I want to be honest with you
really quickly as I only I'm
always honest with you on here.
But yesterday just to give you a
little look behind the curtain.
I had some real some real
concerns about the show I did.
I'll admit that I asked the team,
do you really think people
are going to sit and watch 14
straight minutes of stories about
redistricting and gerrymandering?
I mean, I don't want to be up here
talking to myself while you're flipping
over to car crash coverage on channel.
The other guys.
They said something.
I'm kind of paraphrasing here,
but it's something along the lines of Dan.
Just do what you're told so.
That's what I did.
In this morning I woke up and I opened
up the ratings anxiously to learn that
not only were all of you watching,
but our audience grew throughout the show,
meaning the people I don't know
must have been like calling their
friends like dude or you near TV.
Have you heard of Elbridge Gary?
No, put on the story right now.
So to keep you nerds happy,
let's stay on the course.
First off,
lawmakers have put the redistricting
special session on hold until
Saturday because someone in the
Capitol tested positive for COVID.
And according to the Statesman
Journal at least six House
Republicans asked to be excused
because they might have been exposed.
The redistricting deadline is Monday,
so that means the legislature will only
have three days to work everything out.
Now back to last night's
segment on gerrymandering.
Mary Lynn sent me this message and said
I think the professor's explanation,
the person we interviewed of
gerrymandering got it backwards.
You cannot use race to determine districts,
but the Supreme Court said you can
use political party demographics.
So Maryland thank you so much
for that comment.
And I'll admit,
my ears also perked up a bit when I
heard him say that during the interview.
Here's the clip.
You can manipulate the districts,
but the Supreme Court has said
the only reason you can do that
is for racial or ethnic reasons.
And so it prevents people, for instance,
for making districts where an African
American community of black community,
for instance, might be split.
So there's no chance for a
black person to win to be the
representative from that district.
So that's the only thing
you can take into account.
You cannot explicitly cannot take
into account party registration
when you make districts.
OK, so here's the deal.
Let me break it down.
Our professor, first of all, is correct.
This is why we have him on the show.
You can use race to draw districts.
Let me explain.
It's based on article two of the
Voting Rights Act, which is one of
the most important documents in U.
S history and helps ensure minority
communities have a voice in politics.
So to kind of UN peel the onion here and
give you the details back in the day,
white lawmakers didn't want any
black lawmakers and they knew that
black people would be most likely
to elect a black candidate so.
They would split up those black
communities into different districts
and that diluted their voting power.
Basically they created districts where
even if every black person in that
district voted for the same black candidate,
there would still be enough white votes
to keep that person from elected office.
This bird,
many court cases, many,
many court cases including Thornburg V
Gingles where the Supreme Court created
the Gingles test to help lawmakers to
create majority minority districts,
which are very literal,
literally.
Districts with a minority population
like the black population would
be the majority in that district.
This map shows the racial makeup of the
current congressional districts in EU.
S so lawmakers use this gingell
test to see if a minority majority
district is needed.
First,
they take a look to see if the minority
group is even big enough to be a
majority majority in a district in Oregon,
for instance.
They're not neither the black
or Latino population is large
enough on a state level second.
They look at the voting records and
see if that minority population
is politically cohesive.
In other words,
can you see proof that they want the
same things but they can't get those
things because their vote is being diluted?
And lastly,
is there evidence that the majority
group tend to vote for their own
race meaning or the white people
only voting for white people?
Now if you were listening closely there,
you may be a little confused by something,
because didn't our professor also
say that you cannot account for party
registration when drawing a district?
Kind of seems to contradict the gingles
tests were voting history is a key factor.
How can it be both?
Well,
I was told it just is.
It's got little asterisks there alright.
The goal of this ruling or of
the gingles test is based on the
Voting Rights Act and it gives a
voice to minority groups that have
similar values and similar beliefs,
and it protects those people from
having their values and beliefs
from being ignored.
All right, keep sending in
your questions or comments if
they're about redistricting.
I'm happy to nerd up, alright,
so is the rest of the team to be honest
with you keep sending in the story kgw.com.
I'll read a few when we
finish this story next.