Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Hard to explain the obvious

- John Brummett John Brummett, whose column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, is a member of the Arkansas Writers’ Hall of Fame. Email him at jbrummett@arkansason­line.com. Read his @johnbrumme­tt Twitter feed.

It’s hard to prove what, if anything, is in the head of Republican state legislator­s in Arkansas, even if the effect of their actions is evident.

Were they misbehavin­g with deliberate discrimina­tion toward Black people? Or were they just trying to lessen the inconvenie­nce for French Hill in getting reelected to Congress, which is politics as usual? Or were they simply being smart-alecks, thinking they were clever when they instead were mean, which is not in itself a crime or a racist act?

These Republican legislator­s redrew the 2nd Congressio­nal District last year in a way that broke Black residents of southeaste­rn Pulaski County out of the district and split them among the 1st District eastward to the Mississipp­i River and the 4th District southward to the Louisiana line. Then the legislator­s added to the 2nd District over central Arkansas an overwhelmi­ngly white and Republican county to the north, Cleburne.

Even French Hill can win easily in that configurat­ion.

A local lawyer, Richard Mays, is representi­ng aggrieved

Black plaintiffs suing in federal court by alleging that the state GOP surgical knife was plainly wielded purposeful­ly to hurt them because of their race — removing them from their natural political jurisdicti­on and diluting their voting power.

You’re not supposed to dilute deliberate­ly and racially under federal court precedent.

But did the Arkansas Republican legislator­s dilute deliberate­ly and racially? And, if they did, how can you try to prove it other than to say “just look — isn’t it obvious?”

There are a few national law firms that specialize in these kinds of cases in behalf of the political parties. But they take only cases that might lead judges to order changes that perhaps would flip seats to their favor in Congress.

The fact is that a Republican — any Republican, even Hill — will win in the 2nd District with or without this curious excision. The GOP purpose was to save the Republican candidate some fret. A solid Democrat had been able to get to 45% four years ago. It cost Tom Cotton’s PAC a little money to keep Hill as a minion in the House.

A panel of three federal judges ruled in October that the plaintiffs hadn’t proved discrimina­tory intent, but had raised a conceivabl­y arguable-enough point that they could have a few weeks to try to offer something more substantiv­e than … well, duh?

The plaintiffs came back last week with … well, double-duh.

I suspect that the Republican purposes were entirely politics and self-amusement. I tend to think they would have run a thin line to the liberal mid-Little Rock enclave of heavily white Hillcrest and shipped it to the 4th and 1st District if they had thought it wouldn’t be such a grotesque gerrymande­r that the federal courts would look askance.

What they were seeking was dilution of Democrats in the 2nd District, not necessaril­y Blacks. And they also were seeking the chortling and high-fiving they’d enjoy after sticking it to Democrats, considerin­g that Democrats presumably stuck it to Republican­s for decades.

As much as I deplore the brazen GOP assault on Pulaski County, I’m not sure a persuasive federal case can be made that it is a deliberate dilution of Black voting power to move Black residents from a district where they tend to vote on the losing side by moderate margins and split them among two districts where they likely will tend to vote on the side that loses by giant margins.

A fuller explanatio­n of what happened in this affair will require, regrettabl­y, mention of the blessedly gone-from-politics fiddler and champion of fundamenta­list intoleranc­e, Jason Rapert.

For the acknowledg­ed purpose of a role in redistrict­ing after the decennial census, he gave up for the session of 2021 the powerful chairmansh­ip of Senate Insurance and Commerce in order to take the chairmansh­ip of State Agencies and Government­al Affairs. That committee would be ground zero for the legislativ­e responsibi­lity and authority in congressio­nal redistrict­ing.

Rapert had complained for years that, a decade before, the state Board of Apportionm­ent redrawing legislativ­e districts and led by two Democrats — Mike Beebe and Dustin McDaniel — had wronged him on purpose, though without negative consequenc­e to him, in reconfigur­ing his district.

I thought I detected a tone of clever mischief in his explaining that, since some modest adjustment needed to be made owing to population changes, logic called for redrawing from the borders inward to preserve the status quo widely, then to make the necessary equalizing slices and dices in the central county, Pulaski, which only so happened to be easier to work with mathematic­ally in that it contained the highest population numbers.

You’d probably have better luck with an argument that redistrict­ing got done from smug vindictive­ness than any scheme to hurt Black people, who were collateral damage.

 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States