The redistricting shuffle
Since I am literally walking out the door in about four minutes, I've only got time for a few quick thoughts about yesterday's discussion over the proposed redistricting of Athens-Clarke County's State Senate districts.
The primary thought racing through my mind is how completely out of touch with reality Sen. Ralph Hudgens (R-Comer) and Sen. Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock) are.
Rogers, who, as noted, represents Woodstock, claimed the Athens-Clarke County Chamber of Commerce represents the will of the people of this community more so than the elected leaders of the Athens-Clarke County Commission.
The wisdom of the chamber of commerce, given the makeup of the chamber of commerce, may surpass that of the commissioners.
OK, this is absurd on a many levels, one being that such a statement is ridiculous. I would venture to say the elected leaders of this community - most of them winning with more than 60 percent of the vote in their recent elections - are definitely more representative of the wishes of Athens-Clarke County. It also suggests the commission has gone out of the way to oppose such redistricting, despite the fact such opposition didn't arise until after Rogers' ignorant statement. Much of the opposition to the proposed redistricting has come from average Athens-Clarke County citizens through letters to their current state representatives and a variety of local publications, as well as Rep. Jane Kidd's (D-Athens) rightful concern over it.
Mayor Heidi Davison didn't like the remarks either:
Athens-Clarke County Mayor Heidi Davison called Rogers' comment "ludicrous" at a Wednesday night town hall meeting held by Reps. Keith Heard and Jane Kidd.
"I believe I was elected by the people of this county, 57 percent of them, and no one at the chamber was," Davison said.
Secondly, Sen. Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) - interesting how folks from all over this state know what's best for Athens-Clarke County's representation - claimed Democrats who oppose this redistricting are being hypocritical because earlier they backed the 2001 districts which carved out a Democratic 12th District in Congress.
OK, well let me off the bat say this - the 2001 lines were odd and they were designed with political goals in mind, and that's wrong. But seeing how Johnson has long claimed the 12th district was a product of gerrymandering, why is he so eager to defend this redistricting by comparing the two?
By doing so, is he admitting this is a gerrymandering attempt by Republicans? And that it's OK for Republicans to do it now because Democrats did it then? I thought gerrymandering was bad all across the board, regardless of the political party pushing it through?
The primary thought racing through my mind is how completely out of touch with reality Sen. Ralph Hudgens (R-Comer) and Sen. Chip Rogers (R-Woodstock) are.
Rogers, who, as noted, represents Woodstock, claimed the Athens-Clarke County Chamber of Commerce represents the will of the people of this community more so than the elected leaders of the Athens-Clarke County Commission.
The wisdom of the chamber of commerce, given the makeup of the chamber of commerce, may surpass that of the commissioners.
OK, this is absurd on a many levels, one being that such a statement is ridiculous. I would venture to say the elected leaders of this community - most of them winning with more than 60 percent of the vote in their recent elections - are definitely more representative of the wishes of Athens-Clarke County. It also suggests the commission has gone out of the way to oppose such redistricting, despite the fact such opposition didn't arise until after Rogers' ignorant statement. Much of the opposition to the proposed redistricting has come from average Athens-Clarke County citizens through letters to their current state representatives and a variety of local publications, as well as Rep. Jane Kidd's (D-Athens) rightful concern over it.
Mayor Heidi Davison didn't like the remarks either:
Athens-Clarke County Mayor Heidi Davison called Rogers' comment "ludicrous" at a Wednesday night town hall meeting held by Reps. Keith Heard and Jane Kidd.
"I believe I was elected by the people of this county, 57 percent of them, and no one at the chamber was," Davison said.
Secondly, Sen. Eric Johnson (R-Savannah) - interesting how folks from all over this state know what's best for Athens-Clarke County's representation - claimed Democrats who oppose this redistricting are being hypocritical because earlier they backed the 2001 districts which carved out a Democratic 12th District in Congress.
OK, well let me off the bat say this - the 2001 lines were odd and they were designed with political goals in mind, and that's wrong. But seeing how Johnson has long claimed the 12th district was a product of gerrymandering, why is he so eager to defend this redistricting by comparing the two?
By doing so, is he admitting this is a gerrymandering attempt by Republicans? And that it's OK for Republicans to do it now because Democrats did it then? I thought gerrymandering was bad all across the board, regardless of the political party pushing it through?
posted by Jmac at 8:16 AM
6 Comments:
By doing so, is he admitting this is a gerrymandering attempt by Republicans? And that it's OK for Republicans to do it now because Democrats did it then? I thought gerrymandering was bad all across the board, regardless of the political party pushing it through?
Yes, but surely you see how convenient this is for Democrats. They got away with it in 2001, though they were criticized. Now when Republicans try to 'even the score,' the Dems can point to Republican hypocrisy. But notice that the Dems aren't offering to redo their own 2001 gerrymandering.
'Tu quoque' logical fallacies aside, from a Republican perspective there are only two ways to proceed in response to Dem gerrymandering in 2001. 1. Try to undo it, or 2. Do it yourself to 'even the score.'
Morally, it might be nice if they focused on 1, though that would still ruffle feathers, (any time you change a district, you ruffle the feathers of the people who were happy with it as it was) too. I agree that 1 would be better. But surely you, JMac, can understand why the hypocrisy criticism will ring a little hollow to Repub ears.
As someone who thinks both redistricting efforts were examples of gerrymandering, I don't think such criticism is that shallow. As you've noted in previous discussions, it's almost logically impossible for just one side to be hypocritical.
The Republicans cry foul in 2001, and then do the same thing. That's hypocritical.
The Democrats cry foul in 2006, but did the same thing in 2001. That's hypocritical.
Both instances are wrong for a variety of reasons, consistency being the least of them.
Not to mention this kinda seems to be being done a bit more to get somebody's brother-in-law into office than just to create more safe Republican seats. Isn't _that_ a problem?
For what it's worth, and I'll go ahead and acknowledge that I'm going to be the minority here, I don't think this thing was Kemp's baby. It was Hudgens all the way. I think Kemp thinks it's an ok idea, but is probably also faintly disgusted with it (the way he was after he left the governor's office during his first term after Sonny shook him down to change his vote on predatory lending.)
No, this is Hudgens' baby, and the Athens Chamber is the baby daddy. I just don't see this thing being primarily for Cowsert's benefit, although there is no denying that it helps him too. Fact is, Cowsert was looking pretty good in the old district, and the numbers are on his side, especially in a statewide year. (Unless they're getting really worried about Cathy Cox peeling off moderate Republicans and causing a resulting downballot shift.)
So, if not for Cowsert, then why? Retribution, perhaps. I think it really irks Republicans that they can't get anything going in Athens. That tiny little blue spot really pisses them off. Maybe it's economic, and the GOP think that Athens is getting too big a share of the pie. (I don't pretend to understand Republican thought processes most of the time.) Or hell, maybe the are scared of Jane Kidd.
One thing's for sure though. They aren't doing it to force a wage increase at UGA, as the Chamber's email alludes.
But why retribution specifically now?
Because they can. They really couldn't risk it as much in 2004, what with Kemp being a first-term incumbent. The backlash to a thing like that could've been really bad.
Plus, there's a CYA aspect to doing it now. With Kemp out tilting at ag commissiony windmills, if there was backlash leading to Cowsert's loss, they can always blame the candidate, which is much more convincing with an open seat kind of race, or the candidate you're blaming is a challenger running against an incumbent, as in Becky Vaughn's case. For what its worth, half the crap that gets blamed on Becky in that loss was not Becky's fault.
Publius (too lazy to log in, and not my computer anyway)
Post a Comment
<< Home