State Senator Mamie Locke penned an editorial printed in today’s Virginian Pilot on the need for a second minority-influence Congressional district.
We waste minority voting strength by packing one district with more minorities than necessary for them to elect a candidate of choice. This dilutes their voice in neighboring districts and is not my idea of fair representation.
Locke’s plan is to make the current 3rd Congressional district, currently represented by Congressman Bobby Scott, a minority-influence district, while making the 4th Congressional district, currently represented by Congressman Randy Forbes, a majority-minority district. A map of the plan can be viewed here.
The Senate may be in favor of such a plan but I don’t expect it will pass the House. If Virginia’s redistricting ends up in court, as predicted by state Senator Dick Saslaw, alternate plans such as this one may very well be considered.
UPDATE: Press release of Hampton Roads Leaders urging support of the Locke plan is below the fold.
Hampton Roads Leaders Urge Support of Locke’s Congressional Redistricting Plan
HAMPTON- Hampton Roads community leaders are speaking out today in support of the Congressional redistricting plan, sponsored by Sen. Mamie Locke, which calls for the creation of a second minority-opportunity Congressional district in the Commonwealth.
Former Delegates Mary Christian and Flora Crittenden, and Civil Rights Attorney Al Smith want legislators to pass redistricting bill SB5004 when the Senate reconvenes on April 25.
“Virginia needs to have Congressional districts that are truly representative of our growing minority population. For far too long, the voices of minority voters have been diluted in other districts because of packing. It’s time to give minority voters a real opportunity to choose their candidate of choice,” said Christian, who represented the 92nd District from 1986 to 2003.
“It has been more than 40 years since the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, but there is still a lot of work that needs to be done to provide more minorities with equal voting rights. Minorities still face difficulties in electing a candidate of choice because our current district maps are packed at higher levels than necessary which essentially wastes votes. The Congressional redistricting map being proposed by Senator Locke is the first step the General Assembly should take in readdressing this issue,” said Smith.
The proposed Senate map, which meets all federal and state legal requirements, would make significant changes to Virginia’s 3rd and 4th Congressional Districts. The 3rd District, currently represented by Rep. Bobby Scott, would become more compact and would become a minority-opportunity district.
Virginia’s 4th Congressional District would move northward into the east end of Richmond under the Senate plan and place Republican Congressman Randy Forbes into a majority-minority district.
“Today, I urge my friends and former colleagues in the General Assembly to support the passage of a redistricting bill that would create a second minority-opportunity district. Every voter deserves to live in a district where their vote counts and their voices can be heard,” said Crittenden, who served in the House of Delegates from 1993 to 2003.
Hampton Commissioner of the Revenue Ross Mugler and members of the citizens awareness group Hampton Watch have also endorsed Locke’s redistricting bill.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
What is a minority influenced district? Not minority by population, but by voters? Has the 3rd always been such?
It seems Senator Locke is asking that some of the “minority” residents of the 3rd be made part of the 4th. Thought being, the incumbent has an advantage with the non-minority voters in the 3rd, and a disadvantage with the minority voters in the 4th.
This seems gerrymandering at it’s worst.
A minority-influence district is one in which the minority voting population is large enough to have an effect on the outcome of an election. The 3rd has been a majority-minority district, which means that minorities make up more than half of the population.
The last redistricting moved some of the minorities in the 4th CD to the 3rd, most notably in Portsmouth. This was done to make the 4th non-competitive. (Sen. Louise Lucas ran for the 4th CD seat and came very close to winning it under the old lines.)
As long as parties control redistricting, gerrymandering will exist. Take a look at the Congressional plans by the independent commission & the college competition if you want to see what the districts could look like without it.
Look at a comparison between the two maps with precincts shaded to show their racial makeup;
http://policybriefingbooks.com/home/item/39-what-significant-racial-gerrymandering-looks-like
Senator Locke said this could be done without “significant” racial gerrymandering in a previous Pilot article. Shouldn’t any gerrymandering or certainly any racial gerrymandering be considered wrong?
And to quote Donna Brazile and South Carolina State Rep Bakari Sellers from a panel on C-SPAN;
“I’m worried about the proliferation of what I call the so called ‘minority-majority’ districts that on one hand has given African Americans, Hispanics, and others a significant number of increases in the United States Congress; but at what cost? At what price? Are they able to then take those districts and then leverage them for economic gains or political gains in the legislature? Are we able to elect another Duvall Patrick in the political arena? We have a lot of steps to take for us before we can finally claim that we are post-racial.” – Donna Brazile
“The type of politician that I desire, that I want, especially an African-American politician, can and should be able to win the 35% district. I just think they should have that ability in a 35% district to go out and reach across lines.” – Bakari Sellers
“In South Carolina, what no one will tell you is this simple fact. You cannot run statewide from the black district. You cannot run statewide effectively from the black district…Because it’s the perception that you are concerned about, it’s a box, you are only concerned about African Americans.” – Bakari Sellers
First, Max, I wouldn’t quote Donna Brazile on anything. She’s the one who said that Rev. Wright was typical of black churches. The woman will say anything to get her name out there.
Second, this is no “proliferation.” The number of majority-minority districts remains the same: at one.
Finally, I’ll say it again: if you don’t want gerrymandering, racial or otherwise, then look at the maps put forth by the independent commission & the college competition.
It is frustrating to hear people complain about the gerrymandering when few were trying to get an independent commission thru the legislature. Our process is partisan and racial simply because the House of Delegates refused to pass legislation that would make it less so.
And most of the people didn’t give a damn.
One in Virginia on the Congressional level, many more on the GA level and many many more nationwide.
I just think the whole idea of a minority-majority district is a closet way of saying you can’t get elected if you are black unless we put enough black voters in your district. It’s also a closet way of saying black people will vote for a black candidate most of the time, because if people didn’t think that, what would be the point of gerrymandering them into one district?
Bobby Scott could win any DEM leaning 3rd district, even if it had 15 or 20% minority population. The best chance I see for more minorities are more competitive districts in general, not racial gerrymandering.
Yeah, it sucks, yeah, its the law, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be called out for what it is. And I certainly do give a damn, otherwise I wouldn’t be spending my time making maps and publishing articles on the new districts for people to see how ridiculous they are.
We’re talking about the Congressional districts, Max. There is is still only one. Don’t even get me started on the House and Senate stuff.
There is, of course, a corollary to your argument: blacks won’t vote for white candidates, which is why it’s better for whites to put all the blacks in one district.
That’s about as ridiculous a statement as black people will only vote for black people. There are two majority minority districts in the GA that have white representatives, which belies the argument, but hey – if we say it often enough, it becomes truth.
But tell me: how many blacks (and let’s be honest, we’re not talking about other minorities here) represent majority white districts?
Could it be that whites will generally not vote for a black candidate?
And doesn’t this get to the real core of the issue: that is, as a country, we still haven’t dealt with the issue of race?
I’m not saying I believe or agree with those statements on black people voting for a black candidate, I’m just saying, if that isn’t the logic behind minority-majority districts, then what is?
All I hear is that it’s to elect a “candidate of choice.” If the logic behind that isn’t what I stated before, then what are they thinking?
Really, what’s worse; not having a minority rep or voters being stuck with the same person for 20-30 years until they die or retire? Would minority populations be better served with a minority in office or someone who actually has to work his/her ass off every two years to hold their seat?
As for whites not voting for a black candidate, I think in 2011, people will vote against a black candidate for being a Democrat or a Republican before they vote based on skin color.
I definitely agree we have not dealt with the issue of race yet, but at least we (you and me) are trying.
In a perfect world your vote would be a vote that mattered. You could go to the polls and know there was a competitive race. A candidate no matter which party could have a chance of winning if he/she was the best candidate. However, our elected officials gerrymander the districts to protect themselves and their fellow party candidates. So as long as that goes on I am for protecting the rights of the minority voters. Everyone should actually have a say in who there elected officials will be. Everyone willing to serve should have the same chance of a level playing field as the other candidates. Hopefully someday everyone’s vote will count the same.
What should happen, if someone wants to create a new district, is that a NEW district should be created. Take pieces of the existing districts to make an influence district and call it a day.
Typo:
“Locke’s plan is to MALE the current 3rd Congressional district….”
Blacks are 20% of Virginia’s population. How great a percentage do you need for “influence”?
Actually, Warren, looking at the current GA districts, anything above 20% African-American seems to be a competitive district, which means African-American votes have influence.
What you’ll see in the maps, particularly the Republican House plan, is that the 11 majority-minority districts have been stuffed…they aren’t 51% African American or 52%, they are 58,59,60,62% African-American.
which creates districts where black candidates get elected.
But it also creates…in the most recent House plan…35 districts where African Americans make up less than 10% of the population.
If you are correct, Steve, then there should be no need to be concerned with race at all in the GA redistricting.
However, the topic at hand is the Congressional redistricting.
I had an opportunity to interview Congressman Bobby Scott at Shad Planking last week. He gave me long, comprehensive answers to all the questions I asked except for one.
When I asked him what he thinks about potential congressional redistricting plans, all he said was: “I support Mamie Locke’s plan.”