July 28, 2011 - Issue 437 |
|||||
|
|||||
The Redistricting
"Power Grab" of African American Seats:
|
|||||
The California Citizens Redistricting Commission (CCRC) will be voting to release the final iteration of the redistricting maps this week. These maps are supposed to reflect the state’s demographic shifts in the state’s population after the reapportionment of state and congressional legislative seats following the 2010 Census. As far as the
congressional seats go, the goal of the collective African American community
statewide is to hold on to what it has, despite a population that is in
decline. Blacks in The latest float
of the CCRC’s district maps, seats historically held by African American
representatives, commonly referred to as “the BLACK seats,” have fewer
blacks in those districts, making it much more difficult to continue the
legacy of black representation. In the most dramatic scenario, two of
the seats are merged into one, creating a majority black district, but
losing a “black” seat in the process. Relegating the statewide African
American community to three seats, Well, how should we feel about it? Political representation that we’ve fought (and died) for is about to be taken away on questionable population premises that include undocumented aliens and historical gerrymandering. With its population in decline, CCRC rationalization is stating that the emerging Latino and Asian populations have grown and this has put the squeeze on black representation. I don’t necessarily buy that, for a number of reasons. Black population hasn’t declined that much. 2020, the seat may be gone for sure, but blacks have to retain political power to address to dramatic political interests at hand, namely unemployment and reentry, which I wouldn’t trust anybody else to handle. For those reasons alone, congressional representation must be retained. I’m more inclined to think it’s a power grab from which blacks in the state may never recover. The CCRC is playing with our community’s representation over a one percent differential in population percentage. Black Congressional representatives would go from four to three, or 5.6% of the state’s congressional representation. So they would rather us be underrepresented by one percent (5.6%) than overrepresented by one percent (at 7.5%). If population parity is the play, why does the CCRC still have over 60% of the congressional seats represented by white people when they are only 40.1% of the state’s population? I’ll tell you why, it’s because of the way the lines are drawn and that effect on majorities, namely blacks and Latinos that are clustered in urban areas. That’s the fallacy of the population parity argument. Whites can represent other people, but other people can’t represent whites. So, the “minority seats” which exist now represent a majority of the state’s population. The commission is playing black and Latino political interests against each other and marginalizing Asian political interests in favor of the historical political status quo. We must call this out or it will continue. It’s power that the black community cannot afford to concede. And so the commission must know the level of alarm our community has for its district maps and be encouraged to change them. Frederick Douglass’ words never have rung truer:
If the BlackCommentator.com Columnist, Dr. Anthony Asadullah Samad, is a national columnist, managing director of the Urban Issues Forum and author of Saving The Race: Empowerment Through Wisdom. His Website is AnthonySamad.com. Click here to contact Dr. Samad. |
|||||
|
|
||||