Tennessee Shows Our Voting Gap
Terry H. Schwadron
April 18, 2023
Spurred by the behavior of the lopsided Republican state legislative majority in Tennessee in ejecting two young, Black Democrats — only to see them returned in days — suddenly there’s been new attention on an old issue: gerrymandering.
Aside from wonderment over why Republicans in the state would use or abuse their legislative majority in a dumb political way that has bought them no gain either on the issues or in support, it’s set off a new round of uncomfortable self-examinations by politics and court watchers over the steady, spiraling decline of democracy.
The new target Is the old target — politicians who get into office and then spend their time and effort to redraw political lines that help their own. Both parties do it, though Republicans have done it better and in more states.
Of note is the growing gap between rural voters, whose vote goes Republican, and urban areas, which more often vote Democratic. In Tennessee that means Democrats represent more voters within concentrated areas, and Republicans represent many more rural districts.
As a result, we get a Tennessee state legislature that best serves the needs of the political party than fairly reflecting the sentiment of all its citizens. The same is true in many other states and in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Though Republicans have lost the popular vote for president in the last several elections, the House has a Republican majority — one that is increasingly dominated by the extreme right wing even of that party — that differs even from Republicans elected statewide to the U.S. Senate.
The same thing is true for state legislatures, which now see themselves in charge of election and voting standards and procedures, abortion policy, decisions affecting what it means to be gay or trans in our society, housing costs and what books are being allowed for use in schools.
Gerrymandering Has Grown
Indeed, recent studies show states including Georgia, Florida and Wisconsin, all of which grew in population, have grown much less competitive in elections held in voting districts approved by state legislatures with Republican majorities. That means that district lines were drawn in such a way as to make the outcome less contentious and clearly favoring one party.
One need only compare statewide votes for Senator or the recent Wisconsin Supreme Court to see that district-less voting often shows a different result than the elections in legislative districts.
By contrast, the number of competitive districts in Michigan grew, and, as a result, the legislative majority changed. Elections in Texas and New Hampshire generally showed fewer competitive districts, according to those who follow these election mechanics. In states like Pennsylvania, Virginia and Maine, the number of competitive district have remained about the same.
It had been the case that these redistricting maps were open to challenge in the courts, particularly over issues of race, though the Supreme Court has significantly cut the power of enforcing voter protections over race. At the same time, the Supreme Court has said it and other courts lacks the ability to draw election lines and that the issue must be settled locally. Essentially, the Supreme Court has ratified state legislative gerrymandering.
In North Carolina, the dispute over voting maps had renewed all these questions about the powers of state legislatures and elections before state officials said they were rethinking what they are doing. After Republican legislature had drawn a map to favor GOP candidates, the state Supreme Court said it couldn’t. Republican legislators balked. Then the partisan balance on that court changed and now may approve the blatantly partisan maps originally sought.
How the U.S. Supreme Court handles the resulting cases about an “independent state legislature” being the sole determinant of district maps and will affect several other states, including New York, where it had been Democrats redrawing maps that raised partisan issues.
Wider than Tennessee
Politico noted that the voice of Nashville and Memphis, Tennessee’s most populous areas, has been “steadily chipped away in recent years subtly through legislative maps” before the recent explosive ouster of Representatives Justin Jones and Justin Pearson last week over too-loud gun-safety protests. Democrats see similar opposition efforts to cancel their party in all levels of government, though not through public ouster.
“From the city to the state to the federal level, our city has lost small-d democratic representation,” noted Sen. Jeff Yarbro, D-Nashville.
It is a familiar refrain around the country where representative bodies with lopsided majorities that don’t really represent the electorate of the state around them.
This issue this time was about guns. But the pattern emerging around abortion, gender and identity protections, crime and justice, and health and housing issues are similar.
“Whoever is in power becomes the gatekeeper of the tenets of democracy, a local pastor told Politico.
CNN detailed efforts of Republican state legislative majorities to move aggressively against local prosecutors and decision-makers in blue cities, for example. It is evident in differences in policy between Austin and Houston local officials and the state government, among other places, or in Florida, where the governor’s national political aspirations are prompting him to go after local district attorneys who don’t agree with his priorities for prosecution. The same is proving true over policies affecting minimum wage and family leave laws to environmental regulations, mask requirements and even recycling policies for plastic bags.
Recent events have spotlighted a disparity important to democracy. It is unclear whether anyone will address it: Republicans want it this way, Democrats can’t change it anytime soon, and the rest of us are allowing it to go on.
##