There are few elements that would contribute to better government in Massachusetts and Rhode Island than a vigorous two-party system on Beacon Hill and Smith Hill. But because of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision on legislative gerrymandering, that isn’t going to happen anytime soon, or maybe ever.
As Republicans around the country gloat about the high court’s 5 to 4 decision to allow aggressive gerrymandering, nothing could be worse for the GOP in our corner of New England. The statehouses in Boston and Providence are run by huge Democratic majorities. After this decision it’s improbable to think that will ever change.
Put simply, what gerrymanders do is flip Democracy 101 upside down. It allows the politicians to choose their voters in rigged districts instead of voters choosing politicians in fair elections.
John Marion of Common Cause of Rhode Island , the good government group, is a vigorous watchdog on election matters. But even he says this Supreme Court decision sets a very high bar for drawing fair legislative districts after the 2020 U.S. Census.
Nationally, Republicans are pleased because they control more statehouses than Democrats. The National Conference of State Legislatures says Republicans hold both the governorship and legislature in 22 states, compared with Democratic full control in 14 states. Gerrymandering enabled the GOP to hold onto their U.S. House majority during the Obama years even as Democratic candidates harvested more votes.
Legislative reapportionment is one of those complicated, my-eyes- glaze- over issues, akin to reading fine print in an insurance policy. But history tells us that it has big consequences. In Rhode Island, it led to voter suppression through property qualifications to cast a ballot and tolerance of such evils as child labor well into the 20th Century.
That’s because by 1910 Providence and six large industrial cities contained two thirds of the state’s population, but 22 rural towns with fewer than 5,000 people controlled the state senate. That meant Republican Protestants controlled Rhode Island politics long after they were a numerical minority in a state that by 1905 had an immigrant Roman Catholic majority. Massachusetts also had a malapportioned legislature where rural Yankees held sway over the Irish immigrants who flocked to Boston after the potato famine of the 1840s.
To this day, Massachusetts congressional districts –shaped by the Democrats who have an iron grip on Beacon Hill—favor one party over another. Michael Goodman, head of public policy at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth, describes Rep. Joseph Kennedy III’s district as “clearly partisan.”
Kennedy’s district runs from the wealthy, liberal inner Boston suburbs of Newton and Brookline to the faded textile factory towns of Taunton and Fall River. It doesn’t make a lot of sense geographically or in linking communities of interest but it does make it difficult for a Republican to win.
Rhode Island’s stagnant population—the state has had about one million people since WW II—means the state will likely lose a U.S. House seat after the 2020 Census. Then for the first time since the beginnings of the Republic, the nation’s smallest state will have just one U.S. House member.
In both Massachusetts and Rhode Island, the legislature decides the U.S. House district borders and their own districts. This means that the insider political classes –in this case Democrats—draw the lines. Massachusetts does have a Republican governor, Charlie Baker, who could try to negotiate some fairness.
This may not be as hopeless as it sounds. In his opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts stated that state courts—but not federal—could still play a role in partisan gerrymandering cases. And John Marion of Common Cause notes that some states have done away with gerrymanders by taking redistricting out of the hands of state lawmakers and giving it to a non-partisan commission.
Still, the sad aspect of the gerrymander ruling is that is creates huge incentives for bad behavior. If Republicans are going to be aggressive in pushing partisan gerrymanders, Democrats would be foolish to play fair in states they control.
The only solution, Marion says, is for voters to become engaged in the redistricting process and demand the politicians play fair. Good luck with that in today’s fractured political culture.
Scott MacKay’s commentary can be heard every Monday at 6:45 and 8:45 and at 5:44 in the afternoon.
