Thumb On The Scale:
Using Gerrymandering and Voter Suppression to Rig Elections
Phil Warf Professor Political Science Mendocino College
A Minority of Voters Controls the U.S. Senate
Senators representing just 44% of the national population confirmed Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court Redistricting
Why: To adjust for population changes When: Reapportionment happens after each census Where: State legislatures and U.S. House of Representatives Who? In 42 states, the legislature redraws district boundaries
Requirements: 1. Equal population 2. Contiguity 3. Compactness
Gerrymandering
State senate district in Essex County Massachusetts 1812
2 kinds: Partisan & Bipartisan African American Voting Rights in the South
14th Amendment: Equal Protection 15th Amendment: Voting Rights Voter Suppression Methods White primaries Poll taxes Literacy tests Racial gerrymandering “Jim Crow”
Wesberry v Sanders (1964) Culmination of several malapportionment cases U.S. House included in the “one person, one vote” standard Voting Rights Act of 1965
Established Federal oversight of elections in places with a history of racial discrimination
Section 2 – Bans vote “denial” or “dilution” Section 5 - “Preclearance” of redistricting plans
Based on
Section 4 – Which states are covered and why Voting Rights Act Gutted
2013 Shelby County v. Holder Roberts: Preclearance review is “…based on 40-year-old facts having no logical Strikes down Section 4 relation to the present day.”
2019 Rucho v. Common Cause Alito: Redistricting is a “non-justiciable” question that should be left to (NC and MD cases) politicians, not courts. Reapportionment
2010 2020 Partisan Gerrymandering
Proportional
Packing
Cracking
A Bipartisan Gerrymander Could Result in 3 All Blue and 2 All Red Districts The Power of Redistricting Gerrymandering Texas
2002 2004 Democrats in charge of redistricting in 2001 Republicans win control of state legislature in 2003 Result: 17 Democrats,15 Republicans Result: 21 Republicans, 11 Democrats North Carolina Republican Vote Share North Carolina: and U.S. House Seats Won A Decade of Dominance Built Year Statewide Seats Won by Drawing Safe Districts Vote % (of 13) 2018 50 10 2016 53 10 2014 55% 10 2012 49% 9 2010 54% 6 (Dem drawn)
Democrats Know How Gerrymander Too
2012-2014 North Carolina U.S. House Districts: An Unconstitutional Gerrymander
2016 map Voluntarily Redrawn Same Result Democratic Partisan Gerrymander Supreme Court Gives Green Light To Partisan Gerrymanders June 2019 – Rucho v Common Cause They may be "incompatible with democratic principles“ But they are not “justiciable” political questions
“A districting map is alleged to be unconstitutional because it makes it too difficult for one party to translate statewide support into seats in the legislature. But such a claim is based on a 'norm that does not exist' in our electoral system—'statewide elections for representatives along party lines'. ... [Federal] courts are not equipped to apportion political power as a matter of fairness, nor is there any basis for concluding that they were authorized to do so.” Two Red Districts in NC May Turn Blue in 2020
OLD NEW PARTISAN PARTISAN DISTRICT LEAN LEAN 1st D+35 D+10 2nd R+13 D+19 3rd R+24 R+24 4th D+35 D+29 5th R+18 R+36 6th R+16 D+18 7th R+18 R+20 8th R+15 R+10 9th R+14 R+13 State Courts Ordered New Districts. 10th R+24 R+38 11th R+28 R+17 What do you notice about the 12th D+37 D+34 “partisan lean”? 13th R+10 R+36 Source: Daily Kos Reforming Redistricting Redistricting Commissions Now in 8 States
California Citizens Redistricting Commission www.wedrawthelines.ca.gov
Prop 20 (2010 - Congressional)
Prop 11 (2008 – State Legislature) VOTER SUPPRESSION ______
Voter ID Laws
State Voter ID Requirements
Source: National Conference of State Legislatures www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/voter-id-history.aspx In Person Voter Fraud: An “Imaginary Problem” In-Person Voter Fraud 2000-2014
834,065,928
35
Credible Allegations Total Ballots Cast
Source: Justin Levitt, Loyola Law School “News 21” Analysis 2000 – 2012 146 million registered voters and billions of votes cast
Only 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud
Just 10 cases of in-person fraud Have Investigations Found Significant In-Person Voter Fraud?
Journalist Reviews? No
Court rulings? Nope
Federal Studies? Not there
State Investigations? Negative
Elections Officials Testimony? None
Academic Research? Never Which Groups Are Less Likely to Have Valid Voter ID?
2016 Election Strong Evidence That Typically Democratic Voters Are Less Likely To Have Proper ID
Wisconsin has “a preoccupation with 7 out of 7 mostly phantom election fraud” states studied found (Federal Judge, 2016) ownership lower among Black and Latino voters (GAO, 2014)
Texas African-Americans 1.79 times and Latinos 2.42 times more 70% Proportion of those likely – than whites to lack the without proper ID who are required identification. likely Democratic voters (Federal Court Ruling, 2014) (FiveThirtyEight.com - 2012) Do Voter ID Laws Reduce Turnout of Likely Democratic Voters?
North Carolina Voter ID laws “target African Americans with almost surgical precision.” 2-4% Reduction (Federal Court Ruling, 2016) in turnout of minority voters nationwide after Voter ID enacted (GAO, 2014) 7% decrease in Hispanic turnout (University of Chicago, 2017) Effect of Voter ID Laws on Turnout 2016
Study by: Zoltan Hajnal, Nazita Lajevardi and Lindsay Nielson But Research on the Impact of Voter ID Laws on Voter Turnout is Mixed 2014 GAO Review of 10 Academic Studies Why?
Increased Turnout 1 study Those without ID are No Effect Turnout 5 studies much less likely to turn Decreased Turnout 4 studies out anyway.
2017 UC-Davis meta-analysis: Some others suggest “modest, if any” turnout effects mobilization efforts have been fairly effective 2017 Stanford study: no consistent effect on turnout
2019 Harvard Business School: no effect on turnout Voter Purging Simply means cleaning up voter rolls by deleting names from registration lists
January 2017 to Election Day 2018 “Use It Or Lose It” Voters can be dropped if they miss elections and don’t respond to a mailed notice
Florida Process About a Dozen States Purge Aggressively
In 2020 “it’s going to be a much bigger program” January 2019 Voter Purges in Ohio Targeted Groups More Likely to Vote Democratic Georgia Voter Purges In Recent Election Years Georgia Registration Confirmation Notices 2017
About 500,000 Sent About 10% Returned
Returned Not Returned
Source: Georgetown Law Professor Paul M. Smith There Are Better Ways to Track Registration Purge Rates and the Voting Rights Act
States previously covered by Section 5 Closing Polling Stations
Voters in black neighborhoods waited, on average, 29% longer to vote than voters in predominantly white communities. (UCLA study) Reducing Early Voting “Of course it’s political. Why else would you do it?” More States Allowing Vote By Mail Or Absentee For 2020 Elections Growth of Early and Mail Voting Republicans More Likely To Vote In-Person Mail Balloting Does Not Lead to Voter Fraud
This is about .000006% of all 14.2 million votes cast. Nearly 7 in 10 votes were cast by mail. Mail Voting Has Several Safeguards
Identity verification by signature matching
Use of bar codes can identify duplicates and allow voters to track their ballots
Secure drop off locations
Harsh penalties of up to $10,000 in most places
Post-election audits Mail Ballot Deadlines May Cause Tight Mailing Windows