Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Why Republicans Will Keep the House in November
________________________________________
Why Republicans Will Keep the House in November
By David Daley [1] / BillMoyers.com [2]
August 11, 2016
Democrats are daring to dream. A sit-in by House Democrats to demand action
on post-Orlando gun control measures energized party faithful, dominated
social media and may have generated enough public pressure to splinter the
Republicans' near-solid fealty to Second Amendment absolutism.
It also encouraged many Democrats to set their sights on something long
considered impossible - taking back the House, where Republicans and Speaker
Paul Ryan hold an historic 247-188 majority. Clinton has even made her
guarantee of a Democratic Congress into an instant applause-generator on the
stump.
But the map for the House of Representatives looks very different.
As strong as Hillary Clinton looks against Donald Trump four months before
Election Day - data whiz Nate Silver now gives Trump less than a 30-percent
shot at beating the former secretary of state, and projects Clinton has
almost 325 Electoral College votes sewn up - 2016 is not looking like a
Democratic wave year.
This is a fool's errand. The Republican firewall in the House can survive
even Donald Trump. Indeed, it was painstakingly designed to keep the House
red even in the face of a Democratic landslide. The reason why? The oldest
trick in the book - the gerrymander - which Republicans used in a thoroughly
modern and masterful new way after sweeping 700 state legislative seats in
2010, and taking control of two-thirds of all state legislative chambers
nationwide.
The Constitution mandates that every congressional and state legislative
district be redrawn after the census, so elections in "zero years" can
reverberate throughout the decade. The maps the Republicans drew in 2011 -
especially in blue and purple states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin,
North Carolina and Ohio - have been carefully crafted with sophisticated
algorithms and reams of demographic details such as to be virtually
impregnable. Even against a Democratic wave.
The maps paid immediate dividends in 2012, when Barack Obama was re-elected.
Democrats took 25 of 33 Senate seats, and Democratic House candidates won
1.4 million more votes than Republicans - but the GOP held the House,
234-201.
In Pennsylvania, Democratic House candidates won 100,000 more votes than
Republicans, but the new lines were artfully packed into so few districts
that the GOP claimed 13 of the 18 seats. In Michigan, 240,000 more voters
favored Democrats, but the delegation went 9-5 Republican. Barack Obama won
Florida by almost 3 percentage points, but he only won 40 percent of the
tilted congressional districts. Ohio voters narrowly favored Republican
House candidates - but the unforgiving lines turned 12 of the 16 seats red.
That means 52 percent of the vote became 75 percent of the seats.
Similar stories played out in Wisconsin, North Carolina and many other
states. While nationally, 1.4 million more voters cast ballots for
Democratic House candidates, the lines were so stout that the GOP lost just
seven seats. Republican strategists took a victory lap after the 2012
results, noting that they'd managed to "erect a Republican firewall through
the redistricting process." Indeed, for the first time since 1972 - and just
the second time since World War II - the party with the most votes did not
take control of the chamber.
Democrats are hoping that 2016 will be different, but this is wishful
thinking. In Florida this week, an optimistic Democratic Congressional
Campaign Committee went so far as to reserve six figures' worth of TV time
in the pricey Orlando market to target veteran Republican lawmaker John
Mica, who rolled to victory in 2014 with 63 percent of the vote. The only
reason he's vulnerable is because a Florida judge ordered his radically
gerrymandered district to be redrawn last year. Trump doesn't jeopardize
this seat. If the Democrats capture it, it's because it was
un-gerrymandered. This seat is in play only because it's the rare district
where a judge forced an untilted, fair map.
Democrats are also imagining that Trump could drag down GOP incumbents in
suburban districts in Minnesota, New Jersey and California, and that he
inspires so many Latinos to vote against him in states like Texas that even
more seats are put in play. Some Republicans are concerned about this as
well. In a recent column, National Review editor Ramesh Ponnuru warns,
"Republicans should worry about losing the House [3]."
Unfortunately for Democrats, there just aren't enough competitive districts
for any serious challenge to Ryan's speakership. Nationwide after 2010,
Republicans took complete control of drawing 193 districts. The Democrats
drew just 44. The GOP specialized in taking "swing districts" off the table.
Of the 70 districts dubbed "competitive" by NPR in 2010, Republicans redrew
47 of them in 2011 - and aimed to take them off the table for the next
decade.
Earlier this year, The Cook Political Report [4] identified 31 Republican
seats as at risk. Democrats would need to take 97 percent of those districts
to win the House - without losing any of their own. You'd have to be a
character in Dumb & Dumber to look at those odds and think, "So you're
telling me there's a chance."
There's not. There might be a "Never Trump" movement within some wings of
the GOP. But there is no movement to put the Democrats in charge of the
government. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last week found Clinton taking
control of battleground states - but a 46-46 tie when voters were asked
which party they wanted to control Congress. When voters were asked the same
question in June 2008, when Democrats retained the House, on that same
question the Democrats held a 52-33 advantage.
If polls show a looming Trump debacle by late summer, the smart Republican
money simply moves down-ballot as an insurance policy. The deep-pocketed GOP
donors now seemingly snubbing Trump will simply focus their money on
securing the House and attempting to save the Senate. It need not be an
expensive policy: In his latest Crystal Ball study [5]last week, the
respected political scientist Larry Sabato rated only nine Republican
incumbents as holding "toss-up" seats. His Center for Politics report rates
227 GOP seats as safe, likely or leaning GOP. It takes only 218 to control
the chamber.
In this age of hardened partisanship, Americans just don't split their
tickets any more. Is it possible that this fall, Republicans turned off by
Trump will hold their nose and vote for Clinton, support a Libertarian
ticket with two former GOP governors or just stay home? Sure. But to think
that many millions of them - enough to rebalance a deeply undemocratic map -
will also support Democratic congressional candidates and give Clinton a
chance to govern with a Democratic Congress is the kind of political fantasy
we must dispense with.
Cable news panels, from now through November, will ceaselessly debate
whether the Democrats have a chance at taking back the House. It's a waste
of time. What we need to be talking about instead is how to reform a system
that makes partisan mapmakers more powerful than a popular majority.
David Daley is the author of "Ratf**ked: The True Story Behind the Secret
Plan to Steal America's Democracy" (W.W. Norton/Liveright)
Share on Facebook Share
Share on Twitter Tweet
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [6]
[7]
________________________________________
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/republicans-will-keep-congress
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/david-daley
[2] http://billmoyers.com/
[3]
http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-06-17/republicans-should-worry-a
bout-losing-the-house
[4] http://cookpolitical.com/house/charts/race-ratings
[5] http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2016-house/
[6] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Why Republicans Will
Keep the House in November
[7] http://www.alternet.org/
[8] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
Published on Alternet (http://www.alternet.org)
Home > Why Republicans Will Keep the House in November
Why Republicans Will Keep the House in November
By David Daley [1] / BillMoyers.com [2]
August 11, 2016
AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to FacebookShare to TwitterShare to Google+More
AddThis Share optionsShare to Email
Democrats are daring to dream. A sit-in by House Democrats to demand action
on post-Orlando gun control measures energized party faithful, dominated
social media and may have generated enough public pressure to splinter the
Republicans' near-solid fealty to Second Amendment absolutism.
It also encouraged many Democrats to set their sights on something long
considered impossible - taking back the House, where Republicans and Speaker
Paul Ryan hold an historic 247-188 majority. Clinton has even made her
guarantee of a Democratic Congress into an instant applause-generator on the
stump.
But the map for the House of Representatives looks very different.
As strong as Hillary Clinton looks against Donald Trump four months before
Election Day - data whiz Nate Silver now gives Trump less than a 30-percent
shot at beating the former secretary of state, and projects Clinton has
almost 325 Electoral College votes sewn up - 2016 is not looking like a
Democratic wave year.
This is a fool's errand. The Republican firewall in the House can survive
even Donald Trump. Indeed, it was painstakingly designed to keep the House
red even in the face of a Democratic landslide. The reason why? The oldest
trick in the book - the gerrymander - which Republicans used in a thoroughly
modern and masterful new way after sweeping 700 state legislative seats in
2010, and taking control of two-thirds of all state legislative chambers
nationwide.
The Constitution mandates that every congressional and state legislative
district be redrawn after the census, so elections in "zero years" can
reverberate throughout the decade. The maps the Republicans drew in 2011 -
especially in blue and purple states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin,
North Carolina and Ohio - have been carefully crafted with sophisticated
algorithms and reams of demographic details such as to be virtually
impregnable. Even against a Democratic wave.
The maps paid immediate dividends in 2012, when Barack Obama was re-elected.
Democrats took 25 of 33 Senate seats, and Democratic House candidates won
1.4 million more votes than Republicans - but the GOP held the House,
234-201.
In Pennsylvania, Democratic House candidates won 100,000 more votes than
Republicans, but the new lines were artfully packed into so few districts
that the GOP claimed 13 of the 18 seats. In Michigan, 240,000 more voters
favored Democrats, but the delegation went 9-5 Republican. Barack Obama won
Florida by almost 3 percentage points, but he only won 40 percent of the
tilted congressional districts. Ohio voters narrowly favored Republican
House candidates - but the unforgiving lines turned 12 of the 16 seats red.
That means 52 percent of the vote became 75 percent of the seats.
Similar stories played out in Wisconsin, North Carolina and many other
states. While nationally, 1.4 million more voters cast ballots for
Democratic House candidates, the lines were so stout that the GOP lost just
seven seats. Republican strategists took a victory lap after the 2012
results, noting that they'd managed to "erect a Republican firewall through
the redistricting process." Indeed, for the first time since 1972 - and just
the second time since World War II - the party with the most votes did not
take control of the chamber.
Democrats are hoping that 2016 will be different, but this is wishful
thinking. In Florida this week, an optimistic Democratic Congressional
Campaign Committee went so far as to reserve six figures' worth of TV time
in the pricey Orlando market to target veteran Republican lawmaker John
Mica, who rolled to victory in 2014 with 63 percent of the vote. The only
reason he's vulnerable is because a Florida judge ordered his radically
gerrymandered district to be redrawn last year. Trump doesn't jeopardize
this seat. If the Democrats capture it, it's because it was
un-gerrymandered. This seat is in play only because it's the rare district
where a judge forced an untilted, fair map.
Democrats are also imagining that Trump could drag down GOP incumbents in
suburban districts in Minnesota, New Jersey and California, and that he
inspires so many Latinos to vote against him in states like Texas that even
more seats are put in play. Some Republicans are concerned about this as
well. In a recent column, National Review editor Ramesh Ponnuru warns,
"Republicans should worry about losing the House [3]."
Unfortunately for Democrats, there just aren't enough competitive districts
for any serious challenge to Ryan's speakership. Nationwide after 2010,
Republicans took complete control of drawing 193 districts. The Democrats
drew just 44. The GOP specialized in taking "swing districts" off the table.
Of the 70 districts dubbed "competitive" by NPR in 2010, Republicans redrew
47 of them in 2011 - and aimed to take them off the table for the next
decade.
Earlier this year, The Cook Political Report [4] identified 31 Republican
seats as at risk. Democrats would need to take 97 percent of those districts
to win the House - without losing any of their own. You'd have to be a
character in Dumb & Dumber to look at those odds and think, "So you're
telling me there's a chance."
There's not. There might be a "Never Trump" movement within some wings of
the GOP. But there is no movement to put the Democrats in charge of the
government. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll last week found Clinton taking
control of battleground states - but a 46-46 tie when voters were asked
which party they wanted to control Congress. When voters were asked the same
question in June 2008, when Democrats retained the House, on that same
question the Democrats held a 52-33 advantage.
If polls show a looming Trump debacle by late summer, the smart Republican
money simply moves down-ballot as an insurance policy. The deep-pocketed GOP
donors now seemingly snubbing Trump will simply focus their money on
securing the House and attempting to save the Senate. It need not be an
expensive policy: In his latest Crystal Ball study [5]last week, the
respected political scientist Larry Sabato rated only nine Republican
incumbents as holding "toss-up" seats. His Center for Politics report rates
227 GOP seats as safe, likely or leaning GOP. It takes only 218 to control
the chamber.
In this age of hardened partisanship, Americans just don't split their
tickets any more. Is it possible that this fall, Republicans turned off by
Trump will hold their nose and vote for Clinton, support a Libertarian
ticket with two former GOP governors or just stay home? Sure. But to think
that many millions of them - enough to rebalance a deeply undemocratic map -
will also support Democratic congressional candidates and give Clinton a
chance to govern with a Democratic Congress is the kind of political fantasy
we must dispense with.
Cable news panels, from now through November, will ceaselessly debate
whether the Democrats have a chance at taking back the House. It's a waste
of time. What we need to be talking about instead is how to reform a system
that makes partisan mapmakers more powerful than a popular majority.
David Daley is the author of "Ratf**ked: The True Story Behind the Secret
Plan to Steal America's Democracy" (W.W. Norton/Liveright)
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Report typos and corrections to 'corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx'. [6]
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.[7]
Source URL:
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/republicans-will-keep-congress ;
Links:
[1] http://www.alternet.org/authors/david-daley
[2] http://billmoyers.com/
[3]
http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-06-17/republicans-should-worry-a
bout-losing-the-house
[4] http://cookpolitical.com/house/charts/race-ratings
[5] http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/2016-house/
[6] mailto:corrections@xxxxxxxxxxxx?Subject=Typo on Why Republicans Will
Keep the House in November
[7] http://www.alternet.org/
[8] http://www.alternet.org/%2Bnew_src%2B
