|
Democracy
……Tony Evers was elected governor of Wisconsin last month. Gretchen Whitmer was elected governor of Michigan. Both states elected a Democratic Attorney General, too. The Republican legislators in both states were not happy. They decided to do something.
……The Republican legislators in both states have plans. Take away the governors’ authority. They have time. The election is over, The governors don’t take office until January. The Republican legislators are still in office. They have lame duck sessions when they can vote new laws.
……They will vote new laws. The Republican governors still in office will sign them. Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin will sign the new laws with alacrity. Governor Rick Snyder of Michigan will appear reluctant. He might veto something. Are these post election laws legal? We’ll see. Courts will decide.
……Meanwhile, we see the Republican priorities. In Wisconsin, legislators will prevent the new governor from renegotiating corporate benefits, prevent the new governor from taking any action on gun safety, prevent the new attorney general from withdrawing from a lawsuit to end the Affordable Care Act. In Michigan, the legislature is looking at reducing the minimum wage, eliminating fixed pensions for teachers, and providing new tax credits to businesses.
……Two years ago, North Carolina had a similar experience. North Carolina elected a Democratic governor and attorney general in 2016. The legislature removed the governor’s authority to appoint trustees to the state university and introduced a requirement for legislative approval for cabinet members. The total number of employees under his control dropped from 1,500 to less than 500.
……Is this outrageous? Sure. Making structural change in order to prevent political opponents from achieving goals is outside the bounds of ordinary civility in politics. Democrats don’t do it. Not often, at any rate. Massachusetts Democrats don’t restructure the government to stop Republican governors. Maryland Democrats don’t either.
……Is it unprecedented, though? For a legislature to take authority away from the executive? Think about President Andrew Johnson.
……Andrew Johnson became President after Abraham Lincoln’s assassination. Immediately, he began dismantling Reconstruction before it had really begun. The Republicans in the House and Senate passed civil rights laws to protect freed slaves, passed the fourteenth amendment and the fifteenth amendment to do the same, impeached Johnson and came within one vote of convicting and removing him.
……The post Civil War Republicans acted with confidence. They had been elected to complete the Civil War victory. Johnson, as Vice President, had been intended as a symbol of potential reconciliation. His actual version of reconciliation was seen by Republicans as a betrayal of the purposes of the Civil War. Even so, the Senator who voted against conviction was remembered as a “Profile in Courage.”
……The Republican legislators of our time act with determination to protect their vision of what their states should be. They might remind us that they were elected, too. They are still in office. They can act on their convictions.……Their convictions are offensive. The Republican legislators in Michigan, Wisconsin, North Carolina, are advocates for the wealthy, opponents of the poor. Fight to take away health care? Reduce the minimum wage? That’s not what we want or anyone should want.
Worse. These Republican legislatures are enemies of democracy. As a form of government for large numbers of people, democracy is not so old. Universal male suffrage became widespread in the mid to late nineteenth century. With a few exceptions, women did not get to vote until early in the twentieth century. By the middle of the twentieth century, as countries in Africa and Asia became independent, there was universal suffrage where democracy was the goal. In the United States, African Americans were deprived of the vote in the South as Reconstruction ended. The federal government did not assure African Americans of the vote until 1960s. In the 2010s, the Supreme Court eroded that assurance, Voter suppression followed.
……Removing the right to vote is somewhere between a sin and a crime. As the Civil War was moving into its final year, Frederick Douglass spoke — “personal freedom; the right to testify in courts of law, the right to own, buy and sell real estate; the right to sue and be sued” — these rights are available only with the right to vote.……Voting doesn’t guarantee freedom. Majority rule can become tyranny. But without the right to vote, all freedoms are jeopardized.
……More insidious than their attacks on the minimum wage or health care or a Governor’s authority over corporate benefits are Republican attacks on democracy. Michigan elected a Democratic Secretary of State. The Michigan legislature is targeting the authority of the Secretary of State to oversee campaign finance. The North Carolina legislature has sought to limit the governor’s authority over elections to years when there are no elections. Wisconsin has focused on reducing early voting.
Not just these states. Georgia elected as governor, a Secretary of State who reduced the voter rolls by eliminating people who might vote for Democrats. The Kansas Secretary of State became the national leader for voter suppression. Fortunately, the people of Kansas defeated his attempt to become governor. The vote suppressors claim they are rooting out fraud. The most serious instance of fraud in generations achieved a Republican Congressional victory in North Carolina. Republicans tampering with absentee ballots.
……The legislatures of Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina claim to represent the people of their state. They don’t. The districts have been gerrymandered to ensure that Republicans win.
……Gerrymandering is a longer standing and more serious attack on democracy than voter suppression. Republicans in North Carolina, Michigan, and Wisconsin will have substantial majorities when their legislatures reconvene in January. The Supreme Court’s position is that gerrymandering based on race is prohibited, but not gerrymandering based on political parties. Learned in the law, the North Carolina Republicans have repeatedly explained that the basis for their gerrymandering is to protect Republicans, not to reduce the voting power of African Americans.
……Election after election, the total votes for Democratic legislators in Wisconsin, Michigan, North Carolina exceed the votes for Republican legislators. Yet, the Republicans get the most seats. They sometimes get enough seats to override a veto by a Democratic governor.
……Here is an example. Republicans will have 63 seats in Wisconsin’s Assembly or 64% of the seats. Democrats will have 36. Republicans got 60% of the vote for contested seats. Pretty fair, huh?
However, the Wisconsin Secretary of State’s office isn’t reporting the votes for uncontested seats. More than thirty seats had no contest. Democrats were the sole candidate in most of those seats. Assume that each uncontested candidate got 25,000 votes (Very few contested seats had fewer than 25,000 total votes). Then we get a different result. Democrats won 54% of the vote for the Assembly. Democrats got 36% of the seats. Pretty fair, huh?’
……Waiting for the Supreme Court to change its view of gerrymandering is not productive. A change is unlikely. Even with a more sophisticated calculation than the one I just provided.
……There is hope. North Carolina is showing the way. Pennsylvania is demonstrating what’s possible. Virginia is already changing.
……North Carolina elected more Democrats to their legislature in 2018. Republicans no longer be able to override vetoes automatically. North Carolina voters rejected constitutional amendments that would have given the legislature oversight over elections. Voters also elected a Democrat to the state Supreme Court. The North Carolina Court may follow the example the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
……The Pennsylvania Court revised the state’s Congressional Districts. It has not yet considered changing state legislative districts. State court mandated change in state legislatures could happen in both North Carolina and Pennsylvania. Michigan voters have already transferred redistricting authority from the legislature to an independent commission. Wisconsin’s gerrymandered districts have been considered by the US Supreme Court and may be considered by state courts. Election to the Wisconsin Supreme Court is supremely contentious.
Things change. Not long ago, Virginia had a Republican governor and a House and Senate that were overwhelmingly Republican. Overwhelmingly Republican because of gerrymandering through redistricting after the 2010 census. ……Now all of Virginia’s statewide elected officers are Democrats. Each legislative branch has a two vote Republican margin. All House of Delegate seats are up for election in 2019. All Senate seats are up for election in 2019. The Democrats are looking to flip enough seats to have control of both the House and the Senate. Gerrymandered districts have not been enough to put off people’s disgust.
……Let’s hope that when Virginia looks at redistricting, they will have enough sense to create a permanent independent commission as Michigan did, as California has done, as Arizona has done.. Democrats should not need or want gerrymandering. America needs democracy. America needs districts that are fairly drawn. America needs to create every opportunity for people’s vote to count.
You are invited. Write something. A Letter. This section of what will become the Len’s Notes and Letters when my website is completed should have Letters from other people as well. Send me something. You need to be willing to accept my editing. You are invited. Write something.
|
