(Haywood County) Residents did you know that your State constitutional rights are being violated by your State Legislators?
Article II Section 3 paragraph 3 States: No County shall be divided in the formation of a senate district.
Article II Section 5 Paragraph 3 States: No County shall be divided in the formation of a representative district.
Our (Haywood) County is split into two House Districts, and also two Senate Districts.
This alignment handicaps the whole county in terms of being able to influence the State Legislation.
This alignment handicaps all County political parties by causing them to split their resources for two house races and two senate races.
This alignment severely discriminates against the residents who live in the Maggie Valley, Bethel and Cruso communities.
These communities are in the district with Jackson, Swain, and Macon Counties. A truly excellent and qualified candidate from this part of the county would not have a chance to win, even in a primary.Every two years Rep Phil Hare comes by my business and shakes hands, gives out his business card and say vote for me. After that we never see or hear from him again. He has no ties to the these communities he will focus his Legislative agenda for bills that are most favorable for Jackson, Swain and Macon counties, because those are the counties where the majority of his votes will come from.
This has been allowed to happen because of our Federal Government. Specifically the US Department of Justice here is why.
Division of Counties Must Be Minimized:
Article II of the State Constitution says that in drawing State House and Senate districts, no county shall be divided. In 1981, the US Department of Justice said that requirement was inconsistent with the Voting Rights Act, so the General Assembly disregarded it for 21 years. Then in 2002 the State Supreme Court in the case of Stephenson v. Bartlett said the “Whole County Provision”, found in the State Constitution must be honored to the extent it can be honored, consistent with the Voting Rights Act and other State and federal precepts. The Stephenson decision for the first time said the equal protection clause of the State Constitution contained a presumption for single-member legislative districts, and that presumption should be a limitation on the Whole County Provision. The US Justice Department approved the Stephenson opinion and withdrew its 1981 objection to the Whole County Provision. The Court in Stephenson prescribed a step-by-step method for harmonizing the Whole County Provision with the other laws.
First, the General Assembly should draw the districts required by the Voting Rights Act.
Second, it should take all the counties with just the right population to be single-member districts and make them one-county single-member districts.
Third, it should take all the counties that have just the right populations for one or more districts and divide those counties into compact single-member districts.
Fourth, for the remaining counties it should group them into clusters of counties and divide the clusters into compact single-member districts, crossing county lines within the cluster as little as possible.Haywood County falls into the fourth step.
So to summarize, we as Haywood county residents give up some of our voting rights to ensure the voting rights of others in the state.
This is one issue that every single resident can unite around in a totally non-partisan way.
What can be done about this?
We can partition our County Commissioners to sue the state just like Pender County NC did.
Here is a summery of what took place.
The nation’s highest court upheld a 2007 state Supreme Court decision that found boundaries for a House district in Pender and New Hanover counties were illegal.
The decision means the General Assembly must change the House boundary map before the 2010 election cycle,
Redistricting experts say they expect the ruling likely will have a greater impact when the once-a-decade redrawing of boundaries for the House and Senate seats occurs in 2011, once data from the 2010 census is in.
The Legislature had to redraw district boundaries in 2001 and 2002, but a judge threw out the maps and ultimately create temporary boundaries for the 2002 elections. Another set of maps was approved by lawmakers in 2003 and has been used since the 2004 elections.
The justices’ split decision favored Pender County elected officials who originally sued in 2004 and determined a state isn’t required by the federal Voting Rights Act to draw electoral districts where black residents comprise less than half the voting-age population.
The court said such racial gerrymandering is required only if a district has a numerical majority of minority voters.
In the 18th House District, currently represented by Rep. Sandra Spaulding Hughes, D-New Hanover, the black voting-age population is 39 percent. The Legislature decided to split the district between Pender and New Hanover counties in 2003.
Lawyers for the current and former Pender County commissioners argued the split violated a provision of the North Carolina constitution discouraging district boundaries from crossing county lines and that all county residents should be placed in a single district.
The state Supreme Court agreed with county leaders in August 2007, saying the district was illegal because the constitution’s “whole county provision” could only be superseded if the district be comprised of a majority-black population. It ordered the Legislature to make changes before the 2010 election cycle.
