Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, November 23, 1993 TAG: 9311230405
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A7 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: PAUL GOLDMAN
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
Given Gov.-elect George Allen's inroads into these traditionally Democratic voters, the answer may define the party's character for years to come.
The last congressional redistricting has exposed a dangerous and fundamental flaw in the party's convention process. Unfortunately, a few savvy party officials, all in favor of another convention in 1994, apparently believe they can exploit this flaw to enhance their own power within the party.
Those in control of the convention process, by following the same delegate- allocation rules used in every previous Democratic convention, can reduce the potential influence of African-American voters to an all-time low. The devil is in the details.
Virginia's longstanding patterns of housing segregation, along with legally documented racial-bloc voting, triggered a federal law requiring creation in 1992 of an African-American majority district.
Voters in predominantly African-American areas of a half-dozen major cities were put into Virginia's new 3rd Congressional District. Residents in predominantly white areas of those cities were placed in adjacent congressional districts. Previously, the residents of these cities had never been split between members of Congress.
If the Virginia Democratic Party used a primary, this gerrymandering would be irrelevant. In a primary, all voters are equal, no matter where they live. The principle of one-person, one-vote does not apply in a convention. Instead, the party uses a debatable mathematical formula to determine how many delegates will be selected by voters in each of the state's counties and cities.
Even though a convention, like a primary, is a nominating process, the delegate number is supposed to reflect that area's share of the total statewide Democratic vote in a general election. For example, at the last Democratic convention, the cities of Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, Petersburg and Portsmouth received a total of 597 delegates. No matter how many voters in these cities turn out to support a candidate, the convention process limits the delegates that candidate can win.
In a convention system, voters can be severely penalized depending upon where they live. As I have tried to point out for years, this is a particularly serious flaw where racial segregation in housing exists.
Creation of Congressman Scott's African-American-majority district has set in motion a new set of practical circumstances that make the usual Democratic convention process far more inequitable toward the party's most loyal constituency. By splitting the black and white residents of Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Richmond, Petersburg and Portsmouth into separate congressional districts, the Voting Rights Act has produced the precise result it was intended to prevent.
Under the procedures used at every previous Democratic convention, a city in two different congressional districts receives two sets of delegates, each elected separately by the residents living in a particular district. This was not the case in 1988, when Sen. Robb was nominated by convention. Each of these six cities held one mass meeting to elect all their delegates.
Due to the recent redistricting, all six cities in 1993 were given two separate delegate allocations. Of the total, 338 delegates were assigned to areas of these cities within the new congressional district. The other 259 delegates went to sections within adjacent districts.
Even an ostrich can see the obvious result. Previously, a strong showing among residents of the district allowed a candidate to carry all 597 votes. Now, following the same rules, a candidate would have to carry all 12 of the new racially carved districts to do the same.
The potential impact on the Democratic senatorial contest cannot be understated.
For example, let's assume all six cities get the same 597 delegates in 1994. A candidate who wins the six mass meetings in the 3rd District but loses the six in the other districts will end up winning these cities by a margin of only 79 votes.
The result is startling; the candidate with strong African-American support sees his or her margin in these areas shrink by 518 votes. This is about 30 percent of the vote needed to win.
Perhaps in a more perfect world, analysts would not be required to look at this potentiality. But as Jefferson might have said, to bring about positive change, one must first be willing to face the world as it is, not as he or she might wish it to be. As long as the party tries to dilute the one-person, one- vote principle, fair and honest discussion demands principled analysis.
Reasonable men and women can reasonably disagree on how best to chose the next Democratic nominee for the United States Senate. But no reasonable person can disagree with this basic truth: In 1994, using the same old rules for a Democratic Party convention process may not only drastically suppress black voting strength, but also create the potential of seriously dividing Democrats along racial lines.
\ Paul Goldman is former state Democratic chairman and a political adviser to Gov. Douglas Wilder.
Keywords:
POLITICS
by CNB