Recent racially motivated terrorism in Charleston, South Carolina, has appropriately renewed our country's debate over our problems with race and institutionalized white supremacy. Most attention has focused on the symbolism embodied by the Confederate battle flag flying on the South Carolina state capitol grounds, but astute commentators have long stressed the toxic impact of institutional racism.
One of the ways our political institutions harm racial minorities is through our electoral system. I have previously discussed several of the ways in which our electoral rules hurt minorities, but one of the biggest problems stems from electing members of Congress through gerrymandered, single-member districts. The result is a Congress that is roughly 80 percent white in a country significantly less so. This should be unsurprising when less than one fourth of districts are majority-minority, let alone districts where a single minority group can elect their chosen candidates.
The 1965 Voting Rights Act is the foundation upon which minority representation and electoral participation is built. Despite Republicans' efforts to gut the law through the Supreme Court and cut away at its efficacy through state legislation, the VRA still makes a crucial difference in advancing the cause of equal minority political power. The VRA makes no mention of majority-minority districts, but Supreme Court cases have laid out at least four criteria for when and how such seats must be drawn: a compact minority population, racially polarized voting, and a majority population that votes as a bloc to defeat minority voters’ candidate, while a single minority group should be able to form the majority of the voting-age population where for that district to be protected.
Continuing our series on non-partisan redistricting, this article will demonstrate that the VRA and especially its enforcement have failed to fully advance equal minority voting rights and require reform. As the above map illustrates (you can find a full-size version here), alternate redistricting plans could have elected roughly a dozen more minority members of Congress in the South.
Alabama — Proposed Map:
- Drawn by: Republican legislature
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 6 white Republicans, 1 black Democrat
- 2010 Census: 69 percent white, 25 percent black
- Summary: White Republicans effectively maximized their seats.
Net Impact: Black Democrats gain one seat.
Alabama should have been required to draw an additional district for black voters under current VRA jurisprudence. It is quite easy to draw two relatively-compact seats with a white plurality where black voters would nonetheless be able to elect their candidate of choice thanks to crossover white votes. This map also respects Alabama’s communities of interest better than the actual districts by creating a heavily-black 2nd District fully in the Black Belt and Montgomery, while the 7th District consists just of Birmingham and Tuscaloosa, rather than combining those two regions.
Black representation would increase to 29 percent, which is much closer to the demographics of the state than the current delegation.
It is also possible to create two reasonably-compact districts with an outright black majority by splitting the Black Belt and utilizing both Birmingham and Mobile, demonstrating why two black districts should be required under the Voting Rights Act. Note that the 1st District uses a thin strip of land along Mobile Bay to maintain contiguity. While both VRA districts are just barely over 50 percent black, this threshold was used to reduce the impact of splitting communities and to increase compactness while demonstrating how it is possible to draw two districts with a black majority.
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Democratic legislature
- Intended to Favor: Democrats
- Delegation: 4 white Republicans
- 2010 Census: 78 percent white, 14 percent black, 5 percent Hispanic
- Summary: Arkansas Democrats drew a map which backfired and elected four Republicans.
Net Impact: Black Democrats gain one seat.
Arkansas Democrats foolishly drew a map that benefited Republicans and divided black Democrats among three different districts. The 2nd District above would now be very likely to elect a black Democrat. However, it is just under 43 percent black and quite uncompact. Current VRA jurisprudence clearly would not require this district, and Arkansas is already a very white state for the South. However, because single-member districts already disadvantage minority voters, we might consider changing the law to require districts like this and correct the nationwide bias against minority voters.
Florida — Proposed Map:
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 14 white Republicans, 7 white Democrats, 3 Hispanic Republicans, 3 black Democrats
- 2010 Census: 61 percent white, 14 percent black, 21 percent Hispanic
- Summary: Republicans blatantly ignored the recently enacted Fair Districts amendment and the original map was struck down. The current 5th District is a racial gerrymander designed to pack black Democrats into fewer seats.
Net Impact: Black Democrats likely gain another seat, while two seats currently held by Hispanic Republicans become much friendlier for Hispanic Democrats.
Florida Republicans aggressively gerrymandered their congressional map, but it was struck down earlier in 2015 by the state Supreme Court as a flagrant violation of the state's Fair Districts amendment. In particular, the GOP's racially gerrymandered 5th District was deemed to not be required by the VRA, despite their claims that it was necessary to draw it from Jacksonville to Orlando to maintain a black majority. The state Supreme Court ordered the 5th to instead have an east to west orientation, but this requirement is due to state law, rather the VRA in its current form.
The 5th shown above would become 42 percent black, 48 percent white, and gave Obama over 61 percent of the vote. However, it would make the 2nd District unwinnable for any Democrat, given that Romney won it by 28 points. This would make it difficult for then-Rep. Gwen Graham to win re-election in a Tallahassee seat that backs Republicans by a landslide, but a Jacksonville-based Democrats would have little trouble winning the 5th on average.
Removing Orlando from the 5th, however, allows the new 10th District to become a majority-minority seat containing all of Orland. Future Rep. Val Demings would be likely to run there, especially now that Rep. Alan Grayson has left to run for the Senate. That would increase African-American representation by one member.
Elsewhere in the state, this particular map maintains the 20th as a nearly black-majority district. However, as you can see, it not very compact at all. This district should be unnecessary under the VRA, since one can easily draw a plurality-black seat in Ft. Lauderdale that would reliably elect an African-American candidate. However, the state Supreme Court has mandated this district remain in effect. Regardless, removing West Palm Beach from the 20th would have little political impact.
Further south, two of the three Republican-held, Hispanic-majority seats in Miami-Dade County would become considerably more Democratic, increasing the likelihood that Hispanic Democrats could grow their numbers.
Georgia — Proposed Map:
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 10 white Republicans, 4 black Democrats
- 2010 Census: 59 percent white, 29 percent black, 7 percent Hispanic
- Summary: White Republicans effectively maximized their seats by packing minority voters in the Atlanta metro area into just three seats.
Net Impact: A black Democrat would likely win one or two more seats.
The Atlanta metropolitan area saw one of the most rapid paces of non-white population growth of anywhere in the country last decade, but because Republicans maintained control over redistricting, that population boom only served to allow them to elect another white Republican.
This map unpacks minority voters in the three black-majority metro area districts to create a new, plurality-black district in swiftly-diversifying Gwinnett County. Given the degree of partisan racial polarization here, it is very likely that a black Democrat would be nominated and favored to win this safely-Democratic seat. Georgia's minority representatives would consequently comprise at least 36 percent of the delegation, a much more proportional number.
Additionally, without their partisan gerrymander, the 12th District could add heavily-black Macon to increase its black population to over 45 percent. It is quite likely that black voters there would also be able to elect their candidate of choice in a district that favored Clinton 55-43 and Obama 58-41.
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 5 white Republicans, 1 black Democrat
- 2010 Census: 63 percent white, 30 percent black
- Summary: White Republicans effectively maximized their seats by dividing black voters between multiple white-majority districts.
Net Impact: Black Democrats gain one seat.
Louisiana previously had an additional black-VRA district in the early 1990s when such seats were first required. However, it was subsequently struck down in court over its Rorschach-like tentacle shape. Republicans drew the current map to pack black voters into the single VRA-mandated 2nd District, which stretches from New Orleans to Baton Rouge, while the 6th contorts around it.
This map undoes that gerrymander by giving the core of the New Orleans metro area its own seat. This new 2nd District is plurality white, but it’s heavily Democratic and very likely to continue electing a black Democrat. Subsequently, the new 6th district can be made plurality black by focusing on Baton Rouge, Lafayette, and the Mississippi River counties. Black representation would likely double with this map.
Just to demonstrate the possibility, this map above increases the black proportion in the 6th District from a plurality to a majority. The district is still reasonably compact enough that it should be required under the Voting Rights Act, however the plurality-black version should be sufficient to elect black voters’ candidate preference.
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Democratic governor and legislature
- Intended to Favor: Democrats
- Delegation: 1 white Republican, 5 white Democrats, 2 black Democrats
- 2010 Census: 57 percent white, 28 percent black, 7 percent Hispanic, 6 percent Asian
- Summary: Maryland Democrats made sure to draw white Democratic Rep. Steny Hoyer's seat so that the primary electorate would not be overwhelmingly black.
Net Impact: A black Democrat would likely win Rep. Hoyer's seat when he retires.
Maryland Democrats drew an extremely ugly-looking map, but for parochial rather than partisan reasons,u since they could have drawn a much more visually-appealing map that would have given them an additional district. This came into play in the 5th District: House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer likely wanted to ensure that he had College Park and would not have an overwhelmingly non-white Democratic primary electorate that could put him at risk.
This nonpartisan iteration significantly reconfigures Hoyer's 5th District by turning it into the VRA-mandated black-majority district. That causes the 4th District to become overwhelmingly nonwhite and although African-Americans are only 43 percent of the voting-age population, they would be highly likely to elect a black representative in the Democratic primary. While it is possible to raise that percentage seven points so that the district is majority black, that is unnecessary due to the lower degree of racially polarized voting compared more Southern states.
Due to that lower polarization it is probable that both of these districts would have elected a candidate preferred by nonwhite voters in 2016. Rep. Hoyer is a powerful incumbent who has done little to offend black primary voters and could probably win either of the 4th or 5th without too much difficulty. However, once the 76-year-old eventually retired, both seats would be highly likely to elect a non-white representative. These two districts should not have been required under current VRA jurisprudence, but the law should change so that a majority-minority seat similar to the 4th District is required.
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Federal court
- Intended to Favor: Neither
- Delegation: 3 white Republicans, 1 black Democrat
- 2010 Census: 61 percent white, 35 percent black
- Summary: The federal court drew a least-change version of last decade's court map, but both district maps unnecessarily pack black voters into a single VRA district.
Net Impact: Black Democrats gain one seat.
Mississippi has the highest black population proportion and arguably the most racially polarized voting of any state in the country. Due to the high degree of segregation, it's quite possible to draw a second district that is majority-black, ensuring that half of the state's members of Congress are non-white. But it’s unlikely this map uses a black population that’s compact-enough for the VRA. As with Arkansas though, the law should be changed to require a district such as this to counteract the national bias against non-white representation.
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Republican legislature. Democratic governor could not veto redistricting.
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 10 white Republicans, 1 white Democrat, 2 black Democrats
- 2010 Census: 68 percent white, 20 percent black, 7 percent Hispanic
- Summary: Republicans drew a racial gerrymander to pack black Democrats into a single 12th District.
Net Impact: Black Democrats gain one district and could effectively compete in the Democratic primary and general election in another Republican-held seat.
North Carolina is home to the infamous 12th District, which runs along Interstate 85 to pack in black Democrats in Charlotte and the Triad cities. Initially forced into existence by the George H.W. Bush Department of Justice, this district was eventually found to be an illegal racial gerrymander in the landmark Supreme Court decision Shaw v. Reno.
The continued presence of the 12th is justified on the grounds of partisan gerrymandering, but the current incarnation has been struck down and is subject to ongoing litigation.
This map completely eliminates the old 12th and confines the new version solely to Charlotte. It remains majority-minority, and black voters would be all but guaranteed to keep their representative since the Democratic primary electorate would be overwhelmingly non-white. This allows the formation of a new 9th District containing solely the three cities of the Triad. It is only about one-third black and not quite majority-minority, but just as with the 12th, black voters are a majority of the Democratic primary electorate and black Rep. Alma Adams would easily retain her seat.
Elsewhere, the 2nd District becomes very competitive at the federal level, while black voters make up nearly half of the Democratic primary electorate. A black Democrat would not be a heavy favorite for the nomination, but such candidates would have a serious chance of winning. Even if a white Democrat were to win here, that still helps empower black voters by allowing them to elect their preferred general election candidate, which the current map prevents.
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 6 white Republicans, 1 black Democrat
- 2010 Census: 67 percent white, 26 percent black
- Summary: White Republicans effectively maximized their seats by packing black voters into the 6th District.
Net Impact: Black Democrats gain one seat.
Similarly to Alabama and Louisiana, South Carolina should have been required to draw a relatively compact second majority-minority district. There is no justification for combining both Charleston and Columbia in the current black-majority 6th District other than to pack black Democrats into a single district. By dividing the Black Belt and separating those two cities, the 5th and 6th below have narrow white pluralities, but black voters would be able to elect their candidate preference. Black representation would double to 29 percent of the delegation, which is far more reflective of the state itself.
Just to demonstrate that it’s possible, this map makes both the 5th and 6th districts majority black. Although more counties and cities are split, the map is no less compact than the actual black-majority 6th District. Note that while the 1st District here uses water contiguity, this could again be avoided by precinct splits, as could some of the county divisions.
Texas — Proposed Map:
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 22 white Republicans, 1 black Republican, 1 Hispanic Republican, 3 white Democrats, 4 black Democrats, 4 Hispanic Democrats
- 2010 Census: 50 percent white, 11 percent black, 34 percent Hispanic
- Summary: Republicans effectively maximized their seats while limiting the number of seats that would elect a Hispanic representative.
Net Impact: Hispanic Democrats gain two seats from white Republicans and one from a black Republican who currently represents a heavily-Hispanic district. A non-white candidate could also win one additional new Democratic seat.
Republicans went to extreme measures to gerrymander Texas before getting rebuked in federal court over VRA violations. Still, their gerrymander does a considerable amount of damage to minority representation. Texas is one of the most difficult states to draw due to the myriad VRA-related issues it presents. To ensure that this map passes muster, the district population stats are also calculated among citizens only (you can find the adult population numbers here). Because the Census does not ask about citizenship, the data is from the 2008-2012 American Community Survey, with a margin of error of roughly one percent.
The narrow "Fajita Strip" districts in the south are required by the VRA, otherwise Hispanic voters would be packed into fewer, near-monolithically Hispanic districts. This map eliminates the narrowly Hispanic-majority 35th District that combined parts of Austin with parts of San Antonio. Despite a nominal Hispanic majority, this district was likely to elect a white Democrat from Austin like Rep. Lloyd Doggett given the disparities in primary electorate turnout.
As a replacement, we drew a new heavily Hispanic district based in San Antonio that includes some of the outlying Austin suburbs.
Meanwhile, our 23rd District's Hispanic population is increased to a clear majority of the electorate. While the district already had a nominal Hispanic majority, Republican cartographers ensured that turnout disparities would make it difficult for Hispanic voters to elect their candidate of choice. Hispanic former Democratic Rep. Pete Gallego would have been a clear favorite in 2016 over black Republican Rep. Will Hurd. Non-white representation thus doesn't increase, but the power of minority voters does, as Hurd is clearly the candidate preferred by white voters.
In Houston, the two black VRA seats are maintained, as is the Hispanic seat, while a new urban 2nd is created after the old district was eliminated. Obama won this seat by 8 points, and it is unlikely that Republicans would have won it with presidential turnout. The district is majority minority by citizen voting age population.
In the Dallas-Ft. Worth metro area, a new heavily Hispanic 33rd District is drawn while the 6th remains the court-mandated coalition district between black and Hispanic voters and the 30th is kept majority black. All three seats are heavily Democratic, and black Democratic Rep. Marc Veasey likely runs in the 6th. This would allow Hispanic voters to reliably elect their preferred candidate in the 33rd, which is not the case under the current map, despite Republican claims that it would do so and a nominal Hispanic majority.
These changes in South Texas, San Antonio, and Dallas-Ft. Worth should have been required even under current VRA jurisprudence. In total, three seats would go from reliably electing the preferred candidate of white voters to backing those of Hispanic voters. Texas would likely elect two more minority representatives in 2016.
Current Map:
- Drawn by: Republican governor and legislature
- Intended to Favor: Republicans
- Delegation: 8 white Republicans, 2 white Democrats, 1 black Democrat
- 2010 Census: 67 percent white, 18 percent black, 7 percent Hispanic, 5 percent Asian
- Summary: White Republicans effectively maximized their seats. The 3rd District was subsequently struck down due to illegally packing black voters and the map is subject to ongoing litigation.
Net Impact: Black Democrats gain one seat.
Republicans in Virginia have found themselves in trouble after federal courts struck down the 3rd District as an illegal racial gerrymander designed to pack black voters in Richmond and Hampton Roads. Since the state government is divided between the two parties, it is quite likely that the court will need to draw its own map and create another seat that's winnable for a minority candidate.
This map does that very thing by turning the 4th District into substantially-black seat combining Richmond and parts of the Southside. Subsequently, a compact 3rd District in inner Hampton Roads is roughly 39 percent African-American. Black Democratic Rep. Bobby Scott would easily win the primary here while another black candidate would win the 4th, increasing non-white representation by one.
Outside the South, racially polarized voting is not nearly as strong. It is generally not possible to draw additional districts to elect minority representatives without a dramatic revision to the Supreme Court's requirement that a single minority group form the majority to be protected. It might be technically possible to draw more majority-minority districts in these states, but oftentimes they would be horrifically-shaped bacon strips, such as in Tennessee for instance.
In total, these maps would be likely to add 13 to 14 additional non-white Democratic representatives from the South in 2016 compared to the current districts. That would be a significant improvement, but even such added representation still comes nowhere close to completely eliminating the racial bias of our electoral system.
We need to contemplate even more thorough reforms such as added proportional representation, ending felon disenfranchisement, automatic voter registration, and moving state and local elections to coincide with the federal cycle to improve turnout. More radically, we should consider instituting Australian-style compulsory voting after making voting as easy as possible to counteract persistent disparities in turnout by race as well as class.
Methodology
The criteria for drawing optimal non-partisan districts are numbered below in order prioritization, but it is important that these factors be balanced with one another.
- Ignore partisanship
- Comply with the Voting Rights Act's demand for majority-minority districts
- Utilize communities of interest like shared culture or economic class
- Minimize unnecessary city and county splits
- Geographic, not geometric compactness
You can find further details on the methodology used to construct these districts here, as well as all of the associated data files.
This post has been updated. For all of our posts in the Nonpartisan Redistricting series, click here.