Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Could Walker Have Used Redistricting as a Stick to Keep Wisconsin Senate Democrats in Madison?

Bookmark and Share

Here's a hypothetical question.

What if Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker had proceeded earlier this month with the state budget deficit-aiding components to his plan that would require state employees to contribute to their pensions and increase payments to their health-care premiums, but had temporarily tabled his proposal to eliminate some of the collective bargaining rights for governmental employees?

For example, what if Walker had waited until after the federal government had delivered all the census data necessary for the redistricting process to begin?

Could Walker have used redistricting as a stick to keep Wisconsin Senate Democrats at the Capitol?

Wisconsin's redistricting process is like most states in the nation in that the responsibility for redrawing congressional and legislative district lines lies with the legislature.

All 50 states receive their 2010 Census Redistricting Data [P.L. 94-171] in February and early March of this year, with a final federal delivery deadline of April 1, 2011.

To date, 21 states have received their redistricting data - including neighboring Iowa and Illinois - but not Wisconsin.

Five states are scheduled to receive their data next week: Delaware, Kansas, Nebraska, North Carolina, and Wyoming.

Once Wisconsin receives its files, the data will be aggregated into ward boundaries and then disseminated to each of the Badger State's 72 counties - likely in late March or April.

While the legislative database would not normally be created until much later in the year (around October), with plans drawn up in November and votes on final plans in January 2012, the state could take steps to somewhat expedite that process.

Governor Walker has thus far been unsuccessful in his public appeals to bring back the 14 absent Democratic Senators from their various out-of-state hideaways in Illinois.

Because Walker acted swiftly on the collective bargaining issue by folding it into his budget plan, we'll therefore likely never know the answer to this question:

Would Senate Democrats have left the state in the first instance if they knew Wisconsin's new legislative and congressional district maps could be created and voted on without any of their input?

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Strange Bedfellows: The Curious Case of Chuck Grassley and Tom Harkin
Next post: Republican Women 2010 U.S. House Voting Record Most Conservative in History

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

Political Crumbs

Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


more POLITICAL CRUMBS

Humphrey School Sites
CSPG
Humphrey New Media Hub

Issues />

<div id=
Abortion
Afghanistan
Budget and taxes
Campaign finances
Crime and punishment
Economy and jobs
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign affairs
Gender
Health
Housing
Ideology
Immigration
Iraq
Media
Military
Partisanship
Race and ethnicity
Reapportionment
Redistricting
Religion
Sexuality
Sports
Terrorism
Third parties
Transportation
Voting