Talk Elections

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/19113164/fox-2-exclusive-polling-study-14th-congressional-district

Can we put to rest the argument that lowering the Black percentage of  VRA districts to the low 40's wouldn't place those Black incumbents in danger?

In this case I've heard the black Detroit establishment wants Clarke out and Peters in, under the idea that peters will run elsewhere and the establishment can place their own guy in the seat.

For the umpteenth time, the race of the elected official does not determine whether a district has "regressed"or not. We've been through this every previous time this has come up. Note that according to this poll, Clarke gets less than half the votes of the African Americans surveyed.

1) For the umpteenth time, the claim I read in this forum is that regressing a Black VRA district to the low forties would not result in Black incumbents losing. Can we acknowledge that that claim simply isn't based on fact? The advocates of that claim hand-waved away the democratic primary in favor of solely analyzing the general. In the real world, minority Democrats are being beaten by White Democrats when their districts are being regressed to the low fifties.

2) The claim that I have read here is that when a minority carries his minority's vote, but a White beats him based on White support, something untowards has happened. [I've even read the claim being made that Blacks voting against the "preferred" Hispanic is equally untowards.]  It seems that Clarke will  be the "preferred" candidate of the Black electorate, while Peters will be the "preferred" candidate of the White electorate. That is the test I've read being asserted for what is "regression."

MI is not a section 5 covered state and Wayne is not a covered county, so regression does not apply here. Section 2 is the only applicable section and it requires that if there is a compact area with 50%+ BVAP large enough to make a district and there is evidence of cohesive voting patterns by both whites and blacks, then there must be a district drawn that could elect the candidate of choice of the blacks. That candidate need not be black, but the question as to whether the district must have 50%+ BVAP has not been settled by the courts. Individual states have been successful in defending maps with minority districts below 50% BVAP, but it isn't established on a national basis.

In 2022?

I do wish, at least for the sake of Ohio maps, that districts in the upper-40s in black VAP could be assumed protected under the VRA. Mainly I'm just sick of looking at that hideous Cleveland-to-Akron thing that was drawn to stop a lawsuit.

Dennis in 2014!

I don't think the Cleveland to Akron thing was required by the VRA. It was merely not prohibited by it.

It wasn't technically required but it was effectively required because if it was not drawn, the Republican map-drawers would likely face a lawsuit from civil rights organizations and risk having their map thrown out.

It's true that VRA districts are NOT drawn to elect a specific candidate, but rather to allow minorities to elect a candidate of their choice. There really weren't a whole lot of options for how to maintain this seat as a VRA one, the percentage was never going to be that high due to population loss.

2014. By 2022 the 4 Detroit bordering districts will likely be collapsed into 3.

Where will Peters run in 2014?

Where will Peters run in 2014?
[/quote]

Allegedly, Governor or Senator.