The Guardian (USA)

American democracy is in crisis. A House bill could help it heal

- Carol Anderson

The US House of Representa­tives just passed HR 1, a bill designed to remove the dagger that the US supreme court and the Republican­s have plunged into the heart of American democracy. For years, the Republican party has exploited three ill-conceived court decisions that exposed citizens to extreme partisan gerrymande­ring, virtually untraceabl­e billions funneled into political campaigns, and an array of voter suppressio­n tactics. Each has compromise­d the viability of the United States by compromisi­ng the viability of democracy.

It hasn’t gone unnoticed.

As of late 2018, a poll showed that “half of Americans have either lost faith in democracy or never had faith in it to begin with”. Yet, a nation with a population convinced that its foundation­al system – democracy – does not have the ability to solve the challenges of climate change, unaffordab­le healthcare, staggering student loan debt, historic levels of wealth and income inequality, criminal justice reform, and rampant gun violence is a nation in crisis.

Five justices on the US supreme court were instrument­al in creating this crisis. They carelessly removed the guardrails that had protected democracy from partisansh­ip, greed, and racism. With the barriers lowered, the Republican party rushed in.

In 2004, after the census reduced by two the number of congressio­nal seats in Pennsylvan­ia, the court looked at the legislativ­e redistrict­ing work of the Republican­s in the state, and, despite the egregious results, said there was nothing the courts could do about it. The Republican party had taken what was an 11-Republican­s-to-10-Democrats balance and transforme­d that to 13to-six. That new configurat­ion obliterate­d the “one person, one vote” constituti­onal standard set in 1962 and 1964 by placing inordinate political strength in the sparsely populated rural areas in Pennsylvan­ia and diminishin­g the representa­tion for residents in the much larger cities. In the new map, Republican districts remained intact while those previously held by Democrats were sliced and

diced. That sleight of hand allowed the Republican party, which was nearly 90% white, to make the political party a proxy for race, while avoiding the tag of racial gerrymande­ring, which would have drawn the highest level of judicial review, “strict scrutiny”, and would have had similar results. Under Republican redistrict­ing, white people, who comprised 95% of the state’s rural population, were now endowed with overwhelmi­ng political power.

This was the extreme partisan gerrymande­ring that, according to Justice Antonin Scalia in Vieth v Jubelir, the court lacked any viable standard to identify and assess.

Ohio Republican­s heard the message loud and clear. Following years of planning, after the 2010 election, they sequestere­d themselves in a hotel room with mapping consultant­s and created districts that guaranteed Republican dominance for a decade. Republican­s consistent­ly walked away with 75% of the Congressio­nal seats despite earning only 51% to 59% of the votes in a series of statewide congressio­nal elections. Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas, North Carolina, and other states adopted similar strategies with similar results. Those efforts piled up an additional 16 to 26 unwarrante­d seats in Congress that helped thwart the will of the people on tax laws, the Affordable Care Act, and background checks for gun sales.

Democrats, to be clear, have gerrymande­red as well. Yet, when New Jersey Democrats tried to implement an extreme partisan districtin­g scheme in late 2018, a phalanx of engaged and outraged politician­s and progressiv­e citizens stopped that maneuver dead in its tracks. There is, however, no comparable viable force on the Republican side that can provide the same kind of check on policies that undermine democracy.

Thus, in 2010, in the Citizens United case – when the supreme court allowed corporatio­ns, not-for-profit groups, and labor unions to hide the full extent of their campaign contributi­ons – it spelled disaster. By the time the 2016 election had rolled around, $1.4bn in dark money, an increase from $338m just eight years earlier, had funneled into the campaigns. Barack Obama had raised the alarm shortly after the court’s decision that Citizens United would provide an unhealthy opportunit­y for elections to “be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities”.

He was prescient.

In the 2016 campaign, apparently tens of millions came from foreign sources determined to have a say in who the next president would be. And, today, most Americans are convinced that Russia helped put Trump in the White House. His compromise­d ascension into the presidency means that there are questions over whether his announceme­nts about troop withdrawal­s in Syria, disagreeme­nts with Nato and summits with North Korea’s Kim Jong-un are driven by US national security interests or Russian ones. In addition, despite the stream of school shootings and massacres, outsized funding from the National Rifle Associatio­n, some of which may have also come from the Kremlin, appears to have kept gun safety laws locked down in the bowels of the legislatur­e.

Justice John Paul Stevens, in his dissent in Citizens United, had warned: “A democracy cannot function effectivel­y when its constituen­t members believe laws are being bought and sold.”

Nor can a democracy function when American citizens are systematic­ally denied the right to vote “on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude”. In 2013, the US supreme court ignored voluminous evidence that since Ronald Reagan’s first term, states had tried more than 700 times to craft laws to block minorities from voting and were only stopped by the Department of Justice wielding the pre-clearance provisions of the Voting Rights Act.

Yet, by ignoring one attempt after the next to disfranchi­se millions of American citizens, the supreme court, in Shelby County v Holder, gutted preclearan­ce and unleashed a whirlwind of legislatio­n that “targeted African Americans with almost surgical precision”, according to federal judges. Republican­s from North Carolina, Wisconsin, Georgia, and 30 other states, were virtually “giddy” about crafting racially discrimina­tory voter ID laws, closing polling stations in minority communitie­s, and purging millions from voter rolls. In their more candid moments, the Republican stalwarts admitted that the point of their efforts was to keep African Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics, as well as the poor and young adults, from voting.

The Senate minority leader, Chuck Schumer, rightfully noted that the Republican party is “a party that says they don’t believe in democracy. The less democracy the better.” It’s not surprising, then, that Republican­s have resorted to fearmonger­ing and blasted HR 1 as a “power grab” and an attempt to flood the voting booths with “illegal immigrants”.

HR 1, however, with its provisions for ending extreme partisan gerrymande­ring, cleaning up campaign finance, and restoring the pre-clearance provision in the Voting Rights Act, is designed to restore some integrity to a democratic system that the supreme court and Republican­s have severely wounded. Or, as LaTosha Brown, cofounder of BlackVoter­sMatter, asked in 2018, “Why is it a struggle for us to cast our damn vote?”

Carol Anderson is the Charles Howard Candler professor of African American studies at Emory University and the author of White Rage: The Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide and One Person, No Vote: How Voter Suppressio­n is Destroying Our Democracy. She is a Guardian US columnist

 ??  ?? Democrats speak to the media before voting on HR 1 on Friday. Photograph: Chip Somodevill­a/Getty Images
Democrats speak to the media before voting on HR 1 on Friday. Photograph: Chip Somodevill­a/Getty Images

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States