September 12, 2025 • 49 mins
On this episode of The Middle, as states including Texas, California and Missouri consider a mid-decade redistricting, we're asking what fair political representation looks like, and if you feel represented by the political process. Jeremy is joined by USA Today Chief Political Correspondent Phillip Bailey and Charles Bullock, a professor of political science at the University of Georgia and author of the book Redistricting: The Most Political Activity in America. DJ Tolliver joins as well, plus calls from around the country. #redistricting #politicaldistricts #gerrymandering #voting #representation #California #Texas #Utah #Missouri
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Support for the Middle comes from the stations that air
the show and from you. Thanks for making a donation
at listen Toothmiddle dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, along with our
house DJ Tolliver and Tolliver. Of course, as you know,
as we go to air, people are still processing yet
another political assassination, that of Charlie Kirk, who was shot
at a campus event in Utah. This comes just a
few months after the House speaker in Minnesota, Melissa Hortman,
and her husband were assassinated, and there are so many
(00:36):
other examples of political violence from recent years. Of course,
I don't know what the answer is, but I do
know that our democracy only works if we are willing
to communicate with each other in good faith, to talk
and listen even when we disagree. That's what the Middle
is all about. And I want to thank our listeners
for always keeping it civil in this space. I think
that's really important.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
I can second that as somebody who reads the comments there,
you know, pretty civil, and then when they're not, people
are cussing. I edit that out. So that's how we
handle that.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Take care of it for us. Okay, thank you Tolliver.
So this hour we want to get into something very
important that's happening right now, which is the partisan drawing
of congressional maps, something that's been around for a long
time but is back on the front pages now. After
President Trump asked Texas Republicans to draw new maps mid decade.
They're usually only drawn after the census every ten years,
(01:25):
where Republicans in Texas obliged. Then California's Democratic Governor Gavin
Newsom said he wanted to draw new maps in California
to even the playing field. Now, Missouri, Indiana, maybe Florida
all jumping into this game. But what all this could
mean is that a lot of Democrats in Republican led
states will have no or very little representation in Congress.
Same for a lot of Republicans in Democratic led states.
(01:48):
And it brings us to our question, do you feel
represented by the political process and what does fair representation
look like to you? We're taking your calls in a
moment at eight four to four to four middle that's
a four four four six four three three five three.
But first last week on the show, we talked about
some of the biggest challenges facing gen Z. We got
so many gen Z callers, and here are some of
the comments we got on our voicemail.
Speaker 4 (02:11):
Nick from Denver as gen Z. The biggest issue for me,
at the very least is no feeling of the ability
or completeness graduating in twenty twenty, getting my first adult
job in the COVID times, all that fun stuff. It's
just nothing ever feels complete or real.
Speaker 5 (02:27):
Anthony Cardwell, it's called from Chicago's Now I'm a boomer
raising of gen Z. My main thing to worry about
is that every gen Z I meet, the type of
business they're going into, most of it it'll be taken over
by AI, and I'm kind of afraid of the future
of m being able to find jobs.
Speaker 6 (02:45):
Hi, my name is June and I'm calling from man
kid On, Minnesota. What I'm worried about as a gen
Zer is the idea of ever owning a home. I
don't It seems like some far off alternate reality that
I could ever own a home. No one's ever explained
to me, like how to take out a loan for
a home? What are what is a mortgage?
Speaker 7 (03:07):
I don't know what a mortgage is.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Maybe we'll have to do a show about that. Thanks
to everyone who called in. You can subscribe to the
Middle wherever you listen to podcasts and hear that whole show.
So now to our question this hour, do you feel
represented by the political process? And what does fair representation
look like to you? Tolliver? How can people reach us?
Speaker 1 (03:25):
You can call us at eight four four four Middle
that's eight four four four six four three three five three,
or you can write to us at listen to the
Middle dot com. Like I said, I'm reading all your comments,
so get them in.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Joining me this hour. Reigning champion of appearances on the Middle,
USA Today, Chief political correspondent, Philip Bailey. I Philip, great
to have you.
Speaker 8 (03:42):
Back, Jeremy. How's it going.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
It's going well. And we've also got with us Charles Bullock,
Professor of political science at the University of Georgia and
author of the book Redistricting The most political activity in America.
You are the pre eminent expert on redistricting. How unusual
is what's happening now with all all these states trying
to change the maps in the middle of the decade.
Speaker 8 (04:03):
Well, yeah, changing maps in the middle.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Of the decade itself is unusual.
Speaker 9 (04:07):
What's particularly unusual about it this time is that the
changes are being made in areas that have already been
jerry managed. Now, twenty years ago, there was also some
mid decade redistricting in Texas and Georgia, and in those
cases Republicans were putting in their own jerrymanders and wiping
out Democratic jerrymangers. But this time around, these states which
(04:30):
are now making further changes have already been jerrymandered.
Speaker 8 (04:34):
So this is.
Speaker 9 (04:35):
Building on the extreme jerry managers were already in place.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
And Philip, what are the political calculations here, because I
was reading that actually lawmakers hate it when their districts
get changed because it makes running for reelection much more
difficult and unpredictable.
Speaker 10 (04:51):
Well, look, I think you know President Donald Trump has
shown his cards pretty clearly, right, understanding that presidents often
lose representation in Congress in the first midterm election, and
particularly with the controversies and consternation about the big beautiful
bill coming out. But you notice that Republicans aren't really
(05:12):
talking all that much about these days. He certainly is
telegraphing that he doesn't think that Republicans are gonna be
able to retain their majorities in the House and the Senate.
So it's a barely it's a very open process here
of this is all about politics.
Speaker 8 (05:26):
This isn't about, oh.
Speaker 10 (05:27):
We need to do these redistricts being because of some
sort of fair government representation. It's all about, hey, I
want more seats to ensure that Republicans maintain their majority. Democrats,
it seems though, who often just a few years ago
were arguing that we need good government, we need these
independent commissions to do it. They're now racing to the
bottom with the Republicans led by Gavin Newsom. There were
(05:49):
some obviously in that space who say Democrats shouldn't do that,
but I think Governor knew some and other Democrats are saying, hey,
look we're gonna fight fire with fire here and do
the exact same thing that President and Trump is doing
to even the odds.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Charles, is there a potential for a backfire for Republicans
if there is a wave election next year that if
they redistrict and make these districts tighter for everybody, that
they could lose even more seats by making them all
more competitive.
Speaker 8 (06:19):
That's exactly the potential.
Speaker 9 (06:21):
Yeah, if this is a wave election, then districts which
are thought to be seven, eight, maybe ten points Republican
might not be sufficient if there is a huge swing
against this. And as Phillips said, yeah, we know that
in a midterm election, invariably the vote goes against the
president's party, and each of our recent presidents has lost
(06:43):
at least one of the control of one of the
chambers in Congress. So yeah, the Republicans know that they
are on thin ice with this tiny majority they have
right now. And even though they've tried to pack some
districts to make it more secure for them in Texas,
if it's a big wave election, that might not be sufficient.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Philip, do how do voters feel about this? And when
you look at how they feel about their politicians saying,
you know what, this would be easier if we just
made these districts better for this party that's in power.
Speaker 10 (07:15):
Well, look, Americans are not a fan of the idea
of politicians picking them rather than them picking politicians. We
saw hundreds of protests against President Trump's effort here to
change the outcome or to influence the outcome of the
mid term elections.
Speaker 8 (07:30):
But polls were done on this.
Speaker 10 (07:31):
In fact, the Reuter's ipso's Paul had done in August
found it more than half of respond that it's about
fifty seven percent say they feared for American democracy that
is in danger because of this tilt, and that includes
high percentages of Democrats and even forty six percent of Republicans. Again,
I think it's seventy one percent of Democrats, forty six
(07:53):
percent of Republicans, and fifty two percent of people who
identify as others. So the American people aren't a fan
of this either. And I think the professor is right.
If we see a wave election, there's no guarantee that
these seats will automatically go for Republicans and the way
they think. And again, we learned this, I think from
some of the filibuster fights when Mitch McConnell and Harry
(08:15):
Reid were battling out in the Senate that whatever power
you take for yourself and politics, remember your opponents can
take that same power when they are voted in the.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
Misty right, Charles, what makes up a fair political district?
Can such a thing actually be achieved?
Speaker 9 (08:32):
So our district would be for a state, okay? And
often the thumbs take as use for this would be
is the congressional delegation roughly reflective of the way the
state votes in state wide elections.
Speaker 8 (08:49):
For example, the plan that was.
Speaker 9 (08:52):
In place in twenty twenty two in North Carolina produced
seven Democrats seven Republicans. All right, North Carolina is a
very competitive state. It has currently both Democrats and Republicans
servings in statewide offices. So one can look at that
and say, yeah, that pretty much reflects the division of
the state in terms of its partnership. When that was
(09:12):
redrawn by Republicans, it then became may ten Republicans.
Speaker 8 (09:16):
For democratic makeup.
Speaker 9 (09:19):
And so if your baseline is how does this state
vote for presidential cogubinatory elections, that's way out of kildre.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Let me sneak in a call here and Hugh is
calling from South Carolina. Hugh, welcome to the middle. Do
you feel represented by the political.
Speaker 11 (09:34):
Process not in national elections? Especially why because I don't
understand why we're having a national election and it becomes
a winner take all on a per state basis. Why
can't the electoral college be divided on a proportional basis
regarding Democratic Republican voters.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
So it's the electoral college. What about on a statewide basis?
Do you feel represented by your senators, by your representatives
in Congress in South Carolina.
Speaker 7 (10:06):
I don't know.
Speaker 12 (10:07):
I think maybe ranked choice voting should be employed across
a lot of other elections. So a Senate election is
for the state, I understand why that would be a
winner take all, but I also feel that maybe ranked
choice voting would allow alternate candidates to get into the
race and have people be able to vote for them
(10:29):
with their rank choice without feeling that they're just throwing
their vote away.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Hugh, thank you for that. And I'm sure we're going
to talk about ranked choice voting because this always seems
to come up when we talk about the political process.
But Tolliver, like we said, California is at the center
of this conversation. But back in twenty ten, they tried
to eliminate parties in political redistricting through a ballot measure.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Yeah, they actually picked members of this commission, sorry commission
lottery style. Here's a news clip on this from caseyr.
Speaker 13 (10:57):
The lottery cage was set up so as you can
see number one the number balls were teed up, the
audience was lined up with suspense in the air. It
had all the earmarks of a game show, but this
drawing may well be the most significant lottery California's ever
staged in terms of how the state is governed, and
it's going to.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
Be a whole new ballgame here in California. We're not
going to have lawmakers drawing their own.
Speaker 13 (11:19):
Districts approved by voters two years ago as Prop eleven,
a pet cause of Governor Schwarzenegger. A finalists were picked
today out of thirty thousand initial applicants.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Good time to mention Tolliver that I did not win
the multi billion dollar power ball. That's we're thinking about
a lot of our.
Speaker 1 (11:35):
Whole savings plan for you to lend me some money.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
So that means that people can still contribute to the
Middle at listen to Themiddle dot com. It's tax deductible
and it's very important to the success of this program.
So make a contribution. We really appreciate it. We write
back with more of the Middle. This is the Middle.
I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just tuning in the Middle
as a national call in show, we're focused on elevating
(11:57):
voices from the middle geographically, politically and philosophically, or maybe
you just want to meet in the middle. This hour
we're asking if you feel represented by the political process
and what fair representation looks like to you. Tulliver, what
is the number to call in?
Speaker 1 (12:10):
It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four
four sixty four three three five three. You can also
write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com
or on social media.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
I'm joined by political scientists Charles Bullock at the University
of Georgia and USA Today chief political correspondent Philip Bailey.
And before we get back to the phones, Charles Bullock,
this conversation goes well beyond house races. There are many
people in this country who are as we just heard
there blue in a red state or red in a
blue state. It could be fifty five to forty five percent,
but the minority party doesn't get forty five percent of
(12:41):
the power. They don't get that proportional representation. Is there
a better way for more people to feel represented in
our democracy?
Speaker 7 (12:49):
Well, conceivably, yeah, we could move towards a European system
of proportional representation. And under that system then you have
multi member districts. You don't have the single member districts
like we make you of here, and in a multi
members system, then yeah, you can end up with roughly
the same proportion of seats held by a party, is
it share of the vote? Now, that would be pretty
(13:11):
alien to what we've done in America for two hundred
and fifty years, but that would be a way in
which we could achieve something of reproaching a proportional representation.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
And Philip, when you think about the representation for minority groups,
including black people, a lot of the issues around redistricting
has been about that a lack of proper representation. Is
that conversation being lost in this latest political battle?
Speaker 10 (13:35):
Well, look, I think you know, I had an opportunity
to talk to black legislators from Texas when they had
left to go to Illinois to sort of delay the
inevitable redistricting map there. Let's look at, for example, if
the Missouri first map is being passed by Republicans there,
it tries to break up or it seeks to break
up the democratic health district in Kansas City held by
(13:59):
Eleven Terment and Manuel Kleeber and basically right that district
into two. So the racial component of this isn't being
lost either. That Republicans have to go after these democratic areas,
these Democratic seats and split them up and divide them up.
They have to essentially go after black and brown oftentime voters.
And that's entirely what you saw the civil rights movement
(14:21):
in the Voting Rights Act and everything being follo over.
So the erosion of the Voting Rights Act by the
Supreme Court, this attack on redistricting and sort of splitting
up these predominantly black districts.
Speaker 8 (14:32):
It's not just a partisan fight here.
Speaker 10 (14:34):
There's a racial component within this redistricting fight that people
like Eric Holder from our Attorney General there has been
adamant about fighting against redistricting up until against Democrats decided
to follow Republicans on this issue. That racial component cannot
be lost. And you're seeing more and more black constituents
speak ups here and saying in these protests that hey,
(14:55):
if these folks can't win, they're basically cheating us out
of our representation. And not just at one more point
that goes back to black history in terms of reconstruction.
This has been a bedrock issue for Black Americans really
since emancipation.
Speaker 2 (15:08):
Mm hmmm, uh, let's go to Devin who's in Brewster,
New York. Devon. I guess it is uh, devon, Wow,
you've got a chime when I come to you. Hello,
welcome to the middle, go ahead with you.
Speaker 14 (15:20):
Hello, Hello Jeremy.
Speaker 7 (15:22):
How are you?
Speaker 15 (15:23):
Yes?
Speaker 7 (15:23):
How are you?
Speaker 16 (15:23):
Yes?
Speaker 14 (15:24):
I was just like agree with the other guy was saying.
This redististing has become.
Speaker 7 (15:30):
A huge problem.
Speaker 14 (15:31):
The reason why it's become a huge fund is because
you got people that just want to each Republicans and
just want to gain the system. There's a game here
and like the do say that with the vote and
right Jack, it fores aligned with the voter, right Jack.
Also because they want to uh which record it. They
don't want to do a fair maps by. They're doing
(15:52):
it an irracial matter in a parst. And but it's
more common that is becoming a racial matter. And we
got to understand that this has happened ever since. If
you look back to the Supreme Court decision in two
tenty nineteen i Utro rosus Common Court. Okay, they said,
John Robins said it's okay to Jerry Manda, Parson, Jerry
Manda as norm as it's not by race. But this
is what's causing the problem. Okay, where you go to
(16:16):
judicial the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court is saying
that basically, it's okay Jerry Manda without no judicial oversight.
So what I think we should do is that is
we don't get fair presentations. We ask democratic stations. I'm
in it was in New York, like my governor Kathy
Hope said, we gotta fight back bottom line.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
So you want you want Kathy Hockel to do the
same thing. You want to fight fire with fire and
have your democratic governor go in and redistrict because that's
what states like Texas are doing.
Speaker 14 (16:44):
You got it, You got it, because if Texas is
doing it, we gotta do it too. We gotta fight back.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
It's not fear interesting.
Speaker 14 (16:50):
We just gotta fight that. And even though it violates
to fourteen to fifteen Amendment, it is what it is.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Yeah, Devon, thank you very much for that.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Given thirty more minutes.
Speaker 2 (16:59):
Man well and Philip Bailey, what about that? What do
you think about that? Actually, let me ask you, Charles Bullock,
what do you think about that? Hearing from a voter
there who says, yes, I want my governor to do
the same thing, is this a race to the bottom
or what?
Speaker 7 (17:16):
Well, Yeah, that's what's become right. If the Republicans are
going to do it. Democrats are going to try to
fight back. What Devam's pointing out this is now, if
you say that you're drawing districts based upon partisanship, you
can get away with about anything.
Speaker 17 (17:31):
Now.
Speaker 7 (17:31):
Of course, in much of the country, it turn if
it is true in the South, where race and party
run collinears. So if you've got a heavily democratic district,
it is going to be a heavily minority district. And
so yeah, if you're drawing it, you're saying, well, we're
we're discriminating here against Democrats, which Prime Court says is okay.
Well you're also in discriminating against the minorities. And so
(17:54):
in North Florida, district that had been held by a
black Democrat for thirty years was carved up and done
away within two thousand and two. Twenty two, excuse me,
twenty two.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Let's go to John, who's in Rockford, Illinois. John, what
do you think about this issue and do you feel
represented by the political process?
Speaker 18 (18:18):
Thanks for taking my call. I see no meaningful difference
between partisan jerry mandering by either party and literacy tests,
poll taxes, and other devices concocted in the Jim Crows South.
They are all intended to decrive a targeted population of
a meaningful or for that matter, any sort of election
they experienced. In so doing, they are an assault upon
(18:40):
our democracy. There is no such thing as good partisan
jerry mandering. Anyone who engages in it is an enemy
of the constitution.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Well, and you, John, like me are at least I
used to be a resident of the state of Illinois.
But Illinois is incredibly gerrymandered as we have seen. How
do you feel about that in your own state?
Speaker 7 (19:00):
I hate it.
Speaker 14 (19:01):
I hate it.
Speaker 18 (19:02):
Before the redistricting, our governor Pritzker said, redistricting is going
to be transparent, he told us, And it was transparently.
Any democratic have you seen like the thirteenth district or
the seventeenth district. I live in Rockford, I'm in the sixteenth,
but right across the street there are people in the
seventiesh who are also in the same district with Springfield
(19:22):
and Wilmington two hundred miles away.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
So right, it's terrible, Yeah, Johnny, thank you very much.
Speaker 16 (19:29):
Democrats.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
Yeah, right right, thank you, thank you so much for
that call. You know, Philip Bailey, I remember and I've
said this before, not for a while because we haven't
talked about this in a long time, but the great
Anne Richards, the late Anne Richards, the last person to
win statewide in Texas back in the nineteen nineties as governor.
She was on Larry King Live back in the day
and she said, Larry, some of these districts are so
(19:52):
narrow you could drive down the street with both your
car doors open and hit every house. It's true. I
mean it's not that good, but I tried my best.
But yeah, what about that?
Speaker 10 (20:05):
Well, look, I mean the consequence for this is when
people complain about all Congress can't get anything done or
America doesn't seem to be able to address these issues, Well,
look no further than how our legislative of our congressional
districts are drawn. There was a time back in the
ancient nineteen nineties where you had a lot more overlap,
a lot more moderate people and lawmakers in Congress. Well,
(20:25):
the consequence of these states saying though we're going to
have seven to one or eight to zero representation is
Congress is going to be more gridlocked. One party is
going to have control. Very little is going to get done, right,
at the congressional level. So these things have an effect
on each other. I think one thing I am hearing
a lot more jeremy from different organizations is that, you know,
(20:45):
this effort and these attacks on democracy, there may be
this renewed effort to particularly with the twenty and fiftieth
anniversary of the United States, our birthday coming up next year, this.
Speaker 8 (20:56):
Call for a renewal of democracy.
Speaker 10 (20:59):
People talking about having national elections, national referendums, because when
you look, you know, you also see efforts to your
own the ability to have national referendums in certain states.
Speaker 8 (21:08):
More and more Americans both.
Speaker 10 (21:10):
Side, we're talking about direct democracy that I've heard in
years past.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
Right, which has its own problems sometimes as well. Alex
is calling in from Southeast Texas. Alex, do you feel
represented by the political process there in Texas?
Speaker 19 (21:26):
Yeah?
Speaker 16 (21:27):
Good?
Speaker 20 (21:27):
I mean, guys, how are you all today? Yes, I've represented,
you know, I don't. I've never had an issue with
redistrict theory. I'm you know, I'm I live in I
guess you would call the the greater part of the Houston.
But you know, I just don't get why it's always
an issue when Republicans would to do it, and there's
(21:49):
never an issue when Democrats would have to do it. It's just
it's this whole theme always Nbinia picks up on what
Democrats complain about, and now they're complaining about derry Mandarin.
But the Republicans are doing it. So it's a big
deal now. But we know, as I told the call taker,
California and New York are the biggest gerrymanderin states there
(22:10):
are and Republicans, although they have large and large populations
that vote for them a large voter turnout, they're very,
very underrepresented in those states. California, I think statistically, I
think it was grea to study. California has probably more
registered Republicans than Texas, yet they're very underrepresented, you know,
(22:34):
so I the Gavin News the takers.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
Yeah, well, I was just gonna say, Alex, you know,
the county of Los Angeles had more people voting for
Trump in the last election in the entire state of Louisiana,
which is interesting to think about. But I take your point.
Thank you, Thank you very much for that. And Charles
Bullock give us the historical context. Here is what Alex
is saying, correct, that Democrats do it even more than Republicans.
Speaker 13 (23:00):
To do it.
Speaker 7 (23:00):
If you've got a trifecta arrangement where you control both chambers,
your legislature and your governor, yeah you're going to do
some some jerry mandering.
Speaker 18 (23:09):
You know.
Speaker 7 (23:10):
So if we were doing this Coke Show twenty years ago,
we'd be talking about how in Texas and in Georgia
there was midterm redistrict team that was to undue democratic
jerry manders and Republicans have just taken control. So yeah,
nobody comes into this historically with clean hands, and yeah,
we've never done this, and there's the power call him in. Yeah,
(23:31):
Illinois is a democratic jerry mander right now in place.
So is Maryland, and you know Texas and Florida. Yeah,
those are Republican jerry manders.
Speaker 2 (23:41):
Well, and Charles, do you think that the idea of
like independent commissions the way that California had done it,
at least until now, that that has any future now
in a world where everybody wants to jerrymander even more?
Speaker 7 (23:56):
Well, I think you can correct me if I'm wrong
on this.
Speaker 4 (23:58):
And where to have.
Speaker 7 (24:00):
Come in place, It's often been as a result of
the initiative process, not as a result of the legislature
stepping forward and doing it. So that is a means
by which, at least in states that permit an initiative,
that the public can express what it would like to
see done when it comes from growing districts. Now, not
every state has, you know, the initiative process. Georgia, for example,
is not. But where that has been done, yes, you're
(24:24):
more likely to end up with a situation which scores
relatively well when it comes to applying spare standards to
what the districts look like.
Speaker 2 (24:35):
Coulton is calling from Lake Tahoe, California. Beautiful Lake Tahoe, California. Coulton,
you are in a state that's at the center of this.
How do you feel about your representation?
Speaker 3 (24:47):
Hey, Jeremy, thanks for letting me on here. I appreciate it.
To answer your question directly, I feel grossly underrepresented in
California as a single party system. Define representation here as
hopeless for anything other than you know, democratic agenda.
Speaker 16 (25:08):
HM.
Speaker 2 (25:08):
So you're a Republican.
Speaker 7 (25:11):
I'm a Republican.
Speaker 3 (25:12):
I live in a county that's Republican, and uh, you know,
the geographic density of California makes it very difficult for
Republican representation a year over year with all of the
uh jerrymandering and everything else happening around the state. I
know the other caller was mentioned in the density of
(25:34):
voters for Trump at Los Angeles County, et cetera. There
is definitely a Republican presence in the state, but regardless
of what happens, representation is not adequate in my opinion.
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Do you have a solution, Culton, you want to break
California up into a number of states or anything.
Speaker 3 (25:50):
Like that, Yeah, I would, you know, Actually, my county
I live in, there's been a big push for the
state of Jefferson. I really do feel that California is
it's justified to be both a southern and northern peace.
Geographically speaking, it's too much geographical land with the density
(26:12):
of populations with kind of just a different mindset based
you know, on living in the city or producing agriculture
and whatnot in the more rural areas of the state.
Speaker 2 (26:23):
Yeah, Colton, thank you so much for that call. And
Philip Bailey, you're joining us from Louisville, Kentucky, which, like
many cities in Red States, is probably a bluish or
purplish city in a red state. Every place has this,
Every state has this situation where they might not feel
exactly represented by their state, or at least a lot
of the people in the states don't.
Speaker 10 (26:44):
Right I mean, look the way that California Republicans feel
is how a lot of Kentucky Democrats feel right now.
I mean, out of the one hundred state legislative seats
in the House, only nineteen or Democrats right now. So
go ask them about how well represented they feel generally.
And we see this show up right here. I mean
during presidential races, during the electoral college, where most Americans
(27:05):
are locked out of picking the president. It's really only
a handful of states every year, five to seven states
where you know, places like Pennsylvania, Arizona, those purple states
that have a say so. So many of us feel
locked out of our state governments, locked out of these
national elections. And I think again, Democrats are going to
have to reckon with this, particularly in the twenty thirty census,
(27:26):
as more people leave these blue states which are very,
very expensive, and move into cheaper red states.
Speaker 8 (27:32):
But look all this talk about, oh, I want.
Speaker 10 (27:34):
To break up my state or I want to change
the dynamics here I do think that we're going to
have a reckoning at this midterm elections, particularly if Republicans
don't prevail, and there is going to have to be
a larger conversation about the health of our democracy. That
Donald Trump himself poisoned would he continued to lie about
the twenty twenty election results, And from that we have
(27:54):
seen a renewed, I think spirit of democracy. I think
that we all want better representation, but I'm not sure
that breaking up states.
Speaker 8 (28:02):
Is the way to go about it.
Speaker 10 (28:03):
I do think that we're going to have some reforms
we're going to be talking about over the next couple
of years.
Speaker 2 (28:08):
Tolliver, what is coming in on?
Speaker 13 (28:10):
UH?
Speaker 2 (28:10):
Listen to the middle dot com UH.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
David and Wyoming says, I consider myself somewhere in the
middle of the political spectrum, and I do not feel represented.
I feel the political process rewards extremism or rudy and
Denver says regarding representation, it's time to expand the size
of the House. Four thirty five is arbitrary and about
one hundred years old. And finally, Lucian grand Rapids says,
I will never feel represented as long as we have
(28:32):
the Electoral College Charles.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
The size of the house though, that's that's that. I
just want to hear what Charles Blok is expanding the
size of the house from four thirty five right right.
Speaker 7 (28:44):
Yeah, And there's been work which suggests that given our population, yeah,
we should have a larger house in order to make it, say,
proportional to our population visa these say the size of
the House of Commons in Britain or the German bul Estag.
That yes, we are much too small, and the time
to do that probably would be, say, at the time
of a reapportionments, right after the next census. And from
(29:10):
the time of the beginning of the Republic up until
nineteen ten, we always did expand the house. It was
one exception when we didn't, but for most of our
history we did, and then since then spend this arbitrary
four thirty five.
Speaker 2 (29:23):
Yeah, I guess it's a round number to some people,
you know, Tolliver. As we mentioned, Texas is central to
this conversation, and Texas Democrats tried to delay their redistricting
there by fleeing to Illinois as a group so the
vote couldn't happen.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
Yeah, And one of the leaders of that group was
Texas State James Tallerico, who spoke at a church in Chicago.
Speaker 21 (29:42):
This American democracy is more than just a constitution. It's
a covenant. It's a relationship between neighbors. It's a promise
that we make to each other to share this country.
Some of the most powerful people in this nation are
breaking that promise as you speak. With every Jerrymander district,
(30:06):
with every suppressed vote, they are breaking that sacred promise.
Speaker 2 (30:12):
And as you know, Tolliver, the Democrats were not successful
in stopping that vote from happening. They eventually did come
back to Texas. Although Tallerico made such a name for himself,
he's now running for Senate in Texas, so it may
actually work out well for him. Let's see. I'll be
back with more of your calls on the Middle. This
(30:32):
is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. In this hour, we're
asking if you feel represented by the political process and
what fair representation looks like to you. You can call
us at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four
four four six four three three five three. You can
reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com. My
guests are USA Today Chief political correspondent Philip Bailey and
political scientist Charles Bullock at the University of Georgia. And
(30:53):
before we go back to the phones, Charles, the courts
often step in on these matters. Have they had much
of an impact over the years in shopping partisan gerrymandering
or removing representation for minority groups.
Speaker 7 (31:06):
Yeah, Historically the courts were important, and they were enforcing
the Civil Rights Act, and that did protect and indeed
did force the redrawing of new districts which were liketed
to be won by blacks in the South Hispanics in
the Southwest. There was during much of the twenty tens.
The issue was could someone come up with an acceptable
(31:27):
standard for determining what was an unacceptable partisan gerrymander? And,
as one of the callers earlier pointed out, the Routo
case inteen twenty nineteen took that off the table. The
Supreme Courts said, We're not even going to look at that.
If you have a fighting that says partisan gerry mander,
don't come to federal court. Now, some state courts, particularly
own North Carolina, have taken up the challenge of trying
(31:51):
to determine that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional, so courts he
has have been important, and of course the way the
game is played. If you your party loses in your legislature,
the first thing you do is you go and you
fly out court case. But you're going to have to
challenge it now arguing that it's discriminatory against the minority
group within your state.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Lucia is calling from Utah. Lucia, what do you think
are you represented?
Speaker 17 (32:19):
I don't think I'm really well represented as somebody is
a bit more less leaning, especially you know with the
latest thing of the Republican germandering of the maps in
Utah and the recent course cases trying to overrule that.
Speaker 2 (32:36):
Yeah, in Utah, people voted, I believe a few years
ago on an initiative to create an independent redistrict and commission,
but that has not happened yet.
Speaker 17 (32:46):
Yeah, I'm twenty eighteen. They actually voted. It was a
narrow vote, but it established an independent districting commission and
set rules for the lawmakers for maps if they didn't
accept the end of and commissions.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
Yeah, Lucia, thank you, Philip Bailey. We're hearing over and
over again from people calling in saying they do not
feel represented by the political process.
Speaker 10 (33:11):
Right now, and I think that often Jeremy flows with
the results of the election. Right September of last year,
pe Research did a survey about the electoral college, and
they've done this over.
Speaker 8 (33:24):
A number of years. And guess what. Back in twenty.
Speaker 10 (33:27):
Twelve, when Barack Obama was reelected, fifty four percent of
Republicans and Republican leaning voters wanted to change the system
of the electoral college to where the person who receives
the most votes wins, right, So every time people lose
the outcome, they want to change the entire system. I
think the entrenched aspect of this when you talk to
(33:48):
voters who come from states and they are different than
the state's outcome. When you talk to Democrats or liberal
leaning people in Utah or liberal leading people in a
place like Kentucky or Mississippi, they have the same sentiment
that Republican or conservative le any people in New York
and Illinois.
Speaker 8 (34:04):
Or California have.
Speaker 10 (34:05):
And I think, again, the remedy for some of this
this bubbling up is going to have to come from
folks who overlap and saying, hey, maybe we should start
having national referendums right and overthrow Congress electorally rather than
waiting on them and waiting on the politicians to make
these decisions. When we see these special elections or these
statewide referendums, oftentimes voters even.
Speaker 8 (34:28):
From conservative states. Right.
Speaker 10 (34:30):
Let's look at, for example, those initiatives about reproductive rights.
They were often more left of center, even in states
like Kansas. Right, you saw people voting for the minimum way,
voting to restore Fellon and voting rights in Florida, and
then the Republican legislatures or the legislatures that are Democratic
controlled basically trying to overrule the voters here. So there
(34:51):
is a bubbling up I think in this populist era
that the MAGA, the make American Great Again movement started
that I think needs to be finished in a lot
of different conversations and parts of the country. But oftentimes
these frustrations come from, Hey, I continue to lose at
these elections, in this electoral process, where am I supposed
to go? And particularly Jeremy, that we're having this conversation
(35:11):
about political violence experimentation in American democracy, I think may
release some of that steam as we face some of
these larger issues of violence in our politics.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
Frank is calling from Western Colorado. Frank, welcome to the middle.
Go ahead with your thoughts.
Speaker 15 (35:29):
Oh yes, I am a blue dot in the red
sea of Western Colorado. As the state goes bluer and bluer,
I still do not feel represented because most of the
legislature and most of the money goes towards the Front Range,
which is like the Fort Collins of Pueblo section over
(35:53):
there on the low part of the mountains on the
east side. So like that's where the legislating is, that's
where all the money goes. That's you know, where everything happens.
And yeah, so number one, I don't have representation out
here in Western Colorado. Number two, the representation that I
(36:14):
do appreciate, uh, isn't doing much for my tiny little
sliver out here almost in Utah.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
So what's your solution, do you have one? Frank?
Speaker 7 (36:26):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (36:27):
Uh?
Speaker 15 (36:28):
So this is you know, District three. It was Bobert
until she carpet bagged and left because she knew she
wasn't gonna win again. I would say ranked choice voting
would be fantastic out here, just to give people like,
you know, more than a lot of people out here
vote for guns. Right, it's a pretty libertarian area. Uh
(36:52):
so I would say just give him a second choice, man,
Like yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
Yeah, okay, third choice yeah. Charles Bullock, what what do
you think about ranked choice voting as a way to
improve representation across the country.
Speaker 7 (37:07):
Yeah, of course, before it really kicks in, you have
to have a situation which nobody gets a majority in
first choices. And it may well be in Western Colorado
that it's so republican that whoever the Republican would be
would would win outright, so you wouldn't go to trying
to make allocations of second choices. It works perhaps best
(37:31):
in the municipalities are often nonpartisan, or it works where
you have what sometimes called a jungle primary, well like
California does, so that everyone is running together, all parties
and whatever, and with the large number of candidates, then
you're unlikely to see anyone get a majority in the
first round. And so what that does is it encourages
(37:54):
candidates to take more moderate positions. We see happening in
our single member districts in space. So way've been jerrymandered
is that the party which is majority makes the choice
in its primary. Who votes in the primary extremists and
this would be very liberal Democrats and the Democratic side,
very conservative Republicans of the complicy side. And so that's
(38:15):
why the people in the middle, they feel like neither
side is giving me any kind of representation. And so
with rank choice voting, yeah, you might take care of.
Speaker 16 (38:23):
Some of that.
Speaker 2 (38:25):
Yeah, I mean, it's it's absolutely true that it fill
up the people in the middle often left out, especially
as the parties move further to their extremes right.
Speaker 10 (38:35):
And I think, look, the reason I think you're hearing
ranked choice voting come up more and more is that, look,
rank choice voting gives and it has a better idea
for at least turnoff for voters who are turned off
by this sort of winner takeoff process. And we saw
that in the New York City mayor's race where Zorhan
Mandani prevailed, and he did that in part because he
(38:55):
combined his support with other candidates and said like, hey,
I know you may not vote form me first, but
you vote for this other guy first, you could vote
and be second.
Speaker 8 (39:03):
And I think the analysis from that race, Jeremy.
Speaker 10 (39:05):
Found through those three rounds of rank choice voting, Mamdani
benefited more than Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New
York did he received, Mamdanmi that being received by ninety
nine thousand transferred votes, while I think Cuomo only received
maybe I don't want to be wrong here, but I
think it was fifty two thousand, fifty three thousand of
(39:27):
those transferred votes.
Speaker 8 (39:28):
So again, it creates a more dynamic election and more
dynamic race.
Speaker 10 (39:33):
It forces candidates to build coalitions, coalition governing coalition campaigning
rather than saying, hey, just vote for this one person.
If you don't like anybody else, then you just have
to stay home. That's a turnoff for a lot of voters. Well,
that will will see his way ever creep up to
national election, state elections races for Congress, I'm unsure about,
but like the professor said, at the municipal level, it
(39:55):
certainly as excited voters and giving them more opportunity because
it opens it up to voters who usually are turned
off buyer when to take all processes.
Speaker 1 (40:03):
Jarrmy, can I jump in real quick?
Speaker 2 (40:04):
Yeah, super short.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
I just wanted to acknowledge that Texans are writing in
like crazy okay, and also people are writing in all
caps a lot. I do appreciate that Philip had a
quick question for you a lot of people are talking
about or asking about money and politics. Do you think
it's possible to reform the voting system without taking money
out of politics.
Speaker 8 (40:23):
Look, I think that Citizens United still haunts all of us.
Speaker 10 (40:27):
But you have seen in many situations like, for example,
the Wisconsin Supreme Court race where Elon Musk, the world's
richest person, threw in a ton of money and he
didn't get the way get what he wanted out of
that election either.
Speaker 8 (40:40):
I think certainly money.
Speaker 10 (40:41):
And politics influences how people visualize and see politics with
ads and everything else. But I think there has been
moments in our politics where that money hasn't had a
direct impact. But I don't think anyone is happy unless
you're very, very wealthy, that you could simply just pour
all this money into our races. But again, I'm going
to go back to what is actually exciting voters, and
(41:03):
what excites voters is when they have more opportunities. And
in this populous era where parties both on the Republican side,
we know the Democrats are in the gutter when it
comes to their approval ratings. People want more representation, they
want more choices. They don't necessarily want party bosses and
parties controlling this process. And I think money is a
part of that too, and you may see a pushback
against that as well as you see again all these
(41:26):
billionaires and tech folks involved in the Trump administration, that
populism will swing to the left, I think in the
next few elections as well.
Speaker 2 (41:34):
Okay, John in Springfield, Illinois is back, and John, here's
your chance. Go ahead with your thoughts.
Speaker 16 (41:42):
Well, I don't think we're fairly representative. And prior to
nineteen eighty two in the state of Illinois, the state
legislature had two representatives from each congressional district and they
add hugger districts back then, and that way the minorities
(42:03):
had a chance to get to vote their candidate in too,
so you'd end up with representatives from two different parties.
Speaker 19 (42:13):
Interesting, Go ahead, Well, I just think that's it's an alternative,
you know, for better representation.
Speaker 2 (42:25):
Yeah, yeah, interesting. Charles Blick, did you know about that
what John is talking about?
Speaker 7 (42:31):
Yeah? Yeah, I believe the state was divided only fifty
nine state House districts, each of which elected three individuals,
and so what you typically would see is that the
majority party could win two of those seats, but not
all three. If they tried to win all three, it
was splitting its support too narrowly and would lose maybe
two of them. So the majority party would just concentrate
(42:53):
on winning two and let the minority party get a
third one. So yeah, you did then have almost every
day of being bipartisan in its representation within that state House.
Speaker 2 (43:06):
By the way, Charles, what do you expect is going
to happen if all the redistricting occurs in Texas and
California and now it looks like maybe Missouri and Indiana
and potentially Florida and other states, if they do everything,
what are you expecting is going to be the result
next year in the midterm elections.
Speaker 7 (43:26):
Well, if everything works out the way those drawing the
districts hope that they will, then it should enhance Republicans' perspective.
But as we talked about earlier, if indeed, by drawing
these new districts and moving people around, you are narrowing
the majorities control in some of the districts that already
has then if there is a wave election, and there
(43:47):
certainly one could talk about why there might be a
strong dejection to what's happening currently, then it could mean
that despite the best plans of the redistrictors and been
Republican to have more pumber opportunities and Democrats do to
create editioncy, that Republicans could actually lose more than they
would if they were operating under the existing plans.
Speaker 2 (44:07):
Yeah, so it's really you can't exactly fix the game
because you never know what's going to happen right before
the election too. Let's get another call in. Paul is
in Grafton, Wisconsin. Paul, go ahead with your thoughts.
Speaker 16 (44:22):
Yeah, is polograph in Wisconsin. Wisconsin used to have nine
representatives back in the eighties, I guess when I was
in school, and now we only have eight and I
recently became aware of one representative per thirty thousand. Was
how the constitution was written, and that was only abandoned
(44:42):
after Jefferson died in eighteen twenty eight. Would be nice
if we could have one representative per thirty thousand, but.
Speaker 2 (44:49):
We have such a much bigger population now, Charles Bullock,
if you wanted to do that, you'd really have to
majorly expand the size of the House of Representatives.
Speaker 7 (44:57):
Would you be meeting in Houston Astrodome or something.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
Right, exactly exactly, Philip, What about you? What are you
hearing on both the Democratic and Republican side about what
people are expecting as a result of all this redistricting
next year in the midterms.
Speaker 10 (45:15):
Well, look at me, as Tolliver, you know, asked me
about money and politics. Misinformation and disinformation I think is
becoming the chief concern for everyone when it comes to
our democracy.
Speaker 8 (45:28):
I think for.
Speaker 10 (45:28):
Democrats there is still a feeling that, you know, some
of them feel like there won't even be a next
presidential election.
Speaker 8 (45:35):
There is still that fear, right even.
Speaker 10 (45:37):
Though Supreme Court justice and stuff that they made it
very clearly they don't believe Donald Trump will be running
or can legally run for a third term. Right, But look,
I think that we're all going to have to wait
and see how this plays out. As a professor mentioned earlier,
all these changes to redistrict in different states may actually
anger voters even more and that wave and again, let's
(45:59):
see how the big beautiful bill plays out. Right, in
some of these more rural areas when it comes to
hospital closers and everything else, you may see rural voters
who voted for Donald Trump, who go I didn't vote
for this. You're already seeing many of them say that
now when it comes to immigration.
Speaker 8 (46:13):
And other issues. So there's a whole lot of time
left here.
Speaker 10 (46:15):
And no matter how much you want to change the
math of the map, this could ultimately be bad for
Donald Trump in the long run, as resentment builds against
his agenda among some of his own supporters.
Speaker 2 (46:26):
Well, and it's no matter what happens. It is pretty
common for a president to face a backlash after two
years in office. It happens almost every time. And I
can think back to twenty ten, two years after the
huge wave of Obama coming in in two thousand and eight,
and it was just he was wiped out. I think
she lacking was the word that yes. Shellacke part right,
(46:46):
Charles Bullock, I'm going to give you the last word
before we go, because you have taught at the University
of Georgia since nineteen sixty eight, and I wonder how
this moment compares politically to everything you've witnessed, including in
nineteen sixty eight, which was the year that Martin Luther
King was assassinated, Bobby Kennedy was assassinated, the Vietnam War
was going on, the protests of the Convention everything else.
(47:08):
How does this moment compare politically for you?
Speaker 7 (47:11):
Yeah, I think what we have learned is that what
we thought were constraints in our system, a separation of
powers the Constitution statutes, turns out that a lot of
what we thought were constraining on the president, really we're
just norms. And we have a person in the White
House now who is a norm breaker, and so he
(47:32):
is going to push the envelope as far as he can.
That means that the only way to stop it would
be Congress. But Congress is not doing anything. It's very supine.
So then you have to turn to the courts. And
the courts may stop some of the things which you're happening,
but the courts move very slowly, and so right now
we're living in a system which we've never seen before,
(47:53):
in which there is increasing executive power, which was not
the idea of the Constitution founders, who thought that legulation
would be the predominant branch. But Congress is giving away
its authority right and left, and the court are the
only constraint that we may have, and they're unelected, of course,
right that.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
Is Charles Bullock, Professor of political science at the University
of Georgia, author of the book read Districting the most
political activity in America. We've also been joined by our
old friend USA Today Chief political correspondent Philip Bailey. Thanks
so much to both of you, and a reminder to
subscribe to our podcast, where you can get extra episodes
of our One Thing Trump Did podcast every week only
on The Middle podcast feed. And next week we're going
(48:31):
to be right back here talking about what has been
lost in education in the digital age, like does anyone
know how to write with a pen anymore? Toliver or
eight o'clock.
Speaker 1 (48:40):
Our number is eight four four four Middle. That's eight
four four four sixty four three three five three, or
you can reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com.
You can also sign up for our free weekly newsletter
and send us your ideas for future show topics.
Speaker 2 (48:50):
The Middle is brought to you by Longnok Media, distributed
by Illinois Public Media and or Bana Illinois. Produced by
Harrison Patino, Danny, Alexander Samburmastas, John barth Onikadessler, and Brandon Condris.
A technical director is Steve Mork. I'm Jeremy Hobson. I'll
talk to you next week.
Support for the Middle comes from the stations that air
the show and from you. Thanks for making a donation
at listen Toothmiddle dot com.
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Welcome to the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson, along with our
house DJ Tolliver and Tolliver. Of course, as you know,
as we go to air, people are still processing yet
another political assassination, that of Charlie Kirk, who was shot
at a campus event in Utah. This comes just a
few months after the House speaker in Minnesota, Melissa Hortman,
and her husband were assassinated, and there are so many
(00:36):
other examples of political violence from recent years. Of course,
I don't know what the answer is, but I do
know that our democracy only works if we are willing
to communicate with each other in good faith, to talk
and listen even when we disagree. That's what the Middle
is all about. And I want to thank our listeners
for always keeping it civil in this space. I think
that's really important.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
I can second that as somebody who reads the comments there,
you know, pretty civil, and then when they're not, people
are cussing. I edit that out. So that's how we
handle that.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Take care of it for us. Okay, thank you Tolliver.
So this hour we want to get into something very
important that's happening right now, which is the partisan drawing
of congressional maps, something that's been around for a long
time but is back on the front pages now. After
President Trump asked Texas Republicans to draw new maps mid decade.
They're usually only drawn after the census every ten years,
(01:25):
where Republicans in Texas obliged. Then California's Democratic Governor Gavin
Newsom said he wanted to draw new maps in California
to even the playing field. Now, Missouri, Indiana, maybe Florida
all jumping into this game. But what all this could
mean is that a lot of Democrats in Republican led
states will have no or very little representation in Congress.
Same for a lot of Republicans in Democratic led states.
(01:48):
And it brings us to our question, do you feel
represented by the political process and what does fair representation
look like to you? We're taking your calls in a
moment at eight four to four to four middle that's
a four four four six four three three five three.
But first last week on the show, we talked about
some of the biggest challenges facing gen Z. We got
so many gen Z callers, and here are some of
the comments we got on our voicemail.
Speaker 4 (02:11):
Nick from Denver as gen Z. The biggest issue for me,
at the very least is no feeling of the ability
or completeness graduating in twenty twenty, getting my first adult
job in the COVID times, all that fun stuff. It's
just nothing ever feels complete or real.
Speaker 5 (02:27):
Anthony Cardwell, it's called from Chicago's Now I'm a boomer
raising of gen Z. My main thing to worry about
is that every gen Z I meet, the type of
business they're going into, most of it it'll be taken over
by AI, and I'm kind of afraid of the future
of m being able to find jobs.
Speaker 6 (02:45):
Hi, my name is June and I'm calling from man
kid On, Minnesota. What I'm worried about as a gen
Zer is the idea of ever owning a home. I
don't It seems like some far off alternate reality that
I could ever own a home. No one's ever explained
to me, like how to take out a loan for
a home? What are what is a mortgage?
Speaker 7 (03:07):
I don't know what a mortgage is.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Maybe we'll have to do a show about that. Thanks
to everyone who called in. You can subscribe to the
Middle wherever you listen to podcasts and hear that whole show.
So now to our question this hour, do you feel
represented by the political process? And what does fair representation
look like to you? Tolliver? How can people reach us?
Speaker 1 (03:25):
You can call us at eight four four four Middle
that's eight four four four six four three three five three,
or you can write to us at listen to the
Middle dot com. Like I said, I'm reading all your comments,
so get them in.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Joining me this hour. Reigning champion of appearances on the Middle,
USA Today, Chief political correspondent, Philip Bailey. I Philip, great
to have you.
Speaker 8 (03:42):
Back, Jeremy. How's it going.
Speaker 2 (03:44):
It's going well. And we've also got with us Charles Bullock,
Professor of political science at the University of Georgia and
author of the book Redistricting The most political activity in America.
You are the pre eminent expert on redistricting. How unusual
is what's happening now with all all these states trying
to change the maps in the middle of the decade.
Speaker 8 (04:03):
Well, yeah, changing maps in the middle.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Of the decade itself is unusual.
Speaker 9 (04:07):
What's particularly unusual about it this time is that the
changes are being made in areas that have already been
jerry managed. Now, twenty years ago, there was also some
mid decade redistricting in Texas and Georgia, and in those
cases Republicans were putting in their own jerrymanders and wiping
out Democratic jerrymangers. But this time around, these states which
(04:30):
are now making further changes have already been jerrymandered.
Speaker 8 (04:34):
So this is.
Speaker 9 (04:35):
Building on the extreme jerry managers were already in place.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
And Philip, what are the political calculations here, because I
was reading that actually lawmakers hate it when their districts
get changed because it makes running for reelection much more
difficult and unpredictable.
Speaker 10 (04:51):
Well, look, I think you know President Donald Trump has
shown his cards pretty clearly, right, understanding that presidents often
lose representation in Congress in the first midterm election, and
particularly with the controversies and consternation about the big beautiful
bill coming out. But you notice that Republicans aren't really
(05:12):
talking all that much about these days. He certainly is
telegraphing that he doesn't think that Republicans are gonna be
able to retain their majorities in the House and the Senate.
So it's a barely it's a very open process here
of this is all about politics.
Speaker 8 (05:26):
This isn't about, oh.
Speaker 10 (05:27):
We need to do these redistricts being because of some
sort of fair government representation. It's all about, hey, I
want more seats to ensure that Republicans maintain their majority. Democrats,
it seems though, who often just a few years ago
were arguing that we need good government, we need these
independent commissions to do it. They're now racing to the
bottom with the Republicans led by Gavin Newsom. There were
(05:49):
some obviously in that space who say Democrats shouldn't do that,
but I think Governor knew some and other Democrats are saying, hey,
look we're gonna fight fire with fire here and do
the exact same thing that President and Trump is doing
to even the odds.
Speaker 2 (06:03):
Charles, is there a potential for a backfire for Republicans
if there is a wave election next year that if
they redistrict and make these districts tighter for everybody, that
they could lose even more seats by making them all
more competitive.
Speaker 8 (06:19):
That's exactly the potential.
Speaker 9 (06:21):
Yeah, if this is a wave election, then districts which
are thought to be seven, eight, maybe ten points Republican
might not be sufficient if there is a huge swing
against this. And as Phillips said, yeah, we know that
in a midterm election, invariably the vote goes against the
president's party, and each of our recent presidents has lost
(06:43):
at least one of the control of one of the
chambers in Congress. So yeah, the Republicans know that they
are on thin ice with this tiny majority they have
right now. And even though they've tried to pack some
districts to make it more secure for them in Texas,
if it's a big wave election, that might not be sufficient.
Speaker 2 (07:02):
Philip, do how do voters feel about this? And when
you look at how they feel about their politicians saying,
you know what, this would be easier if we just
made these districts better for this party that's in power.
Speaker 10 (07:15):
Well, look, Americans are not a fan of the idea
of politicians picking them rather than them picking politicians. We
saw hundreds of protests against President Trump's effort here to
change the outcome or to influence the outcome of the
mid term elections.
Speaker 8 (07:30):
But polls were done on this.
Speaker 10 (07:31):
In fact, the Reuter's ipso's Paul had done in August
found it more than half of respond that it's about
fifty seven percent say they feared for American democracy that
is in danger because of this tilt, and that includes
high percentages of Democrats and even forty six percent of Republicans. Again,
I think it's seventy one percent of Democrats, forty six
(07:53):
percent of Republicans, and fifty two percent of people who
identify as others. So the American people aren't a fan
of this either. And I think the professor is right.
If we see a wave election, there's no guarantee that
these seats will automatically go for Republicans and the way
they think. And again, we learned this, I think from
some of the filibuster fights when Mitch McConnell and Harry
(08:15):
Reid were battling out in the Senate that whatever power
you take for yourself and politics, remember your opponents can
take that same power when they are voted in the.
Speaker 2 (08:24):
Misty right, Charles, what makes up a fair political district?
Can such a thing actually be achieved?
Speaker 9 (08:32):
So our district would be for a state, okay? And
often the thumbs take as use for this would be
is the congressional delegation roughly reflective of the way the
state votes in state wide elections.
Speaker 8 (08:49):
For example, the plan that was.
Speaker 9 (08:52):
In place in twenty twenty two in North Carolina produced
seven Democrats seven Republicans. All right, North Carolina is a
very competitive state. It has currently both Democrats and Republicans
servings in statewide offices. So one can look at that
and say, yeah, that pretty much reflects the division of
the state in terms of its partnership. When that was
(09:12):
redrawn by Republicans, it then became may ten Republicans.
Speaker 8 (09:16):
For democratic makeup.
Speaker 9 (09:19):
And so if your baseline is how does this state
vote for presidential cogubinatory elections, that's way out of kildre.
Speaker 2 (09:27):
Let me sneak in a call here and Hugh is
calling from South Carolina. Hugh, welcome to the middle. Do
you feel represented by the political.
Speaker 11 (09:34):
Process not in national elections? Especially why because I don't
understand why we're having a national election and it becomes
a winner take all on a per state basis. Why
can't the electoral college be divided on a proportional basis
regarding Democratic Republican voters.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
So it's the electoral college. What about on a statewide basis?
Do you feel represented by your senators, by your representatives
in Congress in South Carolina.
Speaker 7 (10:06):
I don't know.
Speaker 12 (10:07):
I think maybe ranked choice voting should be employed across
a lot of other elections. So a Senate election is
for the state, I understand why that would be a
winner take all, but I also feel that maybe ranked
choice voting would allow alternate candidates to get into the
race and have people be able to vote for them
(10:29):
with their rank choice without feeling that they're just throwing
their vote away.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Hugh, thank you for that. And I'm sure we're going
to talk about ranked choice voting because this always seems
to come up when we talk about the political process.
But Tolliver, like we said, California is at the center
of this conversation. But back in twenty ten, they tried
to eliminate parties in political redistricting through a ballot measure.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
Yeah, they actually picked members of this commission, sorry commission
lottery style. Here's a news clip on this from caseyr.
Speaker 13 (10:57):
The lottery cage was set up so as you can
see number one the number balls were teed up, the
audience was lined up with suspense in the air. It
had all the earmarks of a game show, but this
drawing may well be the most significant lottery California's ever
staged in terms of how the state is governed, and
it's going to.
Speaker 2 (11:15):
Be a whole new ballgame here in California. We're not
going to have lawmakers drawing their own.
Speaker 13 (11:19):
Districts approved by voters two years ago as Prop eleven,
a pet cause of Governor Schwarzenegger. A finalists were picked
today out of thirty thousand initial applicants.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
Good time to mention Tolliver that I did not win
the multi billion dollar power ball. That's we're thinking about
a lot of our.
Speaker 1 (11:35):
Whole savings plan for you to lend me some money.
Speaker 2 (11:37):
So that means that people can still contribute to the
Middle at listen to Themiddle dot com. It's tax deductible
and it's very important to the success of this program.
So make a contribution. We really appreciate it. We write
back with more of the Middle. This is the Middle.
I'm Jeremy Hobson. If you're just tuning in the Middle
as a national call in show, we're focused on elevating
(11:57):
voices from the middle geographically, politically and philosophically, or maybe
you just want to meet in the middle. This hour
we're asking if you feel represented by the political process
and what fair representation looks like to you. Tulliver, what
is the number to call in?
Speaker 1 (12:10):
It's eight four four four Middle. That's eight four four
four sixty four three three five three. You can also
write to us at Listen to the Middle dot com
or on social media.
Speaker 2 (12:19):
I'm joined by political scientists Charles Bullock at the University
of Georgia and USA Today chief political correspondent Philip Bailey.
And before we get back to the phones, Charles Bullock,
this conversation goes well beyond house races. There are many
people in this country who are as we just heard
there blue in a red state or red in a
blue state. It could be fifty five to forty five percent,
but the minority party doesn't get forty five percent of
(12:41):
the power. They don't get that proportional representation. Is there
a better way for more people to feel represented in
our democracy?
Speaker 7 (12:49):
Well, conceivably, yeah, we could move towards a European system
of proportional representation. And under that system then you have
multi member districts. You don't have the single member districts
like we make you of here, and in a multi
members system, then yeah, you can end up with roughly
the same proportion of seats held by a party, is
it share of the vote? Now, that would be pretty
(13:11):
alien to what we've done in America for two hundred
and fifty years, but that would be a way in
which we could achieve something of reproaching a proportional representation.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
And Philip, when you think about the representation for minority groups,
including black people, a lot of the issues around redistricting
has been about that a lack of proper representation. Is
that conversation being lost in this latest political battle?
Speaker 10 (13:35):
Well, look, I think you know, I had an opportunity
to talk to black legislators from Texas when they had
left to go to Illinois to sort of delay the
inevitable redistricting map there. Let's look at, for example, if
the Missouri first map is being passed by Republicans there,
it tries to break up or it seeks to break
up the democratic health district in Kansas City held by
(13:59):
Eleven Terment and Manuel Kleeber and basically right that district
into two. So the racial component of this isn't being
lost either. That Republicans have to go after these democratic areas,
these Democratic seats and split them up and divide them up.
They have to essentially go after black and brown oftentime voters.
And that's entirely what you saw the civil rights movement
(14:21):
in the Voting Rights Act and everything being follo over.
So the erosion of the Voting Rights Act by the
Supreme Court, this attack on redistricting and sort of splitting
up these predominantly black districts.
Speaker 8 (14:32):
It's not just a partisan fight here.
Speaker 10 (14:34):
There's a racial component within this redistricting fight that people
like Eric Holder from our Attorney General there has been
adamant about fighting against redistricting up until against Democrats decided
to follow Republicans on this issue. That racial component cannot
be lost. And you're seeing more and more black constituents
speak ups here and saying in these protests that hey,
(14:55):
if these folks can't win, they're basically cheating us out
of our representation. And not just at one more point
that goes back to black history in terms of reconstruction.
This has been a bedrock issue for Black Americans really
since emancipation.
Speaker 2 (15:08):
Mm hmmm, uh, let's go to Devin who's in Brewster,
New York. Devon. I guess it is uh, devon, Wow,
you've got a chime when I come to you. Hello,
welcome to the middle, go ahead with you.
Speaker 14 (15:20):
Hello, Hello Jeremy.
Speaker 7 (15:22):
How are you?
Speaker 15 (15:23):
Yes?
Speaker 7 (15:23):
How are you?
Speaker 16 (15:23):
Yes?
Speaker 14 (15:24):
I was just like agree with the other guy was saying.
This redististing has become.
Speaker 7 (15:30):
A huge problem.
Speaker 14 (15:31):
The reason why it's become a huge fund is because
you got people that just want to each Republicans and
just want to gain the system. There's a game here
and like the do say that with the vote and
right Jack, it fores aligned with the voter, right Jack.
Also because they want to uh which record it. They
don't want to do a fair maps by. They're doing
(15:52):
it an irracial matter in a parst. And but it's
more common that is becoming a racial matter. And we
got to understand that this has happened ever since. If
you look back to the Supreme Court decision in two
tenty nineteen i Utro rosus Common Court. Okay, they said,
John Robins said it's okay to Jerry Manda, Parson, Jerry
Manda as norm as it's not by race. But this
is what's causing the problem. Okay, where you go to
(16:16):
judicial the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court is saying
that basically, it's okay Jerry Manda without no judicial oversight.
So what I think we should do is that is
we don't get fair presentations. We ask democratic stations. I'm
in it was in New York, like my governor Kathy
Hope said, we gotta fight back bottom line.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
So you want you want Kathy Hockel to do the
same thing. You want to fight fire with fire and
have your democratic governor go in and redistrict because that's
what states like Texas are doing.
Speaker 14 (16:44):
You got it, You got it, because if Texas is
doing it, we gotta do it too. We gotta fight back.
Speaker 2 (16:49):
It's not fear interesting.
Speaker 14 (16:50):
We just gotta fight that. And even though it violates
to fourteen to fifteen Amendment, it is what it is.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
Yeah, Devon, thank you very much for that.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
Given thirty more minutes.
Speaker 2 (16:59):
Man well and Philip Bailey, what about that? What do
you think about that? Actually, let me ask you, Charles Bullock,
what do you think about that? Hearing from a voter
there who says, yes, I want my governor to do
the same thing, is this a race to the bottom
or what?
Speaker 7 (17:16):
Well, Yeah, that's what's become right. If the Republicans are
going to do it. Democrats are going to try to
fight back. What Devam's pointing out this is now, if
you say that you're drawing districts based upon partisanship, you
can get away with about anything.
Speaker 17 (17:31):
Now.
Speaker 7 (17:31):
Of course, in much of the country, it turn if
it is true in the South, where race and party
run collinears. So if you've got a heavily democratic district,
it is going to be a heavily minority district. And
so yeah, if you're drawing it, you're saying, well, we're
we're discriminating here against Democrats, which Prime Court says is okay.
Well you're also in discriminating against the minorities. And so
(17:54):
in North Florida, district that had been held by a
black Democrat for thirty years was carved up and done
away within two thousand and two. Twenty two, excuse me,
twenty two.
Speaker 2 (18:07):
Let's go to John, who's in Rockford, Illinois. John, what
do you think about this issue and do you feel
represented by the political process?
Speaker 18 (18:18):
Thanks for taking my call. I see no meaningful difference
between partisan jerry mandering by either party and literacy tests,
poll taxes, and other devices concocted in the Jim Crows South.
They are all intended to decrive a targeted population of
a meaningful or for that matter, any sort of election
they experienced. In so doing, they are an assault upon
(18:40):
our democracy. There is no such thing as good partisan
jerry mandering. Anyone who engages in it is an enemy
of the constitution.
Speaker 2 (18:48):
Well, and you, John, like me are at least I
used to be a resident of the state of Illinois.
But Illinois is incredibly gerrymandered as we have seen. How
do you feel about that in your own state?
Speaker 7 (19:00):
I hate it.
Speaker 14 (19:01):
I hate it.
Speaker 18 (19:02):
Before the redistricting, our governor Pritzker said, redistricting is going
to be transparent, he told us, And it was transparently.
Any democratic have you seen like the thirteenth district or
the seventeenth district. I live in Rockford, I'm in the sixteenth,
but right across the street there are people in the
seventiesh who are also in the same district with Springfield
(19:22):
and Wilmington two hundred miles away.
Speaker 2 (19:25):
So right, it's terrible, Yeah, Johnny, thank you very much.
Speaker 16 (19:29):
Democrats.
Speaker 2 (19:30):
Yeah, right right, thank you, thank you so much for
that call. You know, Philip Bailey, I remember and I've
said this before, not for a while because we haven't
talked about this in a long time, but the great
Anne Richards, the late Anne Richards, the last person to
win statewide in Texas back in the nineteen nineties as governor.
She was on Larry King Live back in the day
and she said, Larry, some of these districts are so
(19:52):
narrow you could drive down the street with both your
car doors open and hit every house. It's true. I
mean it's not that good, but I tried my best.
But yeah, what about that?
Speaker 10 (20:05):
Well, look, I mean the consequence for this is when
people complain about all Congress can't get anything done or
America doesn't seem to be able to address these issues, Well,
look no further than how our legislative of our congressional
districts are drawn. There was a time back in the
ancient nineteen nineties where you had a lot more overlap,
a lot more moderate people and lawmakers in Congress. Well,
(20:25):
the consequence of these states saying though we're going to
have seven to one or eight to zero representation is
Congress is going to be more gridlocked. One party is
going to have control. Very little is going to get done, right,
at the congressional level. So these things have an effect
on each other. I think one thing I am hearing
a lot more jeremy from different organizations is that, you know,
(20:45):
this effort and these attacks on democracy, there may be
this renewed effort to particularly with the twenty and fiftieth
anniversary of the United States, our birthday coming up next year, this.
Speaker 8 (20:56):
Call for a renewal of democracy.
Speaker 10 (20:59):
People talking about having national elections, national referendums, because when
you look, you know, you also see efforts to your
own the ability to have national referendums in certain states.
Speaker 8 (21:08):
More and more Americans both.
Speaker 10 (21:10):
Side, we're talking about direct democracy that I've heard in
years past.
Speaker 2 (21:15):
Right, which has its own problems sometimes as well. Alex
is calling in from Southeast Texas. Alex, do you feel
represented by the political process there in Texas?
Speaker 19 (21:26):
Yeah?
Speaker 16 (21:27):
Good?
Speaker 20 (21:27):
I mean, guys, how are you all today? Yes, I've represented,
you know, I don't. I've never had an issue with
redistrict theory. I'm you know, I'm I live in I
guess you would call the the greater part of the Houston.
But you know, I just don't get why it's always
an issue when Republicans would to do it, and there's
(21:49):
never an issue when Democrats would have to do it. It's just
it's this whole theme always Nbinia picks up on what
Democrats complain about, and now they're complaining about derry Mandarin.
But the Republicans are doing it. So it's a big
deal now. But we know, as I told the call taker,
California and New York are the biggest gerrymanderin states there
(22:10):
are and Republicans, although they have large and large populations
that vote for them a large voter turnout, they're very,
very underrepresented in those states. California, I think statistically, I
think it was grea to study. California has probably more
registered Republicans than Texas, yet they're very underrepresented, you know,
(22:34):
so I the Gavin News the takers.
Speaker 2 (22:37):
Yeah, well, I was just gonna say, Alex, you know,
the county of Los Angeles had more people voting for
Trump in the last election in the entire state of Louisiana,
which is interesting to think about. But I take your point.
Thank you, Thank you very much for that. And Charles
Bullock give us the historical context. Here is what Alex
is saying, correct, that Democrats do it even more than Republicans.
Speaker 13 (23:00):
To do it.
Speaker 7 (23:00):
If you've got a trifecta arrangement where you control both chambers,
your legislature and your governor, yeah you're going to do
some some jerry mandering.
Speaker 18 (23:09):
You know.
Speaker 7 (23:10):
So if we were doing this Coke Show twenty years ago,
we'd be talking about how in Texas and in Georgia
there was midterm redistrict team that was to undue democratic
jerry manders and Republicans have just taken control. So yeah,
nobody comes into this historically with clean hands, and yeah,
we've never done this, and there's the power call him in. Yeah,
(23:31):
Illinois is a democratic jerry mander right now in place.
So is Maryland, and you know Texas and Florida. Yeah,
those are Republican jerry manders.
Speaker 2 (23:41):
Well, and Charles, do you think that the idea of
like independent commissions the way that California had done it,
at least until now, that that has any future now
in a world where everybody wants to jerrymander even more?
Speaker 7 (23:56):
Well, I think you can correct me if I'm wrong
on this.
Speaker 4 (23:58):
And where to have.
Speaker 7 (24:00):
Come in place, It's often been as a result of
the initiative process, not as a result of the legislature
stepping forward and doing it. So that is a means
by which, at least in states that permit an initiative,
that the public can express what it would like to
see done when it comes from growing districts. Now, not
every state has, you know, the initiative process. Georgia, for example,
is not. But where that has been done, yes, you're
(24:24):
more likely to end up with a situation which scores
relatively well when it comes to applying spare standards to
what the districts look like.
Speaker 2 (24:35):
Coulton is calling from Lake Tahoe, California. Beautiful Lake Tahoe, California. Coulton,
you are in a state that's at the center of this.
How do you feel about your representation?
Speaker 3 (24:47):
Hey, Jeremy, thanks for letting me on here. I appreciate it.
To answer your question directly, I feel grossly underrepresented in
California as a single party system. Define representation here as
hopeless for anything other than you know, democratic agenda.
Speaker 16 (25:08):
HM.
Speaker 2 (25:08):
So you're a Republican.
Speaker 7 (25:11):
I'm a Republican.
Speaker 3 (25:12):
I live in a county that's Republican, and uh, you know,
the geographic density of California makes it very difficult for
Republican representation a year over year with all of the
uh jerrymandering and everything else happening around the state. I
know the other caller was mentioned in the density of
(25:34):
voters for Trump at Los Angeles County, et cetera. There
is definitely a Republican presence in the state, but regardless
of what happens, representation is not adequate in my opinion.
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Do you have a solution, Culton, you want to break
California up into a number of states or anything.
Speaker 3 (25:50):
Like that, Yeah, I would, you know, Actually, my county
I live in, there's been a big push for the
state of Jefferson. I really do feel that California is
it's justified to be both a southern and northern peace.
Geographically speaking, it's too much geographical land with the density
(26:12):
of populations with kind of just a different mindset based
you know, on living in the city or producing agriculture
and whatnot in the more rural areas of the state.
Speaker 2 (26:23):
Yeah, Colton, thank you so much for that call. And
Philip Bailey, you're joining us from Louisville, Kentucky, which, like
many cities in Red States, is probably a bluish or
purplish city in a red state. Every place has this,
Every state has this situation where they might not feel
exactly represented by their state, or at least a lot
of the people in the states don't.
Speaker 10 (26:44):
Right I mean, look the way that California Republicans feel
is how a lot of Kentucky Democrats feel right now.
I mean, out of the one hundred state legislative seats
in the House, only nineteen or Democrats right now. So
go ask them about how well represented they feel generally.
And we see this show up right here. I mean
during presidential races, during the electoral college, where most Americans
(27:05):
are locked out of picking the president. It's really only
a handful of states every year, five to seven states
where you know, places like Pennsylvania, Arizona, those purple states
that have a say so. So many of us feel
locked out of our state governments, locked out of these
national elections. And I think again, Democrats are going to
have to reckon with this, particularly in the twenty thirty census,
(27:26):
as more people leave these blue states which are very,
very expensive, and move into cheaper red states.
Speaker 8 (27:32):
But look all this talk about, oh, I want.
Speaker 10 (27:34):
To break up my state or I want to change
the dynamics here I do think that we're going to
have a reckoning at this midterm elections, particularly if Republicans
don't prevail, and there is going to have to be
a larger conversation about the health of our democracy. That
Donald Trump himself poisoned would he continued to lie about
the twenty twenty election results, And from that we have
(27:54):
seen a renewed, I think spirit of democracy. I think
that we all want better representation, but I'm not sure
that breaking up states.
Speaker 8 (28:02):
Is the way to go about it.
Speaker 10 (28:03):
I do think that we're going to have some reforms
we're going to be talking about over the next couple
of years.
Speaker 2 (28:08):
Tolliver, what is coming in on?
Speaker 13 (28:10):
UH?
Speaker 2 (28:10):
Listen to the middle dot com UH.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
David and Wyoming says, I consider myself somewhere in the
middle of the political spectrum, and I do not feel represented.
I feel the political process rewards extremism or rudy and
Denver says regarding representation, it's time to expand the size
of the House. Four thirty five is arbitrary and about
one hundred years old. And finally, Lucian grand Rapids says,
I will never feel represented as long as we have
(28:32):
the Electoral College Charles.
Speaker 2 (28:36):
The size of the house though, that's that's that. I
just want to hear what Charles Blok is expanding the
size of the house from four thirty five right right.
Speaker 7 (28:44):
Yeah, And there's been work which suggests that given our population, yeah,
we should have a larger house in order to make it, say,
proportional to our population visa these say the size of
the House of Commons in Britain or the German bul Estag.
That yes, we are much too small, and the time
to do that probably would be, say, at the time
of a reapportionments, right after the next census. And from
(29:10):
the time of the beginning of the Republic up until
nineteen ten, we always did expand the house. It was
one exception when we didn't, but for most of our
history we did, and then since then spend this arbitrary
four thirty five.
Speaker 2 (29:23):
Yeah, I guess it's a round number to some people,
you know, Tolliver. As we mentioned, Texas is central to
this conversation, and Texas Democrats tried to delay their redistricting
there by fleeing to Illinois as a group so the
vote couldn't happen.
Speaker 1 (29:35):
Yeah, And one of the leaders of that group was
Texas State James Tallerico, who spoke at a church in Chicago.
Speaker 21 (29:42):
This American democracy is more than just a constitution. It's
a covenant. It's a relationship between neighbors. It's a promise
that we make to each other to share this country.
Some of the most powerful people in this nation are
breaking that promise as you speak. With every Jerrymander district,
(30:06):
with every suppressed vote, they are breaking that sacred promise.
Speaker 2 (30:12):
And as you know, Tolliver, the Democrats were not successful
in stopping that vote from happening. They eventually did come
back to Texas. Although Tallerico made such a name for himself,
he's now running for Senate in Texas, so it may
actually work out well for him. Let's see. I'll be
back with more of your calls on the Middle. This
(30:32):
is the Middle. I'm Jeremy Hobson. In this hour, we're
asking if you feel represented by the political process and
what fair representation looks like to you. You can call
us at eight four four four Middle. That's eight four
four four six four three three five three. You can
reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com. My
guests are USA Today Chief political correspondent Philip Bailey and
political scientist Charles Bullock at the University of Georgia. And
(30:53):
before we go back to the phones, Charles, the courts
often step in on these matters. Have they had much
of an impact over the years in shopping partisan gerrymandering
or removing representation for minority groups.
Speaker 7 (31:06):
Yeah, Historically the courts were important, and they were enforcing
the Civil Rights Act, and that did protect and indeed
did force the redrawing of new districts which were liketed
to be won by blacks in the South Hispanics in
the Southwest. There was during much of the twenty tens.
The issue was could someone come up with an acceptable
(31:27):
standard for determining what was an unacceptable partisan gerrymander? And,
as one of the callers earlier pointed out, the Routo
case inteen twenty nineteen took that off the table. The
Supreme Courts said, We're not even going to look at that.
If you have a fighting that says partisan gerry mander,
don't come to federal court. Now, some state courts, particularly
own North Carolina, have taken up the challenge of trying
(31:51):
to determine that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional, so courts he
has have been important, and of course the way the
game is played. If you your party loses in your legislature,
the first thing you do is you go and you
fly out court case. But you're going to have to
challenge it now arguing that it's discriminatory against the minority
group within your state.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
Lucia is calling from Utah. Lucia, what do you think
are you represented?
Speaker 17 (32:19):
I don't think I'm really well represented as somebody is
a bit more less leaning, especially you know with the
latest thing of the Republican germandering of the maps in
Utah and the recent course cases trying to overrule that.
Speaker 2 (32:36):
Yeah, in Utah, people voted, I believe a few years
ago on an initiative to create an independent redistrict and commission,
but that has not happened yet.
Speaker 17 (32:46):
Yeah, I'm twenty eighteen. They actually voted. It was a
narrow vote, but it established an independent districting commission and
set rules for the lawmakers for maps if they didn't
accept the end of and commissions.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
Yeah, Lucia, thank you, Philip Bailey. We're hearing over and
over again from people calling in saying they do not
feel represented by the political process.
Speaker 10 (33:11):
Right now, and I think that often Jeremy flows with
the results of the election. Right September of last year,
pe Research did a survey about the electoral college, and
they've done this over.
Speaker 8 (33:24):
A number of years. And guess what. Back in twenty.
Speaker 10 (33:27):
Twelve, when Barack Obama was reelected, fifty four percent of
Republicans and Republican leaning voters wanted to change the system
of the electoral college to where the person who receives
the most votes wins, right, So every time people lose
the outcome, they want to change the entire system. I
think the entrenched aspect of this when you talk to
(33:48):
voters who come from states and they are different than
the state's outcome. When you talk to Democrats or liberal
leaning people in Utah or liberal leading people in a
place like Kentucky or Mississippi, they have the same sentiment
that Republican or conservative le any people in New York
and Illinois.
Speaker 8 (34:04):
Or California have.
Speaker 10 (34:05):
And I think, again, the remedy for some of this
this bubbling up is going to have to come from
folks who overlap and saying, hey, maybe we should start
having national referendums right and overthrow Congress electorally rather than
waiting on them and waiting on the politicians to make
these decisions. When we see these special elections or these
statewide referendums, oftentimes voters even.
Speaker 8 (34:28):
From conservative states. Right.
Speaker 10 (34:30):
Let's look at, for example, those initiatives about reproductive rights.
They were often more left of center, even in states
like Kansas. Right, you saw people voting for the minimum way,
voting to restore Fellon and voting rights in Florida, and
then the Republican legislatures or the legislatures that are Democratic
controlled basically trying to overrule the voters here. So there
(34:51):
is a bubbling up I think in this populist era
that the MAGA, the make American Great Again movement started
that I think needs to be finished in a lot
of different conversations and parts of the country. But oftentimes
these frustrations come from, Hey, I continue to lose at
these elections, in this electoral process, where am I supposed
to go? And particularly Jeremy, that we're having this conversation
(35:11):
about political violence experimentation in American democracy, I think may
release some of that steam as we face some of
these larger issues of violence in our politics.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
Frank is calling from Western Colorado. Frank, welcome to the middle.
Go ahead with your thoughts.
Speaker 15 (35:29):
Oh yes, I am a blue dot in the red
sea of Western Colorado. As the state goes bluer and bluer,
I still do not feel represented because most of the
legislature and most of the money goes towards the Front Range,
which is like the Fort Collins of Pueblo section over
(35:53):
there on the low part of the mountains on the
east side. So like that's where the legislating is, that's
where all the money goes. That's you know, where everything happens.
And yeah, so number one, I don't have representation out
here in Western Colorado. Number two, the representation that I
(36:14):
do appreciate, uh, isn't doing much for my tiny little
sliver out here almost in Utah.
Speaker 2 (36:22):
So what's your solution, do you have one? Frank?
Speaker 7 (36:26):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (36:27):
Uh?
Speaker 15 (36:28):
So this is you know, District three. It was Bobert
until she carpet bagged and left because she knew she
wasn't gonna win again. I would say ranked choice voting
would be fantastic out here, just to give people like,
you know, more than a lot of people out here
vote for guns. Right, it's a pretty libertarian area. Uh
(36:52):
so I would say just give him a second choice, man,
Like yeah.
Speaker 2 (36:56):
Yeah, okay, third choice yeah. Charles Bullock, what what do
you think about ranked choice voting as a way to
improve representation across the country.
Speaker 7 (37:07):
Yeah, of course, before it really kicks in, you have
to have a situation which nobody gets a majority in
first choices. And it may well be in Western Colorado
that it's so republican that whoever the Republican would be
would would win outright, so you wouldn't go to trying
to make allocations of second choices. It works perhaps best
(37:31):
in the municipalities are often nonpartisan, or it works where
you have what sometimes called a jungle primary, well like
California does, so that everyone is running together, all parties
and whatever, and with the large number of candidates, then
you're unlikely to see anyone get a majority in the
first round. And so what that does is it encourages
(37:54):
candidates to take more moderate positions. We see happening in
our single member districts in space. So way've been jerrymandered
is that the party which is majority makes the choice
in its primary. Who votes in the primary extremists and
this would be very liberal Democrats and the Democratic side,
very conservative Republicans of the complicy side. And so that's
(38:15):
why the people in the middle, they feel like neither
side is giving me any kind of representation. And so
with rank choice voting, yeah, you might take care of.
Speaker 16 (38:23):
Some of that.
Speaker 2 (38:25):
Yeah, I mean, it's it's absolutely true that it fill
up the people in the middle often left out, especially
as the parties move further to their extremes right.
Speaker 10 (38:35):
And I think, look, the reason I think you're hearing
ranked choice voting come up more and more is that, look,
rank choice voting gives and it has a better idea
for at least turnoff for voters who are turned off
by this sort of winner takeoff process. And we saw
that in the New York City mayor's race where Zorhan
Mandani prevailed, and he did that in part because he
(38:55):
combined his support with other candidates and said like, hey,
I know you may not vote form me first, but
you vote for this other guy first, you could vote
and be second.
Speaker 8 (39:03):
And I think the analysis from that race, Jeremy.
Speaker 10 (39:05):
Found through those three rounds of rank choice voting, Mamdani
benefited more than Andrew Cuomo, the former governor of New
York did he received, Mamdanmi that being received by ninety
nine thousand transferred votes, while I think Cuomo only received
maybe I don't want to be wrong here, but I
think it was fifty two thousand, fifty three thousand of
(39:27):
those transferred votes.
Speaker 8 (39:28):
So again, it creates a more dynamic election and more
dynamic race.
Speaker 10 (39:33):
It forces candidates to build coalitions, coalition governing coalition campaigning
rather than saying, hey, just vote for this one person.
If you don't like anybody else, then you just have
to stay home. That's a turnoff for a lot of voters. Well,
that will will see his way ever creep up to
national election, state elections races for Congress, I'm unsure about,
but like the professor said, at the municipal level, it
(39:55):
certainly as excited voters and giving them more opportunity because
it opens it up to voters who usually are turned
off buyer when to take all processes.
Speaker 1 (40:03):
Jarrmy, can I jump in real quick?
Speaker 2 (40:04):
Yeah, super short.
Speaker 1 (40:05):
I just wanted to acknowledge that Texans are writing in
like crazy okay, and also people are writing in all
caps a lot. I do appreciate that Philip had a
quick question for you a lot of people are talking
about or asking about money and politics. Do you think
it's possible to reform the voting system without taking money
out of politics.
Speaker 8 (40:23):
Look, I think that Citizens United still haunts all of us.
Speaker 10 (40:27):
But you have seen in many situations like, for example,
the Wisconsin Supreme Court race where Elon Musk, the world's
richest person, threw in a ton of money and he
didn't get the way get what he wanted out of
that election either.
Speaker 8 (40:40):
I think certainly money.
Speaker 10 (40:41):
And politics influences how people visualize and see politics with
ads and everything else. But I think there has been
moments in our politics where that money hasn't had a
direct impact. But I don't think anyone is happy unless
you're very, very wealthy, that you could simply just pour
all this money into our races. But again, I'm going
to go back to what is actually exciting voters, and
(41:03):
what excites voters is when they have more opportunities. And
in this populous era where parties both on the Republican side,
we know the Democrats are in the gutter when it
comes to their approval ratings. People want more representation, they
want more choices. They don't necessarily want party bosses and
parties controlling this process. And I think money is a
part of that too, and you may see a pushback
against that as well as you see again all these
(41:26):
billionaires and tech folks involved in the Trump administration, that
populism will swing to the left, I think in the
next few elections as well.
Speaker 2 (41:34):
Okay, John in Springfield, Illinois is back, and John, here's
your chance. Go ahead with your thoughts.
Speaker 16 (41:42):
Well, I don't think we're fairly representative. And prior to
nineteen eighty two in the state of Illinois, the state
legislature had two representatives from each congressional district and they
add hugger districts back then, and that way the minorities
(42:03):
had a chance to get to vote their candidate in too,
so you'd end up with representatives from two different parties.
Speaker 19 (42:13):
Interesting, Go ahead, Well, I just think that's it's an alternative,
you know, for better representation.
Speaker 2 (42:25):
Yeah, yeah, interesting. Charles Blick, did you know about that
what John is talking about?
Speaker 7 (42:31):
Yeah? Yeah, I believe the state was divided only fifty
nine state House districts, each of which elected three individuals,
and so what you typically would see is that the
majority party could win two of those seats, but not
all three. If they tried to win all three, it
was splitting its support too narrowly and would lose maybe
two of them. So the majority party would just concentrate
(42:53):
on winning two and let the minority party get a
third one. So yeah, you did then have almost every
day of being bipartisan in its representation within that state House.
Speaker 2 (43:06):
By the way, Charles, what do you expect is going
to happen if all the redistricting occurs in Texas and
California and now it looks like maybe Missouri and Indiana
and potentially Florida and other states, if they do everything,
what are you expecting is going to be the result
next year in the midterm elections.
Speaker 7 (43:26):
Well, if everything works out the way those drawing the
districts hope that they will, then it should enhance Republicans' perspective.
But as we talked about earlier, if indeed, by drawing
these new districts and moving people around, you are narrowing
the majorities control in some of the districts that already
has then if there is a wave election, and there
(43:47):
certainly one could talk about why there might be a
strong dejection to what's happening currently, then it could mean
that despite the best plans of the redistrictors and been
Republican to have more pumber opportunities and Democrats do to
create editioncy, that Republicans could actually lose more than they
would if they were operating under the existing plans.
Speaker 2 (44:07):
Yeah, so it's really you can't exactly fix the game
because you never know what's going to happen right before
the election too. Let's get another call in. Paul is
in Grafton, Wisconsin. Paul, go ahead with your thoughts.
Speaker 16 (44:22):
Yeah, is polograph in Wisconsin. Wisconsin used to have nine
representatives back in the eighties, I guess when I was
in school, and now we only have eight and I
recently became aware of one representative per thirty thousand. Was
how the constitution was written, and that was only abandoned
(44:42):
after Jefferson died in eighteen twenty eight. Would be nice
if we could have one representative per thirty thousand, but.
Speaker 2 (44:49):
We have such a much bigger population now, Charles Bullock,
if you wanted to do that, you'd really have to
majorly expand the size of the House of Representatives.
Speaker 7 (44:57):
Would you be meeting in Houston Astrodome or something.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
Right, exactly exactly, Philip, What about you? What are you
hearing on both the Democratic and Republican side about what
people are expecting as a result of all this redistricting
next year in the midterms.
Speaker 10 (45:15):
Well, look at me, as Tolliver, you know, asked me
about money and politics. Misinformation and disinformation I think is
becoming the chief concern for everyone when it comes to
our democracy.
Speaker 8 (45:28):
I think for.
Speaker 10 (45:28):
Democrats there is still a feeling that, you know, some
of them feel like there won't even be a next
presidential election.
Speaker 8 (45:35):
There is still that fear, right even.
Speaker 10 (45:37):
Though Supreme Court justice and stuff that they made it
very clearly they don't believe Donald Trump will be running
or can legally run for a third term. Right, But look,
I think that we're all going to have to wait
and see how this plays out. As a professor mentioned earlier,
all these changes to redistrict in different states may actually
anger voters even more and that wave and again, let's
(45:59):
see how the big beautiful bill plays out. Right, in
some of these more rural areas when it comes to
hospital closers and everything else, you may see rural voters
who voted for Donald Trump, who go I didn't vote
for this. You're already seeing many of them say that
now when it comes to immigration.
Speaker 8 (46:13):
And other issues. So there's a whole lot of time
left here.
Speaker 10 (46:15):
And no matter how much you want to change the
math of the map, this could ultimately be bad for
Donald Trump in the long run, as resentment builds against
his agenda among some of his own supporters.
Speaker 2 (46:26):
Well, and it's no matter what happens. It is pretty
common for a president to face a backlash after two
years in office. It happens almost every time. And I
can think back to twenty ten, two years after the
huge wave of Obama coming in in two thousand and eight,
and it was just he was wiped out. I think
she lacking was the word that yes. Shellacke part right,
(46:46):
Charles Bullock, I'm going to give you the last word
before we go, because you have taught at the University
of Georgia since nineteen sixty eight, and I wonder how
this moment compares politically to everything you've witnessed, including in
nineteen sixty eight, which was the year that Martin Luther
King was assassinated, Bobby Kennedy was assassinated, the Vietnam War
was going on, the protests of the Convention everything else.
(47:08):
How does this moment compare politically for you?
Speaker 7 (47:11):
Yeah, I think what we have learned is that what
we thought were constraints in our system, a separation of
powers the Constitution statutes, turns out that a lot of
what we thought were constraining on the president, really we're
just norms. And we have a person in the White
House now who is a norm breaker, and so he
(47:32):
is going to push the envelope as far as he can.
That means that the only way to stop it would
be Congress. But Congress is not doing anything. It's very supine.
So then you have to turn to the courts. And
the courts may stop some of the things which you're happening,
but the courts move very slowly, and so right now
we're living in a system which we've never seen before,
(47:53):
in which there is increasing executive power, which was not
the idea of the Constitution founders, who thought that legulation
would be the predominant branch. But Congress is giving away
its authority right and left, and the court are the
only constraint that we may have, and they're unelected, of course,
right that.
Speaker 2 (48:11):
Is Charles Bullock, Professor of political science at the University
of Georgia, author of the book read Districting the most
political activity in America. We've also been joined by our
old friend USA Today Chief political correspondent Philip Bailey. Thanks
so much to both of you, and a reminder to
subscribe to our podcast, where you can get extra episodes
of our One Thing Trump Did podcast every week only
on The Middle podcast feed. And next week we're going
(48:31):
to be right back here talking about what has been
lost in education in the digital age, like does anyone
know how to write with a pen anymore? Toliver or
eight o'clock.
Speaker 1 (48:40):
Our number is eight four four four Middle. That's eight
four four four sixty four three three five three, or
you can reach out at Listen to the Middle dot com.
You can also sign up for our free weekly newsletter
and send us your ideas for future show topics.
Speaker 2 (48:50):
The Middle is brought to you by Longnok Media, distributed
by Illinois Public Media and or Bana Illinois. Produced by
Harrison Patino, Danny, Alexander Samburmastas, John barth Onikadessler, and Brandon Condris.
A technical director is Steve Mork. I'm Jeremy Hobson. I'll
talk to you next week.
Host
Jeremy Hobson
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.