Blue-state re-redistricting — discussions grow more serious

Some congressional Dems are so serious about following in the GOP’s re-redistricting footsteps, they’re making it a campaign issue for party leadership posts.

Two of the three announced candidates for Democratic Caucus vice chairman are making a strong pitch to their fellow lawmakers that Democrats need to swipe a page from the Republican playbook and initiate some pro-Democratic redistricting in Illinois, New Mexico and New York.

Reps. Joe Crowley’s (D-N.Y.) and Jan Schakowsky’s (D-Ill.) support for off-year restricting in their home states — and their decision to campaign on it — reflects a growing acceptance in the caucus that Democrats need to employ the hardball tactics of a practice that many of them once decried.

The third House Dem seeking the vice chairman post, Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), does not support re-redistricting efforts, but a) two out of three ain’t bad; and b) the fact that he’s even addressing the issue shows how seriously the caucus is taking this discussion.

As it turns out, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has not yet warmed up to the idea, but the #2 House Dem, House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), is “emerging as one of the most vociferous congressional advocates” of re-redistricting.

“I think we would be foolish to sit on the sidelines and have our heads beaten in and not, you know, see what we can do in response. If somebody hits you, you usually put up your arm or you strike back,” Hoyer told reporters yesterday.

“We think this battle should not have been begun. We think Mr. DeLay’s strategy, while temporarily effective, is a bad one. But we are certainly not going to be pummeled without response,” he said…. “Two hundred and three members of the caucus are not prepared to be punching bags.”

It’s not “we’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore,” but it’s close.

John Larson wants to be caucus vice chairman, but he believes Dems shouldn’t follow DeLay’s lead.

“I don’t think it’s a wise path to follow what [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay [R-Texas] is doing,” Larson told The Hill, referring to the successful Texas redistricting last cycle that netter the GOP an additional five seats.

“There are constitutional protections, and I still think that Texas might be overturned,” Larson said. “But I think we ought to seize the high ground on this and say, ‘We’re not going to engage in that.'” … “When you see your colleagues brutally redistricted, there’s a visceral reaction and it’s contagious, but you have to step back and restrain yourself,” Larson said.

I can appreciate Larson’s desire for sensible restraint. Really, I can. Tom DeLay isn’t a role model; we’re supposed to be better than him. I get that.

But there’s only so much nobility in losing to an unethical foe. DeLay is taking the low road, but he’s gaining seats. Indeed, were it not for DeLay’s re-redistricting stunt in Texas, Dems would have narrowed the GOP majority in the House in the 2004 cycle. Instead, their majority got bigger. Larson sees the value in “restraining” ourselves from following DeLay’s example, but how long can Dems sit by while Republicans, who have no interest in “restraining” themselves, get rewarded for stacking the deck?

Tom DeLay picked this fight, knowing it would add GOP seats, because he didn’t think Dems would be willing to play hardball in response. It’s time to see if Dems are ready to prove him wrong.