8 comments

  1. UGAMatthew says:

    Great news…does anyone know anything about how succesful the GLOW bus has been or how much its been utilized. I haven’t really seen anything about it.

  2. Interestingly, the Feds also approved the Texas redistricting plan, which the Surpreme Court struck down partially over Voter Rights Concerns. So this justice department doesn’t exactly have a great record of approving things that a more impartial body will also OK.

  3. Senator Eric Johnson says:

    The Court threw out one district in Texas but upheld the state’s right to redistrict whenever they want. Speaker Richardson and I filed an amicus brief in this case that used Georgia as an example. Without the ability to redraw districts between the mandated 10-years, we could not have fixed the partisan gerrymander left behind by a desparate (former) Majority Party.

  4. Harry says:

    I think we’re starting to see the Court moving back to strict constructionism and states’ rights.

  5. MC Pro Tem,

    You are technically correct, but we are talking about VRA stuff in this post and the Texas plan did not pass overall muster on VRA concerns — even though the justice department said it was OK. The justice department doesn’t have a good record on this stuff of late when federal courts have their final say.

    I’ll take you at your word as to why you did Congress. Most of the state (if they cared) would probably cede you your point. But you’d have to be smoking crack and wearing nothing but a flag to think that the balance in Georgia’s congressional delegation will actually change this year — Barrow and Marshall both seem safe and if anything you potentially opened the door to an upset due to a Democratic tidal wave. Not likely in Georgia, but you never know.

    That said, if your goal was to keep the overall partisan balance of Georgia the same, there were better ways to do it that split fewer small counties and kept a higher percentage of people in the same district they were in previously.

    You don’t even have to answer that stuff if you don’t want. What I really want to know is why did you redistrict the legislature. You completely flushed your credibility on redistricting down the drain and adopted the absolute worst habit of our desperate former majority party — incumbents tinkering with their own districts from cycle to cycle.

    How does redistricting SD 46 and 47 in the Senate fit into your Congressional justification, especially when you consider that there were multiple ways to keep Madison County whole (Keith Heard’s Fair Madison proposal being the most obvious)? Talk about a desperate majority party, at least we were worried about losing the legislature when we did our redistricting, what are you worried about dropping to 31 seats instead of 32?

    And what about Harry Geisenger, who redrew his district after barely defeating Jan Hackney in a Democratic trending district. Geisenger came into the House chamber during qualifying and (with a complete straight face) said he was really going to beat her good this year, unlike the last time. I wanted to be like are you a senile old man (probably) don’t you know you rigged it so exactly that would be probable?

    And what about Sonny — he made partisan redistricting a centerpiece of his campaign, and a centerpiece that many Democrats agreed with him on, only to cowardly sign the legislative redistricting plans into law.

    Look Eric, you don’t have to respond to these questions. But I warn you, you continue down this path and you’ll look in the mirror one day and see Roy & Bobby looking back at you. I notice that you and Bobby already have the same haircut 🙂

Comments are closed.