57% Would Like To Replace The Entire Congress!

Lamarr

Star
Registered
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...2009/57_would_like_to_replace_entire_congress

If they could vote to keep or replace the entire Congress, just 25% of voters nationwide would keep the current batch of legislators.

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 57% would vote to replace the entire Congress and start all over again. Eighteen percent (18%) are not sure how they would vote.

Overall, these numbers are little changed since last October. When Congress was passing the unpopular $700-billion bailout plan in the heat of a presidential campaign and a seeming financial industry meltdown, 59% wanted to throw them all out. At that time, just 17% wanted to keep them.

There has been a bit of a partisan shift since last fall. With Democrats controlling both chambers of Congress, it's not surprising to find that the number of Democrats who would vote to keep the entire Congress has grown from 25% last fall to 43% today. In fact, a modest plurality of Democrats would now vote to keep the legislators. Last fall, a plurality of Democrats were ready to throw them all out.

While Democrats have become more supportive of the legislators, voters not affiliated with either major party have moved in the opposite direction. Today, 70% of those not affiliated with either major party would vote to replace all of the elected politicians in the House and Senate. That’s up from 62% last year.

Republicans, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly support replacing everyone in the Congress. Their views have not changed. But Republican voters are disenchanted with their team as much as the Congress itself: 69% of GOP Voters say Republicans in Congress are out of touch with the party base.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) now believe that members of Congress are overpaid. That’s up 10 percentage points from last October. Just five percent (5%) think their Congress member is paid too little. Thirty percent (30%) think the pay is about right.

One reason for this attitude may be that most voters say they understand the health care legislation better than Congress. Just 22% think the legislature has a good understanding of the issue. Three-out-of-four (74%) trust their own economic judgment more than Congress’.

Just 14% give Congress good or excellent review for their overall performance, while only 16% believe it’s Very Likely that Congress will address the most important problems facing our nation. Seventy-five percent (75%) say members of Congress are more interested in their own careers than they are in helping people. On the brighter side, just 37% say most in Congress have extramarital affairs.

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans believe that when members of Congress meet with regulators and other government officials, they do so to help their friends and hurt their political opponents. Most believe that’s why politicians are able to solicit contributions from business leaders. Most, however, say it’s generally a good investment because political donors get more than their money’s worth. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of American adults say political donors get more than their money back in terms of favors from members of Congress.

Despite these reviews, more than 90% of Congress routinely gets reelected every two years. It’s a shock when any incumbent loses. One explanation for this phenomenon frequently heard in Washington, D.C. is that “people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”

Voters have a different perspective, and 50% say 'rigged' election rules explain high reelection rate for Congress.

When the Constitution was written, the nation’s founders expected that there would be a 50% turnover in the House of Representatives every election cycle. That was the experience they witnessed in state legislatures at the time (and most of the state legislatures offered just one-year terms). For well over 100 years after the Constitution was adopted, the turnover averaged in the 50% range as expected.

In the 20th century, turnover began to decline. As power and prestige flowed to Washington during the New Deal era, fewer and fewer members of Congress wanted to leave. In 1968, congressional turnover fell to single digits for the first time ever, and it has remained very low ever since.
 
One reason for this attitude may be that most voters say they understand the health care legislation better than Congress. Just 22% think the legislature has a good understanding of the issue. Three-out-of-four (74%) trust their own economic judgment more than Congress’.

:lol: They're going to kill grandma! I tell ya, the money the health care insurance lobby can buy with pollsters. There was an election and Obama ran on changing the system. That is an accurate poll!

Isn’t that wonderful, we have a governmental system in place that if you are upset about the way your government is being run you can replace them. This is a testament to the phrase “We The People.” Contrast this with the extremely undemocratic system of corporate board/capitalist hierarchy. If you have a problem with say, the price of gasoline or need a life saving operation and a company jerks you around, your protests to remedy that grievance can get you arrested for trespassing on private property or arrested for defaming a corporation, as in the case of Oprah Winfrey being sued by several Texas cattle farmers for her show about the heath hazards of beef processing.

On the other hand, everybody is pissed off at congress but these same people are happy with their representative!
 
<font size="3">
<Center>

"Despite these reviews, more than 90% of Congress routinely gets
reelected
every two years. It’s a shock when any incumbent loses.
One explanation for this phenomenon frequently heard in Washington,
D.C. is that 'people hate Congress but love their own congressman.”

</font size>
</center>
 
Is it any wonder why the people hate congress?

art.joe.wilson.heckling.gi.jpg

source: Google News

Obama heckled by GOP during speech to Congress
(AP) – 1 day ago

WASHINGTON — The nastiness of August reached from the nation's town halls into the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday as President Barack Obama tried to move his health care plan forward.

South Carolina Republican Rep. Joe Wilson shouted "You lie!" after Obama had talked about illegal immigrants.

It wasn't the only interruption during Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress in the House of Representatives. Earlier, Republicans laughed when Obama acknowledged that there are still significant details to be worked out before a health overhaul can be passed.

Wilson's outburst caused Obama to pause briefly before he went on with his speech. Overhead in the visitors' gallery, first Lady Michelle Obama shook her head from side to side.
 
What is the mental illness that the other 43% are suffering from?

The numbers belie the truth. Apparently most of those who would replace Congress are either speaking of "Other Folks" congressman, and not "Their Own" congressman, or, they are non-voters, or some combination thereof. The number that say they would replace congress has been high for some time, yet, the number of actual replacements don't appear to be reflective of the sentiments of the former. :confused:
 
The numbers belie the truth. Apparently most of those who would replace Congress are either speaking of "Other Folks" congressman, and not "Their Own" congressman, or, they are non-voters, or some combination thereof. The number that say they would replace congress has been high for some time, yet, the number of actual replacements don't appear to be reflective of the sentiments of the former. :confused:

Sometimes it's really the lesser of 2 evils. I want Sherrod Brown (Ohio) gone but that means Josh Mandel may take his place. Some are stuck in the job and they know it unfortunately.

Sent from my Galaxy S3
 
Sometimes it's really the lesser of 2 evils. I want Sherrod Brown (Ohio) gone but that means Josh Mandel may take his place. Some are stuck in the job and they know it unfortunately.

Sent from my Galaxy S3

I agree, we're often faced with the "lessers". It also appears to me that many might-be "Good" people appear to avoid running for office, probably out of fear of being lambasted, ridiculed and defamed in a election process run-damn-near-amok.
 

Congress somewhere below cockroaches, traffic
jams, and Nickelback in Americans' esteem



January 08, 2013



Our newest national poll finds that Congress only has a 9% favorability rating with 85% of voters viewing it in a negative light. We've seen poll after poll after poll over the last year talking about how unpopular Congress is but really, what's the difference between an 11% or a 9% or a 7% favorability rating? So we decided to take a different approach and test Congress' popularity against 26 different things. And what we found is that Congress is less popular than cockroaches, traffic jams, and even Nickelback.

Here's what we found:

It's gross to have lice but at least they can be removed in a way that given the recent reelection rates members of Congress evidently can't: Lice 67 Congress 19

Brussel sprouts may have been disgusting as a kid, but evidently they're now a lot less disgusting than Congress: Brussel Sprouts 69 Congress 23

The NFL replacement refs may have screwed everything up, but voters think Congress is screwing everything up even worse: Replacement Refs 56 Congressmen 29 (the breakdown among Packers fans might be a little bit different).

Colonoscopies are not a terribly pleasant experience but at least they have some redeeming value that most voters aren't seeing in Congress: Colonoscopies 58 Congress 31

And you can make the same point about root canals: Root Canals 56 Congress 32

You might get a bad deal from a used car salesmen, but voters evidently think they're getting an even worse deal from Congress: Used Car Salesmen 57 Congress 32

Being stuck in traffic sucks, but voters are even less happy about being stuck with this Congress: Traffic Jams 56 Congress 34

America might have had to bail out France multiple times over the years but voters still have a more charitable opinion of it than Congress: France 46 Congress 37

Carnies may use loaded dice, but voters still think they have a better chance of winning with them than Congress: Carnies 39 Congress 31

It may be true that everyone hates Nickelback, but apparently everyone hates Congress even more: Nickelback 39 Congress 32

Genghis Khan did a lot of bad stuff but I guess it's faded from voters' minds in a way that Congress' recent misdeeds haven't: Genghis Khan 41 Congress 37

DC political pundits and Donald Trump aren't held in very high esteem by the population, but they still both manage to just barely edge Congress: DC political pundits 37 Congress 34 and Donald Trump 44 Congress 42

Cockroaches are a pretty good reason to call the exterminator but voters might be even more concerned if their homes were infested with members of Congress: Cockroaches 45 Congress 43​

Now the news isn't all bad for Congress:

By relatively close margins it beats out Lindsey Lohan (45/41), playground bullies (43/38), and telemarketers (45/35). And it posts wider margins over the Kardashians (49/36), John Edwards (45/29), lobbyists (48/30), Fidel Castro (54/32), Gonorrhea (53/28), Ebola (53/25), Communism (57/23), North Korea (61/26), and meth labs (60/21)​

But when you're less popular than cockroaches, Genghis Khan, traffic jams, and yes even Nickelback, well, it might be time to reevaluate.


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/...-jams-and-nickleback-in-americans-esteem.html


 
Budget:






revenues: $2.303 trillion

expenditures: $3.599 trillion

note:for the US, revenues exclude social contributions of approximately $1.0 trillion; expenditures exclude social benefits of approximately $2.3 trillion (2011 est.)
 
California Nonpartisan Districting Ousts Life Incumbents

California Nonpartisan Districting Ousts Life Incumbents
By Michael B. Marois - Mar 19, 2013 7:00 PM CT

In the 1980s, a joke that ran through California political circles was that more turnover occurred in the Soviet Union’s Politburo than in the state’s U.S. House delegation.

The laugh-line still worked well after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. From 2002 to 2010, the partisan re-election rate for California House seats was 99.6 percent. Only once in 265 House races in general elections during those years did a district’s representation flip parties, going from Republican to Democratic.

That stability ended last year after California (STOCA1) voters in 2010 gave a citizen’s panel the power to redraw the House districts. The impact, combined with a new primary system, was immediate. One out of four of the state’s 53 congressional incumbents departed through retirements or defeats in the 2012 primaries and elections.

“You’ve had voters shoehorned into districts for the sake of maintaining incumbency and we aren’t doing that in California anymore,” said Kim Alexander, founder and president of California Voter Foundation. “It was a big shakeout. That’s probably what would happen everywhere if you had fair redistricting.”

California, Arizona, Idaho, and Washington state have all given the authority to draw congressional boundaries to independent commissions, a model that good-government advocates say can blunt incumbent lawmakers from choosing which voters they represent.

Other States

Four other states are testing ways to remove partisan politics from redistricting, the once-a-decade process of redrawing congressional and state legislative district lines to reflect demographic changes documented in the census.
Redistricting is intended to ensure House members represent roughly equal size populations. Yet from the first Congress, party leaders began exploiting the map-making exercise by weakening the voting strength of some groups to gain partisan advantage, a practice known as gerrymandering.

PART 1: Republicans Foil What Majority Wants by Gerrymandering
PART 1 GRAPHIC: Michigan Map Wins Republicans More Seats With Fewer Votes
PART 2: Republicans Win Congress as Democrats Get Most Votes
PART 2 GRAPHIC: Redistricting Delivers North Carolina to Republicans

Republican state legislatures dominated the process in 2010, and the tension between a White House controlled by one party and a House run by another will be on display during the deficit reduction talks in coming months. Obama is advocating a combination of spending cuts and new revenues to curb debt. That position was favored by 67 percent of Americans in a CNN/Orc International poll conducted Nov. 16, two weeks after voters re- elected Obama. Republican House members last week unveiled a budget that would eliminate the deficit in 10 years by cutting $4.6 trillion and using no new tax revenue.

Presidential Predicament

Other presidents have faced political predicaments similar to Obama’s. Before him, five of the last six elected presidents -- Democrats and Republicans -- had a House controlled by the opposition party at some point during their tenure. President Jimmy Carter was the one who didn’t.

The California experimentation is significant because a change in the map-makers could lead to more competitive congressional districts, which in turn may produce a less polarized U.S. House. Representatives whose electorates are disproportionately Republican or Democratic are under less pressure to find middle ground on legislation or reach out to voters who are registered with the other party.

The change California made “should have the effect both on the left and the right of moderating elements of the delegation, whereas in the past they were all in safe seats, so Republicans were free to be pretty conservative and Democrats were free to be pretty liberal and there was never any consequences of that,” said Rob Stutzman, a Republican consultant who served as deputy communications director for Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

‘Real Solution’

Jocelyn Benson, interim dean of the Wayne State University Law School in Detroit and a Democratic voting rights advocate, agreed. “The only real solution” to decreasing congressional polarization is for states to create “an independent redistricting commission that has the power to not only draw the map but enact it as well,” Benson said.

Still, the challenges for advocates of revising the redistricting process are formidable because partisan state legislators are loath to surrender the power. In California, voters passed on six opportunities to approve an initiative to change the process before, on the seventh try, it was approved.

“It’s a hard sell. It’s one of those arcane issues,” said Alexander. “It’s one of those issues that only comes around once every 10 years and people can get very worked up about when it’s happening and then it’s easy to forget about it once it’s all over.”

Bipartisan Bargain

The consistent partisan outcome in California House races that lasted for decades wasn’t an accident.

In 2001, the state’s U.S. House delegation -- the Democrats and Republicans serving in Congress -- brokered an agreement to draw boundaries that would protect their existing partisan split, recalled Tom Davis, a former Virginia representative who led the National Republican Congressional Committee in the 2000 and 2002 elections.

Davis said he “jumped” at the chance to reach such a deal. “Democrats controlled everything” in the state legislature, he said. “And with Democrats drawing the lines, they could have drawn us down to 15 seats pretty quick.”

The split of 33 Democrats and 20 Republicans envisioned under the plan played out in the 2002 election and again in the 2004 vote. After Democrats won the one seat from Republicans in 2006 to alter the delegation’s makeup to 34-19, that breakdown was replicated in the 2008 and 2010 elections.

Commission Formed

In 2008, California voters formed their commission with the backing of Charles Munger Jr. the son of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A)’s vice chairman, and Schwarzenegger. Its initial charge was to draw state legislative districts. Voters in 2010 expanded its scope to include congressional districts.

In the 2012 election, the first held based on the commission-drawn map, Democrats won 38 seats while Republicans took 15.

The commission is made up of five Democrats, five Republicans and four independents. The members can’t be lawmakers, public officials, legislative aides or lobbyists.

When the commission completed its work, the congressional districts were more manageable in size and shape and emphasized cohesion on some matters, such as bunching urban or rural voters together. The map also created a few competitive seats, although a majority still carried a partisan advantage.

Presidential Performance

In the 2012 presidential race, President Barack Obama or Republican nominee Mitt Romney won by more than 10 percentage points in all but seven of California’s redrawn 53 House districts, according to data compiled by Bloomberg News. In three of the districts, a majority of voters supported the presidential candidate from the party opposite to the congressional candidate who won.

“There is no mandate whatsoever, and I think correctly, to draw districts that are politically more competitive and reverse, social-engineer districts to have a 50-50 split,” said Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.

Still, the commission stands as “the best example against the incumbent protection plan that was in place before and is still in place elsewhere because it’s driven by people who aren’t incumbents and don’t have incentives to pay back into the political system,” he said.

The new primary system in California, where the top two vote-getters advance to the general election regardless of party affiliation, resulted in nine of the state’s districts having candidates of the same party facing off in November. Seven of those races featured two Democrats.

Berman v. Sherman

The effect of the redrawn lines were no more obvious than in the ouster of Democratic Representative Howard Berman from Congress after 30 years of service. While Berman in 2001 helped draw himself and fellow Democratic Representative Brad Sherman safe seats in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley, the citizens’ panel carved out a new Latino-dominated district in the area and put both incumbents into a separate one. Sherman, who’s served in the House since 1997, defeated Berman in November.

“The most offensive gerrymander of the last decade has been the preservation of white, liberal seats around Los Angeles to the downside of Latino seats,” said Stutzman. “And the fact that you had Berman and Sherman drawn together is a great example of what should have been done a decade ago but was protected.”

The new seat was won by Representative Tony Cardenas, a Democrat who is the first Latino to represent the San Fernando Valley in the House.

Four other states -- Iowa, Maine, New York, and Rhode Island -- have advisory panels that help draw districts that later must be approved by state lawmakers.

Iowa uses an advisory board of state civil servants and a non-partisan commission to draft boundaries. Board members are barred from considering incumbents’ home addresses, voter registration data and election results in the map-making. Iowa lawmakers have never rejected the recommendations since the procedure was put in place in 1980.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...itical-districting-ousts-life-incumbents.html
 
source: Bloomberg Businessweek

Republicans Win Congress as Democrats Get Most Votes

In the 1780s, Patrick Henry tried to shape Virginia’s House district lines to block James Madison from serving in the first U.S. Congress.

The grudge between the two men: Henry opposed the U.S. Constitution freshly written primarily by Madison. The gambit failed and Madison won his seat.

More than two centuries later, the politics of redistricting still are shaping Congress.

A majority of Americans disapprove of the Republicans in Congress, yet the odds remain in the party’s favor that it will retain control of the House. One big reason the Republicans have this edge: their district boundaries are drawn so carefully that the only votes that often matter come from fellow Republicans.

The 2010 elections, in which Republicans won the House majority and gained more than 700 state legislative seats across the nation, gave the party the upper-hand in the process of redistricting, the once-a-decade redrawing of congressional seats. The advantage helped them design safer partisan districts and maintain their House majority in 2012 -- even as they lost the presidential race by about 5 million votes. Also nationwide, Democratic House candidates combined to win about 1.4 million more votes than Republicans, according to data compiled by Bloomberg News.

“The Republican-created maps in most states set up a sort of seawall,” said Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. “As the decade goes on, people do shift party allegiances and move in and out of town, and so the effects erode a little bit, but it’s still a seawall and it’s still keeping some of the flood of 2010 in,” Levitt said.

Thwarting Obama

The election results mean House Republicans will have the power to block or demand amendments to President Barack Obama’s agenda.

That tension will be on display during the deficit reduction talks in coming months as Obama advocates a combination of spending cuts and new revenues. That position was favored by 67 percent of Americans in a CNN/Orc International poll conducted Nov. 16, two weeks after voters re-elected Obama. Republican House members last week unveiled a budget that would eliminate the deficit in 10 years by cutting $4.6 trillion and using no new tax revenue.

It’s a predicament presidents previously have faced. Before Obama, five of the last six elected presidents --Democrats and Republicans -- had a House controlled by the opposition party at some point during their tenure. President Jimmy Carter was the one who didn’t.

Rare Outcome

Still, it’s rare for one party to win more House seats while securing fewer votes than the other party. The last time it happened before 2012 was in 1996, when Democrats won the nationwide House vote by 43.6 million to 43.4 million as Republicans held their majority and Bill Clinton was re-elected president, according to the U.S. House Clerk’s office.

Redistricting is intended to ensure House members represent roughly equal size populations. Yet from the first Congress, party leaders began exploiting the map-making exercise by weakening the voting strength of some groups to gain partisan advantage, a practice known as gerrymandering.

Democrats aren’t immune from engaging in the political bloodsport of redistricting. With control of the process in Illinois, Democratic lawmakers from Obama’s home state approved a map on Memorial Day weekend in 2011 that led to the defeat of five Republicans in the 2012 elections.

State Legislatures

In most cases, state legislatures are charged with overseeing the redistricting process, which is done to reflect demographic shifts recorded in the census. The 435 U.S. House districts boundaries are adjusted based on population migration during the past decade.

Republican-controlled statehouses dominated redistricting that occurred after 2010 through a combination of planning and good fortune.

The party began preparing two years in advance of the 2010 elections by concentrating on candidate recruitment and fundraising. The Republican State Leadership Committee, which focuses on state legislative races, called its effort the Redistricting Majority Project, or REDMAP.

In the 2010 campaign, the Republican Governors Association outspent the Democratic Governors Association, $132 million to $65 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group that tracks campaign giving. The Republican State Leadership Committee outspent the Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, $21 million to $5 million.

Wave Election

Democrats also faced a political environment that had swung sharply Republican, partly due to a wave of public discontent over passage of Obama’s health-care law.

The same Republican surge that helped the party net more than 60 seats in the U.S. House -- the biggest gains by any party in 62 years -- swept in governors and state legislators.

“2010 was a really difficult year for there to be a Republican wave election,” said Michael Sargeant, the DLCC’s executive director.

The spending and timing paid off for the Republicans, as they won control of 57 legislative chambers, up from 36 before the 2010 elections, and increased their governorships to 29 from 23, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. In the wake of the 2012 elections, Republicans control 56 state legislative chambers and 30 governorships.

Impact Election

“You can spend hundreds of millions of dollars fighting over a couple dozen congressional districts over 10 years, or you can spend significantly less and impact the shape of those congressional elections over 10 years via state legislative elections,” said Chris Jankowski, the president of the Washington-based RSLC, referring to the Republican strategy heading into the 2010 vote. “It was a cost-effective analysis that truly bore out in reality.”

Once in office, technology made it easier for line-drawers to consolidate and further their partisan goals.

Map-making software is cheaper, more powerful and widely available, compared to a decade ago. State lawmakers can build databases with detailed voter registration figures, election results and population data to project campaign outcomes and demographic trends.

It may also be easier to predict voter preferences. Party- line voting is increasing: fewer than 30 districts backed the presidential candidate of one party and a House candidate of the opposite party in 2012, the lowest total in at least 90 years, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Map-Makers Gold

“If you’re a map-maker drawing lines, that’s just gold for you, because you can very reliably use partisan voting patterns in one election to predict what it might be in another, or much more so than you could before,” said Rob Richie, the executive director of FairVote, a Takoma Park, Maryland-based nonprofit that wants to change the redistricting process to reduce partisanship in Washington.

The 2012 results show how Republicans gerrymandered congressional lines to produce favorable outcomes even in states that lean Democratic.

In Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania, the clustering of Democrats in metropolitan areas made it easy for Republican line-drawers to pack them into a few districts while giving their own party more modest -- yet consistent -- advantages in the remaining ones.

North Carolina

In Pennsylvania, where Democratic votes are concentrated in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, Republicans won 13 of 18 House seats while losing the statewide congressional vote, 2.8 million to 2.7 million. In North Carolina, Republicans drew three districts to be overwhelmingly Democratic and won nine of the other ten, even as House Democratic candidates won the statewide vote, 2.2 million to 2.1 million.

While drawing federal districts to their advantage, Republicans also created favorable state House maps to make it harder for Democrats to wrest control of the redistricting process in 2020. In Michigan, Republican candidates won most of the 110 state House seats despite winning 350,000 fewer votes than Democrats, said Sargeant.

“Clearly, the Republican gerrymander had a lot to do with it,” he said.

Politics and redistricting have been intertwined since the nation’s earliest days, as shown by the Henry-Madison feud outlined in a 2010 report by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.

‘Gerrymandering’ Origins

The practice of drawing party-friendly districts was given its common nickname -- gerrymandering -- in 1812. That’s when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a bill that redrew state senate districts unfavorable to his rivals, the Federalists. The shape of one district was said to resemble a salamander.

One of the most notable partisan battles over redistricting occurred in Texas in 2003, when Tom DeLay, then the U.S. House majority leader, engineered a rare mid-decade remap that so angered Democratic state legislators that most of them fled to Ardmore, Oklahoma, and Albuquerque, New Mexico, to prevent a quorum needed to pass the plan.

The House ethics committee admonished DeLay for his role in using the Federal Aviation Administration to obtain information on the whereabouts of absent Texas legislators. The rebuke one month before the 2004 election didn’t stop Republicans from gaining five House seats in Texas, offsetting a two-seat loss outside of the state and helping the party hold its chamber majority.

Democratic Gains

The U.S. Supreme Court invalidated part of the Texas map in 2006 and a federal court redrew it before that year’s midterm elections. Democrats then won two Texas seats from Republicans - - including the one DeLay had resigned from in mid-2006 -- and 30 nationwide to take control of the House.

While redistricting usually is a once-per-decade exercise, the Texas fight shows that brawls can surface at unexpected times.

In January, Republicans in the evenly divided Virginia Senate shoved through a new map on a party-line vote when a Democrat was absent to attend Obama’s inauguration. The map was blocked by the Republican House speaker on a procedural point.

“Virginia pointed out once again that the players who are involved in the process will try to game the system however they can, be they Republicans or Democrats,” said Kim Brace, the president of Election Data Services Inc., a political consulting firm in Manassas, Virginia.
 
Back
Top