Forget the economy, health care, even which party controls
Congress. The most far-reaching effect of the 2010 midterm
elections could be felt at the state level. By casting their
ballots in dozens of gubernatorial and hundreds of legislative
races, voters will decide whether Democrats or Republicans
dominate the redrawing of state and federal political borders for
the new decade — a process known as redistricting. And the
results could be even more far-reaching for Democrats than the
outcome of the midterm elections.
That’s not hyperbole. Given the country’s closely divided
electorate, the political fortunes of each party chiefly hinge on
how redistricting pans out. That, in turn, hinges on how well
Democrats and Republicans fare at the state level. The reason: in
most states, legislators are responsible for creating, and
governors responsible for signing into law, redistricting plans
that reflect population shifts documented in the census. The
party in command has enormous clout.
With about a dozen of the nation’s state legislatures
closely split along partisan lines and 18 governor’s races in the
“toss up” category this year, big changes could be in store.
Factoring in the tenuous political atmosphere adds even more
spice to the mix. So far, the ground game is shaping up nicely
for the GOP, but there are still fundraising and organizational
storm clouds on the horizon.
The Cook Political Report lists five governorships now held
by Democrats as either “leaning” Republican or “likely”
Republican. Of those five states, four of the legislatures are
Republican and one is split between the parties, giving the GOP a
good chance to control the redistricting process. Conversely,
Cook lists only one governor’s race — for Republican Linda
Lingle’s office in Hawaii — as leaning in the Democrats’ favor,
and none in the “likely” or “solid” Democrat category. There are
no redistricting implications, though, because the Aloha State
redraws political lines by independent commission, not
legislative edict.
In 17 state legislatures, meanwhile, Democrats maintain a
slim advantage in at least one chamber. In a good Republican
year, several of those could flip. Even if a Democrat occupies
the governor’s office or controls one legislative chamber, the
GOP could significantly influence the process and curtail
partisan gerrymandering by capturing at least part of the state
government. Both national parties understand the implications,
which is why they’re pouring $20 million apiece into competitive
legislative races, with an eye toward strengthening their hand in
redistricting.
Aside from the favorable lineup of races, the political
trend is also in Republicans’ favor. Even in the strongly
anti-GOP election year of 2008, Republicans managed to defend all
of their governorships up for grabs except one in Missouri. Since
then, Republicans have been victorious in special elections in
Virginia and New Jersey, states where Democrats had a nearly
decade-long winning streak in gubernatorial elections.
Reapportionment is another factor upping the stakes. That
process moves congressional seats from states that lost
population to states that gained. Here again, Republicans have
reason to be optimistic. The Washington, D.C., based firm
Polidata predicts that 10 states will gain at least one
congressional seat and 10 lose at least one after the 2010
census. Of those, all of the losing states except one are in the
predominantly Democratic northeast and upper Midwest. On the
other hand, all but one of the states gaining seats is in the
Republican-friendly Sunbelt, including a projected four-seat
pickup for Texas.
The hands that redraw district borders are some of the most
powerful in politics. Aside from a handful of state and federal
requirements, lawmakers can finagle district lines however they
choose. Legislative and congressional districts must be
contiguous — meaning all parts touch and none are detached —
and each must have an equal number of residents. The federal
Voting Rights Act also ties legislators’ hands by requiring them
to draw some districts to grant minorities greater electoral
power.
Beyond that, the majority party has a wide degree of
latitude and the capacity to shut out the minority from the
process. To top it off, advances in technology have made it
possible to secure almost foolproof partisan advantage by drawing
lines down to the minutest detail. The result: gerrymandering
such as North Carolina’s 12th Congressional District,
alternatively called the “lightning bolt” and “spaghetti”
district and dubbed “political pornography” by the Wall
Street Journal.
Despite the favorable political tides, however, Republicans
should be cautious. Democrats appear to have a better
redistricting apparatus on the ground to prime for inevitable
legal challenges, and the party seems to be outpacing Republicans
in the fundraising department as well. Liberals don’t want a
repeat of the last round of redistricting, which led the GOP to
historic gains in the 2002 midterms.
In addition, a number of states, including Colorado and
California, are weighing ballot measures that would ease
partisanship in redistricting. Advocates have long called for
independent commissions to handle this important job, but since
the lawmakers who benefit from gerrymandering control the
process, the cause often gets trampled underfoot.
In the end, though, the political dynamics this year should
encourage conservatives. At worst, the GOP will make inroads and
expand its influence over the process. And it’s a good thing,
too. When the history books are closed, state-level races could
be the untold story of 2010 — a story that will be felt for
years to come.
him on Twitter @thepundit1.
