Mediaboss Marketing

That was then. This is now.

In 1999, Republicans snapped Democrats century-long run on legislative power by promising Virginians a General Assembly that would be fair and balanced. Except for a brief Democratic hiatus in the Virginia Senate, Republicans remain the dominant party at Mr. Jeffersons Capitol because of redistricting, a practice that is anything but fair and balanced.

To keep it that way, House Republicans are spending taxpayer money: at least $2.6 million so far for private lawyers to defend their hyperpartisan gerrymandering. That bill will balloon the longer Republicans litigate the longer they refuse to legislate a remedy to a problem the public increasingly recognizes as an obstacle to managing the peoples business.

This past week, a Richmond trial court and the U.S. Supreme Court, through important procedural and technical decisions, nudged Virginia closer to removing naked partisanship from the process of drawing legislative lines and stripping Republicans of the artificial advantage with which they retain the statehouse even as they endure a long, bitter retreat statewide.

Over the wishes of Republicans, Circuit Judge Ry Marchant cleared the way for a trial later this month on whether as alleged by a redistricting reform group, OneVirginia2021 nearly a dozen districts in the House of Delegates and state Senate violate a Virginia constitutional requirement that their boundaries be compact, creating seats that reflect a regions shared characteristics, or so-called communities of interest.

The Senate districts were actually drawn by Democrats because they controlled the chamber at the time. It is a reminder that Democrats, too, are anything but innocent when it comes to the Darwinism that drives redistricting.

In this instance, survival is a consequence of creative cartography and the slender Democratic majority that made it possible.

The fight in Marchants courtroom will likely continue in the Virginia Supreme Court, which has yet to establish standards for determining the compactness of House and Senate districts.

It is an issue largely avoided in some of the courts recent rulings on redistricting. In 1992 and 2002, when upholding Democratic and Republican plans, respectively, the court allowed that the legislature has broad latitude in crafting districts.

The U.S. Supreme Court ordered a do-over by a three-judge trial court that upheld 11 majority-black House districts that Democrats contend intentionally eroded African-American voting strength in surrounding areas, thus protecting Republicans.

The justices said the trial court must reconsider the districts, using narrower guidelines that could make it easier to prove that race illegally guided Republicans.

Perhaps forgotten in these two disputes: They focus on redistricting plans in place since 2011. Because they have perpetuated Republican legislative hegemony and hostility to depoliticized redistricting the struggle over House, Senate and congressional boundaries fully shifted to the courts.

This has kept the issue in plain view and created fresh opportunities for Republican resistance; notably, running down the clock.

The trial in state court and the reconsideration by the federal court mean that the redistricting fight will drag on for months, preserving the contested boundaries on which the Republicans 2-to-1 majority in the House rests.

Those lines, paired with the low turnout of an off-year election that magnifies the strength of the narrowing Republican base, could be a firewall against Democratic challenges fueled by anti-Trump rage in a state that tipped to Hillary Clinton. Democrats, so far, have candidates for about 30 Republican seats. But holding the House could mean little for Republicans and their long-term goal of controlling the legislature into the 2030s.

For that to happen, Republicans need one of their own elected governor this year and for their majorities in the House and Senate to survive the 2019 elections. Then, Republicans would be in 2021, as they were in 2011, in full command of redistricting, happily drawing the friendliest lines, confident that the governor would sign them into law and, no doubt, triggering another years-long tussle in the courts, again financed by taxpayers.

This should call attention to the role of Ed Gillespie, the supposed front-runner for the Republican gubernatorial nomination, in legislative gerrymandering, not just in Virginia, but across the country.

It is becoming a Democratic talking point, with Tom Perriello and Ralph Northam rivals for their partys nomination for governor signaling they would use the veto to stop a lopsidedly Republican redistricting plan.

Gillespie was chairman of the Republican State Leadership Conference, the national organization that supplied the money and minds necessary to install GOP majorities in the state legislatures, which, in turn, draw congressional seats.

Because Republicans now hold two-thirds of the nations legislative chambers, it is no surprise that they are comfortably in charge of the U.S. House of Representatives.

These days, Gov. Terry McAuliffe is practically mimicking Gillespie, a political opponent but a personal friend from their many days together lolling in the Washington swamp as chairmen of their national parties. McAuliffe is joining former President Barack Obama and top members of his administration in an effort to give Democrats an upper hand in redistricting.

So when McAuliffe brays about nonpartisan redistricting, Republicans justifiably guffaw as they did on Wednesday, when the governor responded to the U.S. Supreme Court decision by proposing they quit their pricey court fight and consent to an independent panel redrawing the 11 disputed House districts. McAuliffes offer only steeled Republican intransigence.

But as long as the redistricting issue is before the courts, Republicans face a peril. Judges could rule against them, forcing adjusted boundaries and, in the process, creating districts hostile to the GOP.

In the federal case, the ripple effect of court-ordered shifts could cause headaches in the Richmond area for Manoli Loupassi, John OBannon and Jimmie Massie. Even the mastermind of the 2011 House Republican plan, Chris Jones of Suffolk, could have problems.

Republican lawyers believe that 2019 is the earliest that House seats could be reset should the party lose in court. History suggests otherwise, perhaps auguring a special election next year.

In 1981, federal judges rejected as racially biased a Democrat-drawn House redistricting plan. In their ruling, the judges said it was too late to fix the offending districts.

But the court decreed that delegates, elected for two years, could only serve for one under the flawed plan; that they would have to stand in new districts in a special election in 1982 and, again, in 1983 for a full term. In those three consecutive elections, Republicans would pick up seats, gaining momentum toward their historic takeover in 1999.

That was then. This is now.

Contact Jeff E. Schapiro at (804) 649-6814. His column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Watch his video column Thursday on Richmond.com. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter, @RTDSchapiro. Listen to his analysis 8:45 a.m. Friday on WCVE (88.9 FM).

Read this article:
Schapiro: Va. Republicans on defense over redistricting - Richmond.com