Protecting VRA interests v. protecting incumbents
Allow me to address the question of incumbency, open seats and Hispanic representation, posed to Maria del Carmen Gutierrez, representing CASA, by both Chairman Nordenberg and by Leader Benninghoff at the Morning Session of the January 7 Hearing at 59.19 (Nordenberg) and 1:00.59 (Benninghoff). I address it in two ways. First, the general answer is the twin concepts of a) balancing trade-offs and b) of priority of values. Each boundary drawn on your maps involves trade-offs. And the trade-offs made should answer the question, Which trade-off best reflects the identity, values and interests of the people affected? Senate District 14 should not be drawn with the primary intent to protect Senator Pat Browne (despite Senator Ward’s protestations to the contrary), but rather to keep the Allentown community of interest intact (including its substantial Hispanic population). If it provides and open-contest opportunity, all the better. Inner city Philadelphia House districts should reflect their burgeoning Hispanic community in order to amplify their political voice and empower them to enrich decision-making in Harrisburg with their perspective. Leader Benninghoff, the reason to keep Hispanic citizens together in current House district 22 in Allentown or inside proposed districts 127 and 180 in Philadelphia is not to protect incumbents in those districts. Rather, the priority is to reflect the people – Hispanic citizens – as well as to undo previous gerrymandering and, not least, to comply with spirit and letter of the Voting Rights Act. Those are the priorities. The fact that doing this in 22, 127 and 180 would have the parallel effect of (supposedly) protecting the current Latino incumbents representing those districts is secondary, incidental, and lower priority. Please don’t conflate the two principles. Don’t confuse protecting VRA groups with protecting incumbents. Please stop trying to justify politicians (and caucus leaders) picking the voters, instead of the reverse! Leader Benninghoff, my second response to your questioning of Maria del Carmen Gutierrez is stylistic and rhetorical. First of all, I believe that you should have addressed her as “Ms. Gutierrez,” not “Maria.” (I won’t get into an argument about patriarchalism here!) Alternatively, you could have addressed her as “Doña Maria,” roughly equivalent to Dame Maria, which in Latin cultures is even more respectful. (Think of “Queen Elizabeth” rather than “Mrs. Windsor.”) Further, here is what I think you should have said to her, if I may be so bold: “Doña Maria, you are amazing! You and your community have fled endemic rank corruption, lawlessness, and extreme political violence to come to our ‘shining city on a hill.’ We are honored, and we welcome you with open arms. You will invigorate our culture, not only with restaurants, as you mentioned, but with music, art, traditions, ebullient spirit, and industry. You are amazing – that in such a short time you have learned about the machinery of redistricting, in some cases better than many native-born citizens! You are amazing in having assembled your grassroots movement -- CASA and likeminded allies – and have produced your brilliant Unity Maps, mastering the true democratic process to do so. And lastly, you are amazing, Doña Maria, for your eloquent and articulate testimony in this public spotlight using your adopted language. You inspire us all, and you remind us why we are doing this, and why Pennsylvania is so much the richer for your being here! It will be our honor to get the maps to speak more effectively for your community! ¡Felicitaciones y muchísimas gracias!”