The Coalition of Color is disappointed in yesterday’s hasty move by the Boston City Council to pass another map that fails to address equal opportunity for people of color to elect candidates of their choice. The map passed was the best that could move under the flawed and anti-democratic process dictated by the chair, but it is still unacceptable. The Coalition strongly urges Mayor Menino to veto this map. Further, the Coalition calls on the City Council and the City Council President to replace Redistricting Committee Chair Bill Linehan with a new chair who can restart and reenergize the redistricting process in order to deliver a map that will not gerrymander, will not crack District Two, and will not pack District Four.
The Jackson-O’Malley map is an improvement over the prior, deeply flawed map passed by the council with respect to District 2, but it does not address the unlawful packing of residents of color into District 4. District 4 remains nearly 95% people of color, thus diluting the potential impact of minority votes elsewhere. This second map vote is akin to a double-fault in tennis and Boston would benefit from a map that truly puts the city “in play” for people of color. We thank Mayor Menino for his previous leadership and the Coalition strongly urges him to veto this map to send a strong message to the city council to make a good-faith effort to address his concerns and the legal issue of minority voter dilution as outlined in his September 6th letter to the council.
Coalition Members: Asian American Resource Workshop, Boston Chinatown Neighborhood Center, Boston Chinatown Resident Association, Castle Square Tenants Organization, Chinese Progressive Association & Chinese Progressive Political Action, Inquilinos Boricuas en Acción, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights and Economic Justice, Oíste, Project HIP-HOP, MassVOTE, NAACP Boston Branch, South Boston en Acción, Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts
I proposed my own map a couple weeks ago that unpacked District 4:
http://vps28478.inmotionhosting.com/~bluema24/2012/08/race-and-redistricting-boston-city-council-addition/
(It was a quick sketch intending to show how it could be done, I didn’t give much thought into the exact boundaries)
I’m disappointed that the progressives on the council mostly voted for a map that failed to do so. According to the Globe the yes votes were Jackson, O’Malley, Baker, Pressley, Connolly, Arroyo, Ross.
O’Malley and Baker supported the original map as well. Only Yancey, who represents the hyper-packed less than 5% non-hispanic white 4th district, voted no on both maps.
http://charlestown.patch.com/articles/second-redistricting-map-passes-city-council-7-6-submitted-to-mayor#pdf-9793767
Thank you Charlestown Patch.
Needless to say, I’m very unimpressed. Everything I said in my diary is still true. The injustice of the Linehan’s map wass that it perpetuated the injustice of the old map. The Jackson-O’Malley proposal is no better, it still leaves everything basically intact. Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, so to speak.
As long as we insist on classifying each other and ourselves by ethnic race as opposed to simply the HUMAN race there will be someone who is not satisfied. Those portions of the Voting Rights Act, which is pushing 50, that require these considerations to be taken into account, should be scrapped. The equal protection provision of the US Constitution only should be read to mandate one person, one vote, translated to districts having as close to absolutely equal numbers as makes sense. I do see value in compactness and respecting historic community ties, but those are political rather than legal questions. A vote is a vote and I’m pretty sure the 3/5 clause went out of style about 150 years ago.
I could not disagree more. It’s sad that its provisions continue to be necessary, but experience shows that they are.
However, I do wish that Boston would start experimenting with an alternative voting system, such as cumulative voting, that could obviate the need for this wretched redistricting exercise.
It’s perfectly fair that the minorities of Dorchester are packed into a 95% Black/Hispanic district with the rest of them cracked between two plurality white districts because we’re all the HUMAN race, so it doesn’t matter anyway!
There’s no history of racial tension in Boston! None! There’s no reason whatsoever for anyone to not think that the Irish and the Italians are doing a GREAT job of representing their community’s interests. Sorry! Did I say Irish and Italians? I meant Humans and Humans…
The purpose of the Voting Rights Act is give minority groups the ability to elect a candidate of their choice. They can choose to elect someone of a different race and religion, like the (68% black, IIRC) voters of the 9th Tennessee district (Memphis) who overwhelming reelect (white Jewish) Steven Cohen to congress every two years. But if the legislature was allowed, they could split Memphis between its surround suburbs and rural areas, denying the community their a choice.
Gerrymandering, racial or otherwise, takes the whole “one man one vote” principle and corrupts it. You can vote however you like, but if the lines are cleverly drawn so that your community is cracked between several districts, you will be outvoted and your influence diluted. That’s why it’s so insidious, it’s not a man with gun blocking your way to the polls, but reduces your political influence almost as effectively.
I’m just gunna throw this against the wall and see if it sticks. Why don’t they change District 1 to be East Boston, North End, Downtown, Chinatown? And put Charlestown in Ross’s district. District 1 would be a Minority-Majority seat and give Downtown Boston (which has seen significant growth) an added voice in the council (currently there is no Councilor from “Downtown”) and I think it would settle the map.
Yes I realize this would move Suzanne Lee out of D2. But if the goal is to create more Minority-Majority seats (which is should be) and to give areas of the city that lack representation a greater voice (which it should also be) than I think this would work. It’s about more than 1 candidate, its about the city as a whole.
I hope the Mayor veto’s this map as well and the Council does what it should and take a new approach. Just my thoughts.
…to just step up and say we refuse to think like this anymore. Are the interests of the various ethnic groups that different? In terms of what the city controls doesn’t everyone want good schools, safe streets, and efficient municipal services (etc.)? I promise I wouldn’t complain if I ended up in a district populated primarily by ethnic groups other than my own. My interests are mine and are not necessarily representative of others of my race and ethnicity. My vote counts just as much regardless of who my fellow constituents are.
Maybe you’re right. When the clamor to stop this comes from minority communities, rather than folks in your demographic, I’ll pay more attention.
Are you going to address my comments about everyone ultimately having more or less common interests, or just dismiss my views on the basis of my race? (How’s that attitude not itself technically racist, BTW?) One thing I find when we discuss this is you are stuck in another era and almost imply that progress has not been made. I’ve supported all sorts of candidates based on who thinks like me rather than looks like me, and frankly in some parts of Boston I WOULD be in the minority (not at all complaining, just pointing it out) so on that basis why shouldn’t my opinion count? The underlying assumption is that everyone who looks like or speaks alike also thinks alike, and that’s insulting to the independence and intelligence of ALL involved.