Signatures filed to invalidate Maryland Congressional redistricting

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It's not like Republicans wouldn't have drawn a gerrymander if they had control. Maryland's map isn't nearly as ridiculous as the maps of Pennsylvania and Ohio.

It's exactly as ridiculous, and no one who voted for any of the three deserves reelection. -_-

The MD map is obviously a Democratic gerrymander and so is the IL map (which replaced a Republican gerrymander), and I don't like either of them for that reason.  The only argument for these maps not being as bad as OH and PA's is that they more accurately reflect the statewide political lean.  And that doesn't really hold up because its just another way of saying, "our gerrymanders are horrible, but it's okay because yours are worse, so its okay," and that's ridiculous.  It is also absurd to say that gerrymandering in some state's is okay because (to paraphrase) "my party deserves revenge there."

That being said, it makes no sense for Democrats (or Republicans, for that matter) to stop gerrymandering unless the other party stops gerrymandering states in which it has the opportunity to gerrymander.  Everyone wants fair redistricting when they have no say in it.  But unconditional unilateral disarmament is silly.  It is also naive to expect politicians not to try to help their party win when given the opportunity to do so.  If people really want fair redistricting, then they'll support the establishment of a California-style redistricting commission in EVERY state. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Successful!

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-congressional-redistrict-20120711,0,4104812.story

Win-win.  If the measure is defeated, we keep the current map.  If the measure passes, the current map can just be replaced with an 8-0 map (which isn't really that hard to draw).

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If they wanted to do an 8-0 map, and they thought one was truly feasible, they would have done so in the first place.

Actually, the reason that they went with the current map was that (for reasons that no one seems able to figure out) Donna Edwards basically threw a fit over the intended maps and called for a map that only went after Roscoe Bartlett (her shenanigans almost caused her to face a serious primary challenge, IIRC).  The legislature decided to go with an 8-1 map targeting Bartlett.  I have seen 8-0 maps on DKE that are cleaner than the current one and don't displace any Democratic incumbents. 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

If they wanted to do an 8-0 map, and they thought one was truly feasible, they would have done so in the first place.

Actually, the reason that they went with the current map was that (for reasons that no one seems able to figure out) Donna Edwards basically threw a fit over the intended maps and called for a map that only went after Roscoe Bartlett (her shenanigans almost caused her to face a serious primary challenge, IIRC).  The legislature decided to go with an 8-1 map targeting Bartlett.  I have seen 8-0 maps on DKE that are cleaner than the current one and don't displace any Democratic incumbents. 

So Andy Harris survives because of Donna Edwards getting mad at the intended maps. 

I'm pretty sure this is virtually entirely incorrect, actually. 7-1 with Harris conceded was the plan from the start, Edwards' complaints had little to do with the 1st and 6th districts, and anyways remain very largely unadressed. And the primary challenge was probably in the works before that as well; not entirely sure about that. Edwards is not a member of the machine, you see.

 

The original maps discussed were 8-0 maps and 7-1 maps targeting Harris.  Hoyer originally wanted 8-0 and later started pushing for a 7-1 map targeting Andy Harris.  I'm positive about that.  However, you're probably right that Edwards whining about the maps was incidental (looking at the map again, I see that you're right the her complaints were basically ignored).  I'm pretty sure that the primary challenge talk started due to her behavior regarding redistricting (and I'd argue that this is why in the end, it never materialized despite all the pieces seemingly being in place, people don't care about this stuff enough to vote out an incumbent over it).  As I think about it, the more important factor was probably the fact that MD Senate Majority Leader Rob Garagiola decided that his main priority with redistricting was drawing himself a district (the new MD-6).  Ironically, Garagiola would go on to get destroyed the district's primary.  There may be more to the story than that, but the original maps that were discussed were definitely 8-0 maps and 7-1 maps targeting Harris.