el s.
the evil republicans drew a redistricting map in 2002 with exactly THREE republican majority districts out of 41 distrticts:
RD20 +77 R’s
RD22 +474 R’s
RD38 +852 R’s
you would have been laughed out of court.
your beef is with the voters, not the map drawers or the courts.
and of the remaining 38 districts (all Dem majority)only 11 have less than a thousand vote advantage for the D’s.
“Check first? Please????”
That only works if you know where the person lives. Since he’s talking about a (presumably) anonymous commenter, that’s not likely, is it?
ATiM: Party registration is NOT one of the elements mandated by the law, and therefore would not be at issue in a lawsuit. If registration equality were mandated, the districts that include most of Wilmington would have to be stretched out to the suburbs to include more R’s.
The issue is the SHAPE of the districts, not their registration. With the overall numbers what they are, it would be hard for Republicans to draw a map that had MORE R-majority districs.
Re All Things in Moderation’s points. You’re playing games with language again. Fact is there were (and are) very few Republican or Democratic majority districts to begin with. In fact, there are more D-majority (over 50% of voter registration as D’s) precisely BECAUSE packing districts with lopsided D margins afforded the R’s more opportunities to win, especially given the power of incumbency.
And, to your second point, you are referring to 2009 numbers, NOT the numbers that existed during reapportionment. This shift in voter registration in recent years is the reason that D’s now have the majority.
Finally, as to your point about the case being laughed out of court, you DO realize, don’t you, that Judge Chandler threatened to draw the lines for the House if an accommodation could not be met? The judge might just have done so had a suit been brought. There was also the issue of minority representation as Wayne ‘Resegregate the Schools’ Smith obliterated a black majority district by putting Reps. Plant and Scott in the same district. Unfortunately, Sam Guy decided that grandstanding was more effective than litigating.
There were REAL issues with that 2002 redistricting, far more so than usual. So, to say that this would have been laughed out of court flies in the face of the evidence.
So no more wondering whether Mr. Wingnut is in Viola’s district
Er, I was speaking of confirming his own idenitification of living in Viola’s district is true. I have no idea of his actual address. There are clues in this person’s various postings throughout the intertubes and his supporters. All signs point to him being in Viola’s district, though.
Can’t exactly fact-check an address when the address is unknown, eh anon? Know what highly aggravates me? Accusations based on no facts.
Looking up a name on the file is also tough if you have a relatively common name–like Ron Robinson. Is there an initial in front of his name? Is it Ronald or Ron or something else? Once you’ve found all the Ronald Robinsons, which one is he? Granted, if you have access to the entire voter file, you can figure stuff like that out. But, if all you have is a fairly common name, then you’ve got to get lucky.
nm
who’s playing games?
you claim the Dems lost the 37th special with a 231 voter registration advantage because of district lines drawn seven years earlier.
if the dems maintain the majority in 2010, they will redraw the maps with in eye towards shifting district lines to force Republican incumbants to run against each other.
there will be no change to the landslide districts in Wilmington for the same reason that there was little change in 2000… to preserve African American incumbants. The R’s didn’t want to go to court over a “disparate impact” claim then and the D’s will preserve the status quo.
Whoever is feeding ATIM his/her talking points is letting him/her down. Allow me to quote from the putative redistricting expert:
“…there will be no change to the landslide districts in Wilmington for the same reason that there was little change in 2000… to preserve African American incumbants. The R’s didn’t want to go to court over a “disparate impact” claim then and the D’s will preserve the status quo.”
That is utter fiction. The R’s in fact DID eliminate a predominantly African-American district in Wilmington by placing Reps. Scott and Plant (both African-Americans) in the SAME district. Why did they do this, you might ask?
The answer is/was to save the wrinkly hide of Rep. Joe DiPinto (NOT an African-American, in case you’re wondering), a Republican who resided in Wilmington. How did they do this? By drawing a district extending from Wilmington all the way up to Chateau Country. Don’t believe me. Believe the bleeping map:
http://elections.delaware.gov/information/districtmaps/pdf/rep/04rep.pdf
The R’s gerrymandered districts in 2002 for self preservation. Whomever controls the house in 2010 will do the same thing again.
it’s the unwarranted arrogance that makes you DL’s so funny.
The 45 seat proposal was to maintain the status quo. It would have added the seats in the population growth areas near the beach and Middletown. Conservative Democrat leaders rightly said no, redraw the map with 41. This ment wilmington lost a seat and other rd’s shifted southward. The map we now have was the least disruptive option for black incumbants.
as for talking points, your the one who begins this post admitting you didn’t know shit and had to be set straight by a Dem insider.
I posted the ‘insider’s’ view for what it was–an alternate view. I didn’t say I shared it, nor do I. I know more than a little about the 2002 reapportionment. A hell of a lot more than you.
I also agree that the numbers should not have been increased. 6 more legislators, more staff, more dollars and more everything. And Delaware neither was nor is out of proportion with other states (there are wild exceptions on either end) when it comes to the number of constituents per legislator.
Nothing meant that Wilmington had to lose a seat and certainly not an African-American majority seat, which you first claimed didn’t happen until I showed you that it did. While a septuagenarian Rethug white guy got a district running from Trolley Square to Greenville, two incumbent African-American reps were put in the same district. How that map is ‘the least disruptive option for black incumbents’ is an assertion unsupported by the evidence. A black incumbent from the city was screwed while a white incumbent was given an electoral gift. As was another white incumbent, Helene Keeley.
Some of these things I’ve written, they’re called facts. Gloss over them at your own risk.
those wiley republicans saved Joe’s butt by drawing him a district with 3,113 more D’s than R’s. wow what a gift!
they are some sneakey somsofbeaches.
How many I’s were in that district? Also, how many votes is incumbency worth?
ATIM, this is the SECOND time you’ve tried to sneak this blatantly incorrect talking point past us. You are using 2009 numbers to justify what was done in 2002. In 2002, this district, post-reapportionment, was a swing district based on registration with a long-term incumbent. It has become an overwhelmingly D district only in the past four years.
When all you bring to the table is intellectual dishonesty, time to push yourself away from the table.
Oh, and please answer how placing two black incumbents in the same district is the ‘least disruptive option for black incumbents’ before you move on to your next hit-and-run posting. YOU made that assertion, now back it up. Or slink back to your think tank, or ‘Lancaster Avenue’ as Smitty refers to Rethug HQ.
Since Robert Robinson registered as a candidate, his address was published on the Dept on Elections site.
He lives on S. Front street in Georgetown, which is the 19th Senate District. I used to live within a block from his house on Pine Street, actually.
el empty head,
please enlighten us and post the 2002 registration numbers. I provided a link to my source.
Regarding the wilmington districts I stand by my opinion. Please feel free to post your alternative map that you feel would have preserved or increased the number of elected democrat minorities.
ATiM: Twenty percent of Delawareans are African-Americans. If they achieved that level of representation in the General Assembly, 8 reps and 4 senators would be black.
Take your “opinion” about the Wilmington districts and stick them in the same place I stick self-proclaimed political analysts who can’t spell the word “incumbent” correctly.
ATIM, for someone who hasn’t brought a single fact to the table in this discussion, you sure seem to think that I have nothing better to do than to prove how uninformed you are. Unfortunately for you, that just happens to be the case today.
The complete numbers detailing the registration figures from the 4th RD (DiPinto’s District) as of Election Day 2002 are here:
http://elections.delaware.gov/archive/elect02/elect02_agp/agp2002.shtml#04
I would’ve posted them online, but they didn’t transfer in an orderly fashion. Here are the key figures from the 2002 numbers for the 4th RD:
Registered 16,152
D’s 6762
% 41.9
R’s 5813
% 36.0
I/Others 3577
% 22.1
Those numbers define the term ‘swing district.’ So, the next time you say that the Rethugs drew DiPinto a district with 3113 more D’s than R’s, everyone here will know what I already know: That you’re so full of it that Port-A-Potty should name a model after you.
BTW, ALL of the registration numbers from the 2002 redistricting can be found at the above link, so people can actually see what it was REALLY like following reapportionment.
Oh, and ATIM? you stated as fact that placing two black incumbents in the same district is ‘the least disruptive option for black incumbents’. Now you state that this was actually your ‘opinion’, and called on me to post an alternative map.
I’m going to explain this real slow and with simple words so that you will not tire your mouth out trying to sound this out. I don’t need a map to explain to you the simplest way this could have been done. You simply put DiPinto and Keeley in the same district, while allowing Plant and Scott to keep theirs. Sure their lines would have moved somewhat, but it was a far simpler solution than sending Uncle Joe’s district clear out to Greenville.
Now, come on, admit it. Wouldn’t that have been the ‘least disruptive option for black incumbents’?
Finally, I am tired of chasing your scattershot hit-and-run talking points all over creation. Until and unless you provide any kind of supporting evidence to substantiate your claim that eliminating a minority district is the least disruptive option for black incumbents, any future comments from you in this thread will be placed in moderation. I enjoy being challenged, and there are obviously times when I’m wrong and when I’ve been proven wrong.
But empty BS (i.e. opinions stated as facts with no supporting evidence) does not make for an edifying dialogue. And that’s what we’re all about. You have been given fair warning.
Geezer – you had me going… I had to go up and check if I spelled it wrong… 🙂
RSmitty,
Sorry, I misread your initial post. I thought you knew who Mr. Wingnut was IRL, and just needed to know what district he was in.
My urging to CHECK FIRST, however, still stands for people like those who say Rob Robinson would make a great candidate against Venables, when he’s not even in the district.
To clarify, I do know who Mr Wingnut is IRL, but I choose not to investigate his actual address. It’s a personal choice, but a line I just don’t want to cross. To me, given I don’t have any kind of acquaintance with him (again, by choice, but also by chance), the thought of digging up stuff like that goes into the creepy zone. I wouldn’t want it done to me, therefore I won’t do it to him.
Then why post something like this?
“BTW, on John Viola…guess what wingnut wants to challenge him in the General? Hint: he’s on your banned list. I just need confirmation that he’s in Viola’s district, but from what has been tossed around, he is.”
Doing a quick check on the elections site would get you a determination whether he’s in Viola’s district, and either put that rumor to rest or give it new legs. Seems easy enough, without being “creepy.”
You really don’t pay attention to the thread, do you? You just like to come in and hack things up to your content? Oy. Here, child, here is the recap:
-1) I just need confirmation that he’s in Viola’s district, but from what has been tossed around, he is.
-2) I was speaking of confirming his own idenitification of living in Viola’s district is true.
-3) There are clues in this person’s various postings throughout the intertubes and his support.
-4) All signs point to him being in Viola’s district, though.
-5) I choose not to investigate his actual address. It’s a personal choice, but a line I just don’t want to cross…I wouldn’t want it done to me, therefore I won’t do it to him.
-6) Here’s an extra one: he’s identified himself as within Viola’s district, OK? Having experience with people misidenitfying their districts, though, and considering the source, I still don’t consider that 100% solid.
Look at #5…I DO NOT KNOW HIS ACTUAL ADDRESS, ‘k, Inspector Gadget? Then look at #6! I don’t care to be his stalker! Got it?
You’re such an effing flea! Shoo!
Dude, chill out, ‘K?
You post a rumor about an anonymous someone who may be running against Viola and say you still have to confirm whether he lives in Viola’s district. But then you say you don’t want to look up his address, because that’s like stalking.
That just makes me wonder why the heck you’d post the rumor in the first place if you’re not going to provide identifying details or check to determine whether or not the rumor is even POSSIBLE, let alone true.
That type of stuff is just so much inside-inside baseball (“he’s on your banned list” – so presumably the DL folks know of whom you speak?), which is utterly pointless.
Just seeking some clarity.