Roy Barnes cranks it up — and drops a few hints
Roy Barnes’ web site for his 2010 Democratic run for governor cranked up on Friday afternoon.
Below is the YouTube invitation Barnes has posted, inviting volunteers to sign up. It drops broad hints of the direction the former governor intends to take:
Says Barnes:
“A few of my neighbors and friends are helping me to organize a campaign to take Georgia back from the special interests. We don’t have telephones, we don’t even have a campaign office. But we do have the confidence and enthusiasm that we can make a difference.”
In other words, Barnes thinks it’s still too early to make himself a formal target. While the former governor hadn’t raised any money as of June 30, my AJC colleague James Salzer found about $15,500 in deferred expenses that Barnes has listed for Roy 2010.
Those entries include $2,045 for the travel expenses of media consultant Raymond Strothers, who advised Barnes during his 2002 campaign.
Then there’s this line from the YouTube video:
“We don’t care if you’re a Democrat, Republican, or independent. If you want to build a future for your children and grandchildren, explore our web site and volunteer….”
Translation: While GOP candidates for governor direct their attention to the rightward base, Barnes intends to go after not just swing voters, but Republicans disaffected by the party’s inner turmoil.
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
62 comments Add your comment
CJKatl
July 11th, 2009
3:52 pm
Planned blase and calculated folksy remind people why they got rid of this guy in the first place. Although all reports were his wife’s lack of sophistication, to put it nicely, wasn’t an act.
If Barnes wants us to believe he’s being dragged into this race by people who are begging for him to be Governor again, he should not be the one saying it nor paying for the message. Paying for a consultant while trying to make it appear you are so cool you are not campaigning – hence reporting no money raised – reminds me of when my parents would try to use slang with my friends. It’s cringe-worthy.
Thanks for the good laugh, Roy. I’m thinking you are going to make this campaign season one big hoot for all of us who know you have no chance of winning, but know that you don’t know that. We are going to be laughing at you making a fool of yourself, trying to remind people of what you think of as glory days that most of us disliked so much we booted you out of office.
Old hippie
July 11th, 2009
4:05 pm
Hey Jim, got a link to that website? I couldn’t find one anywhere in your post.
John
July 11th, 2009
4:35 pm
Anybody who underestimates Roy Barnes is a political idiot. Also, if you are satisfied with the way things are have been going in Georgia the past 6 or 7 years then you there is no hope for you. Whether you like Roy or not, he is the best chance to get our state back on the right track.
jt
July 11th, 2009
4:36 pm
As if bottom-feeding lawyers is NOT a special interest group.
Lester Maddox
July 11th, 2009
5:28 pm
Georgians en masse sent this boob packing in 2002. He will not be returned to the Governor’s Mansion. Surely the state Democrat Party can find an electable candidate that is not a shyster.
Lucas
July 11th, 2009
5:52 pm
Seriously – why do poor people vote Republican?
CJKatl
July 11th, 2009
6:15 pm
Yeah, John, that’s real logical. Barnes was a terrible governor, but since you think the next guy was worse it makes sense to go back to Barnes. We might deserve better than what we have now, but we also deserve better that Barnes.
Under your logic, if a woman has a a husband who beats her, leaves him for a husband who cheats on her, she should return to the beater. I’m saying move on from both of them. You act like Barnes is the only other choice. Rubbish.
If your only reason to support Barnes is that the present regime is bad, then you really have no reason to support Barnes, do you? You could support Papa Smurf, Mick Jaggar or Tanya Harding under that same reasoning.
The man and his cohorts tried to steal our government from us. The Supreme Court wrote an opinion that made this very clear, but the AJC, in its Barnes love fest, has failed to ever explain or report this to the people of the State. Until and unless someone explains why the man who tried to steal what he thought was his kingdom should ever be given the keys to the castle again, he should stay put and quiet in the loser pile we put him in eight years ago!
ModerateVoter
July 11th, 2009
6:20 pm
Think it would be more wise for Roy to run for a US Senate Seat in Ga. Must need the Governors salary to pay for his new mansion in Marietta. Looks like a Ga Democrat US Senator is a better place for him.
Jenny Craig
July 11th, 2009
6:21 pm
After looking at his website and the Pic of him. I suggest he join my amazing weight loss program and drop about 50 lbs. Than he should contact my good Doctor down in Costa Rica and get a discounted face lift. While he is in Costa Rica with the face Doc, he should follow up with his associate doctor [ Dr Doom Heart] and take out more life insurance since his wife is going to need it if he does do the impossible and get elected since Georgia and the Nation will in be chaos with the hyper-inflation to come.
CJKatl
July 11th, 2009
6:27 pm
It doesn’t matter what anyone on this board thinks, as the polls make it clear that Barnes doesn’t stand a chance of being Gov again.
The most recent poll showed that fewer than half the Dems want Barnes to be their candidate. (48%). Assuming an even split between the parties in this state, that translates to less than a quarter of the people wanting him back.
The other candidates lack name recognition. As they introduce themselves to the State, people will form opinions and those candidate have room to increase their now low numbers.
Barnes, on the other hand, served a term as governor, which means everyone knows him and has formed an opinion. Like Clinton in the most recent Dem primary, his numbers have nowhere to go but down, as it’s unlikely voters will change their opinion on his past performance based on any calculated campaign statements he may now make.
Barnes is toast before he even manipulated his not-too-early entrance into the race. Good for the State! Bad for Barnes’ bruised ego, which apparently has a hard time believing that the people of our State really didn’t like what he had to offer.
I admire that he finally got the flag changed, but that symbol doesn’t change the fact he was arrogant, tried to steal our State government, and accomplished next to nothing in office.
Larry Orange
July 11th, 2009
6:48 pm
Like the current adminstration hasnt tried to steal State goverment. At least Barnes did put his business interests in a trust when he was governor and also he did not vote himself and himself only a 100,000 tax cut from land deals. The current adminstration also thinks the governor’s exemption from property taxes was not working and has decided to raise your property taxes by a large amount. Lets see, who backed and signed that exemption from property taxes into effect. Oh yeah, it was former Gov. Barnes.
Republicrat
July 11th, 2009
7:04 pm
Roy will only seek to further enrich his college roomate Bob Matthews with road $.
Politico
July 11th, 2009
7:20 pm
If Georgia elects another incompetent, corrupt, do-nothing Republican like the one in office today, it deserves to become another Mississippi. It’s well on its way already. Barnes had a workable plan to fix transportation in Atlanta. Perdue scrapped it and nearly eight years later still has no plan of his own. Sonny got a free pass for the disaster than is natural gas deregulation. All he can propose is more funding for fishing. Barnes, who is a leader, not a fisherman, deserves another chance.
Base
July 11th, 2009
7:22 pm
What a choice we have! There is nobody to vote for but crooks.
Voter in the Know
July 11th, 2009
8:09 pm
Roy’s problem as governor was that his agenda was just too aggressive. He at least has a clue about how to get something done. This current group of egomaniacs that are in control of our state has done nothing to help Georgians. I’m a conservative and the thought of anyone in state office in Georgia that is associated with the likes of Obama and Palosi is repulsive. But so far, Barnes is the best choice for Georgia’s future.
Bloated, Irresponsible Government
July 11th, 2009
8:16 pm
Not only did he alienate most of the state by changing the state flag, FauntleRoy Barnes pissed off the school teachers, and had grits and sweet tea named as official state food and beverage. Georgia can do much better than this arrogant, obnoxious, bloated shyster
J.R. Ewing
July 11th, 2009
8:33 pm
Any slimy two-bit lawyer named Barnes is not worthy to live in the governor’s mansion.
The Snark
July 11th, 2009
8:56 pm
It would be nice to have a Governor who might actually stand up to Georgia Power.
The Alpha Male
July 11th, 2009
8:59 pm
Barnes is a sham. He ran as conservative Democrat in the 90’s and once elected, turned into a pawn of the DNC and the Atlanta liberal elite. Not just my opinion…. this was told me by one of his former constituents in the Georgia Legislature.
usoo
July 11th, 2009
9:05 pm
CJKatl….are you related to WillJones, a frequent poster on this blog?? Sounds like you also may need some psychiatric counselling.
J. Edgar Hoover
July 11th, 2009
9:08 pm
Roy, you had your chance but you screwed over the teachers, and they rose up and b-tch slapped you. They still haven’t forgotten you, and you still haven’t apologized to them. Get C. W. Matthews to donate some money to your “campaign” so that you Rascals from Mableton can buy some phones. Calling you a Rascal will probably buy you some votes in Georgia. You used the teachers in 2002, and they tarred and feathered you. They will do it again in 2010 if you do not apologize. You are stubborn, Roy Barnes. You had your chance. Apologize or lose once again. It is that simple.
Red Skelton
July 11th, 2009
9:35 pm
Nearly all of Georgia’s governors graduated from UGA (ot its predecessor, Franklin College). Jimmy Carter graduated from the Naval Academy (and was associated in some capacity with Georgia Tech). Lester Maddox graduated, I think, from Atlanta’s Tech High. Roy Barnes comes across as a Techie himself. I am a UGA grad, and, quite frankly, it bothers me that I have to go against a fellow Bulldog, but Barnes just acts like he is a Humble Bumble. Throw it to the hypotenuse! Does he carry a straigh ruler in his shirt pocket? He is a technocrat! We need a Bulldogcrat on West Paces Ferry. Was C. W. Matthews really Barnes’s roommate at UGA? Hmm. No wonder he’s grabbed many State contracts! Wow. Roy, Roy, He’s so coy. Roy, Roy, He’s like Augusta’s Roy [Harris]…or, Zack D. Cravey. Or, perhaps Marvin Griffin. Or, is that Griffith? Zack Geer? Man, my memory ain’t what it used to be. Roy should be up in the ante rooms at the ole Grady Hotel (where Peachtree Plaza now stands) cutting deals with upstarts like the late Thomas B. Murphy. His day has passed. He apparently wants to come across like a Michael Dukakis or Paul Tsongas. This doesn’t work in Georgia, but neither does the John Stennis or Eugene Talmadge (another namesake…Roy Eugene Barnes) approach. Roy, just sit back, drink some good Bourbon, smoke your fine cigars, and sit in the sky booth at UGA games and regale in old stories of the by-gone days. This miracle comeback, I don’t think, will work. But, it might, and this, I suppose, is why I am blogging. Personally, I like you…as do the other brothers in the Society. But, we’re sorta helping Brother Baker in this Obama Era. You and Dubois are getting in the way. But, I must admit that ole Zell fooled us all…and that without the help of the Society. That darn rascal was and is hard-headed as h_ll and so proud like you. So, if Zell did it, so can you, but Zell was smart enough to do it with the full support of the educators. He knew that they voted better than any group.
Clandestine Brother
July 11th, 2009
9:40 pm
Heah, heah, Red! Heah, heah!
Sentimental Georgian
July 11th, 2009
10:01 pm
I pray to God that Roy Barnes is elected Governor of Georgia again. What we’ve been putting up with these past years under Perdue and the Perdue Henchmen is abominable. Georgia deserves the chance to move forward through the 21st Century with intelligent leadership, and that would be ROY.
CJKatl
July 11th, 2009
10:05 pm
Larry Orange – The present administration may not be the best, but they have NOT tried to steal the government from the citizens. The Barnes administration tried to manipulate our votes by creating multi-member districts in attempt to doctor the outcome of state legislative elections. That’s a fact. There has been no similar court action against the present administration. There’s a huge difference between your opinion, stated with no factual basis, and court decisions which clearly show Roy was trying to make himself King.
Whether you like Barnes or not, it should scare you that as Governor, he felt this was acceptable. No matter your stands on any other issues, I would think you would be very afraid of anyone become Governor and then trying to manipulate the system to override the will of the people to instead get a result that he and his cohorts wanted. It’s also very sad that so much of our money was wasted defending this scheme, although all the money in the world couldn’t convince any Court that this was an illegal power grab.
Right now, that’s what people in Iran are protesting against. They feel their votes were not counted and that the ruling party just did what they wanted. Why people are not disturbed that Roy Barnes tried to do the same thing in GA is beyond me. Why they give him a pass does not make sense. It’s not okay when Fidel Castro does it, but when the Supreme Court agrees that Roy Barnes and his cohorts did it here, people think they should reelect him.
Here is a link that contains articles about Barnes’ scheme and how it cost the State over $2.3 million to defend what was ultimately overturned. Just think of what could have been done with that money had it not been used to defend the indefensible. http://www.fairvote.org/redistricting/reports/remanual/ganews.htm#supremecourt. Fair Vote is a non-partisan group and the link takes you to newspaper articles that were written during the time. Some (AJC) are biased in one direction, others (Macon Telegraph) slip towards the other side, but overall they paint a clear picture that what Barnes did was very wrong.
Real Journalist
July 11th, 2009
10:20 pm
Well, the big laugh is Jim Galloway. He never made the big time and one can tell why simply by reading his column. Imagine someone who calls himself a journalist attacking a man’s wife. Of course Mr. Galloway is no gentleman. That is obvious. But anyone with any intellect will take this blog out of their “favorites” column. This man is an intellectual midget and an insult to real journalism.
oldtimer
July 11th, 2009
11:57 pm
No support from this old voter!
logical
July 11th, 2009
11:57 pm
CJKatl- You realize that what you are describing is a simple process known as gerrymandering don’t you? Don’t act like Democrats are the only ones who have ever participated in this practice. Republicans participate in the politics as well. They just haven’t been in control when a Census has been released. Don’t present a one-sided slanted argument.
oldtimer
July 11th, 2009
11:58 pm
And look at other states…ga power looks great!! TVA is another matter.
Teacher who votes
July 12th, 2009
12:16 am
I remember how Roy took Fair Dismissal away from teachers. And, we voted in a way that let him know we meant business. His wife was a teacher and she was ashamed of him too. I was there when Roy blasted teachers; his wife sat on the stage and we saw her tears. Retired teachers always vote and so do active teachers.
Jeffrey Meeks
July 12th, 2009
1:47 am
O’Please, Roy.You,have a office,phones,anda elevator in your mansion in Cobb.
I<AM NOT SUPPORTING OR VOTING FOR that fat jerk
Vince
July 12th, 2009
3:07 am
OK, Red…Mr. Barnes graduated from UGA law and also went to my alma mater as an undergrad (hint: he’s one of the last to not first graduate as an undergraduate before going to law school)…hence, NOT a Tech grad. J – you say that he “screwed over the teachers”; however, what Mr. Barnes wanted was teacher accountability at all levels throughout the state – something that is a MAJOR part of a little federal law called “No Child Left Behind” (pushed through by Mr. Bush) was passed a few years ago. CJK – keep sucking on that crack pipe – Roy Barnes is NOT Ellis Arnall under ANY circumstamces.
Marcus Graham
July 12th, 2009
3:35 am
I like Roy and would vote for him if I were still in GA. However, the weight gain looks terrible and possible opponents may use that as a liabilitiy (i.e. health issue) when running against him. He does need to lose 30-50lbs if her is going to run. Usually campaigining makes one gain additional weight because of the schedule, dinners, luncheons and the like. Not that SP is exactly the picture of health/fitness either!
Larry Orange
July 12th, 2009
7:36 am
CJKatl-It is a fact that Perdue does not have his business in a blind trust. It is a fact that his some-time personal lawyer, Larry O’Neal,(R-Warner Robins), introduced the bill that Perdue his tax cut in 2004. It is a fact that this adminstration just signed into law a bill repealing the governor’s exemption that will make your property taxes in this state go up. Gerrymandering, as you described, has been going on for deceades in every state in the union.
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
8:10 am
logical – I understand gerrymandering, and to the victor goes the spoils. What I’m talking about was the use of multi-member districts to supress the vote. The courts found this was not acceptable gerrymandering. The courts found it to be an illegal scheme.
Gerrymandering is carving things up to your advantage. The multi-member districts were used because gerrymandering wouldn’t provide any way for the Dems to win. Had they carved up GA, the Reps would have had more districts, so they put some of those Rep districts in with a couple Dem districts and decided those few districts would elect three, rather than each. What they tried to do was supress the vote. There was not a single court that thought the scheme was legal, but we, the citizens of GA, spent $2.3 million defending this.
Please do not defend this as business as usual when every single court determined it was NOT some benign political process. Courts RARELY overturn gerrymandering and usually it’s for race issues. This, I do believe, is the ONLY time in my lifetime the court determined someone was trying to just make the will of the people go away by violating one-man, one-vote.
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
8:34 am
Harvard Law Review mentions the case in a March 06 article on gerrymandering, but explains the GA situation was “designed to favor parties that probably had lost majority status in their respective states” so the case was not relevant to a discussion on gerrymandering. Given the choice of relying on the conclusion of two posters on this board who back Barnes, or the Harvard Law Review, I’ll take my intellectual cues from the latter. (Harvad Law Review says it’s not gerrymandering, Orange Larry and logical say it is…. Hmm, I’d feel foolish labeling this as business-as-usual gerrymandering.)
If people could seperate what was done in GA from which party gained from what was done, everyone would be angry about this. Too bad some people look at this as a way for their side to win so they are willing to overlook the damage that would have been done to the process had, after spending over $2 million defending this, the District, Appeals and/or Supreme Court not stepped in and stopped the power grab.
While I do not think the present administration has done anything to deserve having it remain under new leadership (since Perdue cannot run again), I cannot help but feel going back to the previous regime would be wrong because of what was done. It’s time for something new.
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
8:45 am
One more try…when gerrymandering wouldn’t give the results they wanted, the Dems in power went one more step and combined three of the gerrymandered districts into one, turning two Dem and one Rep leaning area into a single district that elected three people. This changed it into a Dem leaning district that would presumedly elect three Dems.
It wasn’t the gerrymandering that was the problem, it was taking away the will of the people through the multi-member districts.
Had they created multi-member districts everywhere, it might have been acceptable. It was the picking and choosing – always tucking one Rep leaning district into a district with two Dem leaning districts – that violated the law. The fact they thought this was acceptable is scary. Why would you want that back in office?
No court every agreed that this was legal. Again, it wasn’t the gerrymandering, it was the next step after the gerrymandering couldn’t give them what they wanted. How can anyone think of that as business as usual or acceptable.
My guess is if the Reps were the ones that did this, the very people defending it right now would be screaming at the top of their lungs. Those of us who respect the process don’t care which party did it. We’re offended that it was done and don’t want those people back in office, whether we agree with them on other issues or not!
BTW, the SC Justice who wrote the descending opinion on this – saying the scheme was okay – was SCALIA! His objections were on technical grounds – how it would impact previous decisions – but he was the only Justice who thought this scheme might be acceptable. (Nobody joined him.)
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
8:50 am
Marcus – love how you don’t address what Barnes did, rather you try to imply I must be on drugs. Attacking the messenger while not addressing what was stated pretty much lets the world know you don’t have any rational argument so, like a child in a school yard, you must attack the person.
Not one person can explain to me why the Barnes scheme was acceptable, why it was okay for our state to spend so much money defending the scheme or why the AJC to this day has still not reported once on this subject without painting it as an evil GOP plot, despite the original plaintiffs’ winning at every turn.
I’ll take that as a sign that there is no way to defend it.
usoo
July 12th, 2009
1:54 pm
CJKatl…you obviously are terrified of Roy Barnes being Governor again. What’s your real reason for showing up here on this blog? Who do you work for? Please disclose this to us. Inquiring minds want to know.
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
3:22 pm
usoo – how can you not be terrified that this man, who tried to steal our state government once, but was stopped by the courts, wants to be in power again? It scares the cr*p out of me that there are people who vote in this state who don’t seem to care about what happened. It’s terrifying that the single most important feature of our government – the right for the people’s votes to be heard – was essentially taken away for a couple years until the courts stepped in and corrected it and that one of the men responsible is being treated as a credible candidate again.
There should be outrage. Bernie Madoff stole money and there is more outrage than someone who illegally – yes, that’s what it’s called when the court overturns is because it wasn’t legal – tried to steal our state government.
The bigger question is how can you not be outraged? Why do you think he should be back in office? So he can try to do this again?
For the record, I work for a Fortune 500 company that I’ve been with for years. I have graduate/post-graduate degrees from one of the (arguably) three best universities in the State. (If you ask people to name the Top 3 universities in GA, I’m very sure this one would always be in the list,) More specific than that? Ain’t gonna happen, as my views have nothing to do with my work or my company. I am in no way affiliated with either party, any candidate nor any special interest group. I’ve voted Rep and Dem over the past few years, depending on who was best for a specific position at any given time. I voted for King Roy the first time. To this day I think Guy Milner would have been a disaster. I voted for Purdue both times, but if the Dems had run a candidate last time I might have considered voting Dem. (Taylor was someone Daddy put in politics to keep out of the family business. He was a joke: not a candidate.) I truly am an Independent.
My reason for being so outspoken is it scares me that Barnes might get in office again. It disappoints me that because the story was a little hard to explain, the AJC chose to mostly ignore it and minimize it as a partisan battle when they did bother to write something. Rhonda Cook never understood the issue and was too partisan Dem to want to dig deeper. She saw the world in Dem-vs-Rep certainties and couldn’t fathom that her beloved Party was on the wrong end of the lawsuit. I still have the emails where she said the District Court decision didn’t matter because it was being appealed and after the SC agreed stating she thought everyone was entitled to their opinion and what the SC ruled was their opinion! So much for the AJC reporter recognizing the law of the land.
Since the AJC is incapable of reporting this story and it needs to get out, I post. That’s my motiviation. What happened made me ill. It’s the type of thing that happens in Iran and Cuba. It happened here in GA and the biggest newspaper in the State chose to ignore it! I was in a multi-member district (DeKalb) and couldn’t help but feel my vote didn’t matter because it had been taken away.
If people don’t like Perdue’s Reps, they have every right to vote those people out of office. If the Dems don’t nominate Barnes I very well may vote for their candidate this year. What Barnes did was try to take that right away. He didn’t steal while in government, he tried to hijack the government. The Courts found this repeatedly, the newspaper assigned a reporter who didn’t or couldn’t report the story and it’s left me wanting to be sure people know what happened before they let that man anywhere near the Gov Mansion again.
logical
July 12th, 2009
3:29 pm
It’s a gerrymandering to a different degree. I consider gerrymandering any type of changing of the districts by a majority, so it somewhat does fall under that definitition. My question really is: what do you find so wrong about multi-member districts? Enlighten us. Multi-member districts allow for more equal representation of a populace. It defeats tyranny of the majority. It works in Great Britain and every parliamentary system around the world. Multi-member systems really prevent this type of “vote not counting” mentality that you are discussing. The US Constitution says that the State may determine its own representation. I find that
scrier
July 12th, 2009
3:32 pm
Both parties gerrymander. Think where Barnes and his folks got trapped is they were so good at it that it amounted to complete and utter disenfranchisement of the majority will. My opinion is that Barnes and his people saw that if you looked at the state as a whole the Democrats lose power in the state legislature – so Barnes gave the Republicans certain districts (albeit a minority number of districts) but pushed all the Republican voters into those districts whether it made sense or not. This effectively disenfranchised certain Republican voters who could have affected other districts but for how Barnes drew the districts. The end result was the Democarats keep a majority in the state legislature even though more of the population was Republican than Democrat. Pretty brilliant until the courts stepped – gerrymandering and politics is one thing but to completely nullify the effect of the votes of many folks is another. From a purely policy point of view (transportation, getting rid of lousy teachers, changing the state flag) I generally like Barnes. But the strong arm tactics are a major turn off
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
3:35 pm
BTW, I don’t think Barnes would have won the first time if the Reps had run a better candidate. The only government thing Milner had ever done was run for office. If the Reps had nominated a proven public servant who didn’t pander to the Christian Right, they probably would have won that election. Guy Milner, with his short public resume and bad campaign song, scared off just enough people who probably did want to vote against the Dems. The state had shifted Rep by then and Zell was already running things more like a Rep than a Dem at that point. Barnes was lucky that the Reps picked the wrong candidate.
I was one of those people who didn’t think Milner, a businessman used to getting his way, was the best person to put in a position that requries not only vision, but compromise. Plus, he came across more as wanting to be Governor than wanting to govern the State. The Senate thing didn’t work, so he looked for the next big title that he could run for.
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
3:47 pm
Like the Supreme Court and the Harvard Law Journal, I find the multi-member districts violate the one-man, one-vote principle that I thought our country holds dear. Rather than letting the people vote and their will be heard, it suppresses enough of one party to let the other party perpetuate itself in power. Like the Supreme Court and the Harvard (and Syracuse) Law Journals, I recongnize this was not gerrymandering, this was voter manipulation.
Doesn’t the fact the Courts, at every level, overturned this tell you it wasn’t gerrymandering as usual?
Suppose a state is 60% Dem and 40% Rep and we are electing ten representatives, and there were six Dem leaning and four Rep leaning districts. Districts A, B, C, D, E, and F are Dem leaning, while districts W, X, Y and Z are Rep leaning. If an election were held, we would likely have a 6-4 split, favoring the Dems.
Now, further suppose the Reps are currently in power. To hold onto power, they create 2 mulit-member districts. What used to be district A is now part of District A-W-X. What used to be district B is now part of District B-Y-Z. Each of these districts will elect three reps, all of whom will likely be Reps. The delegation is now likely to be a 4-6 split favoring the Reps. By using the mulit-member districts, the ruling party was able to supress the will of the people and manipulate it so they remained in office. That’s what the courts determined. It doesn’t matter which party is in office and does this, it’s wrong.
Under this scheme, a Party that represents the will of just over 1/3% of the people could keep themselves in office, no matter how the people go out and vote. Even if the Party loses the election 33%-66%, they could still stack the deck to call themselves a winner. What’s it called when a party manipulates things to stay in office despite the vote? It ain’t called Democracy, that’s for sure!
If multi-member districts were used across the state, the impact wouldn’t be the same. It’s when the districts are used to get rid of the opposition’s voice that it’s wrong, scary and illegal.
If Perdue did this right now, you Barnes supporters would be screaming bloody murder. Sorry, but I find the underlying principle so scary that I don’t care which side is doing it. Those people have got to be put somewhere that they cannot have power again!
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
3:51 pm
Scrier, if Barnes had done what you thought he did – packed all the Reps into districts together – I wouldn’t have a problem. Unfortunately for him and his cohorts, they could not win that way. It was the next step, the selective use of multi-member districts – that crossed the line. That’s what was illegal. That’s what the Supreme Court overturned. That’s what leaves this bitter taste in my mouth.
I’m not sure why people have such a hard time dealing with what Barnes did and recognizing how scary it really is. Those are the facts – he tried to steal the government for his party through use of multi-member districts and every court, up to the US Supreme Court – found it to be an illegal scheme. The people of GA spent $2.3 million defending Barnes’ “right” to supress our vote. There was nothing defensible in what was done.
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
3:56 pm
logical – interesting that you quote the constitution. That’s the document the Supreme Court said that Barnes’ and his cohorts violated. That’s what “unconstitutional” means. The multi-member districts were deemed “unconstitutional.” How silly to argue that the consitution allows what the Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional. Do you see how that doesn’t make sense?
I’ll take the Supreme Court’s interpretation that this violated the constitution over your saying the scheme was okay! If you think you know better than the nine justices, well, then you just go on believing that.
CJKatl
July 12th, 2009
4:04 pm
BTW, I know all parties gerrymander, but I’d love it if we adopted the Nebraska/Unicameral system, which take politics out of gerrymandering. Rather than having districts that elect the McKinneys and Barrs of the world (I like Bob out of office, but found him too partisan in office to be effective.) we would likely elect more centrists who would need to appeal a broader electorate.
usoo
July 12th, 2009
5:30 pm
So now you’ve said your piece, CJKatl. Please spare us any more of your drivel.
logical
July 12th, 2009
5:43 pm
Article 1 Section 5
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.
~~~
Now I am unaware of any Congressional mandate that single-member districts be used, so it looks to me extremely Constitutional. And the fact that you trust the views of the Supreme Court, the Harvard Law Review, and other “Intellectuals” without question is very troubling. The Supreme Court is wrong extremely often (Plessy v Ferguson anyone???). They are not perfect. Don’t quote them as such.
Sentimental Georgian
July 12th, 2009
7:52 pm
Please! CJKatl! Mooooove on!