Redistricting: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

Our main story tonight concerns voting.It's the number one way to get a free pen from a woman born in 1904.Voting's also the subject of this bonkers early 90s PSA.

Art is not produced in a vacuum.Beauty cannot be regulated by the state.Music is a reflection of our culture.Today, our own government is trying to tell you what you should and shouldn't put in your tape deck.But there is a way out of the vacuum.Get to the polls on November 6th and exercise your right.

It's your turn to speak.Your vote is your voice.

What?Putting aside the fact that seems to have been directed by a depressed Danish teenager, that is maybe the most early 90s thing I've ever seen.You've got SJP and Robert Downey Jr., who, fun fact, were a couple for seven years, and you've got the sullen mention of a tape deck, which is basically like an iPod, but from the Civil War.Definitely not sure you could get more 90s unless they both threw on Gretzky jerseys and invaded Iraqi -occupied Kuwait.Specifically, this story concerns the fact that while midterm elections are still four months away, some of the biggest decisions that may decide the results have actually already taken place.And that is thanks to a redistricting fight that's been raging all over the country.

REPORTER 2, REPUBLICANS IN TEXAS CURRENTLY HOLD 25 OF THE STATE'S 38 CONGRESSIONAL SEATS.THE NEW MAP... ups the total they could win to 30.California voters have approved Proposition 50, redrawing congressional districts in a way that could cost Republicans five seats next year.

The Missouri Senate has passed a Trump -backed congressional map intended to help Republicans add an additional U .

S.House seat.The Louisiana State House has advanced an updated congressional map that is expected to remove at least one Democrat -leaning district.

That's right, tonight, we're gonna be talking about congressional maps.Really solidifying this is..only comedy show on TV you feel like you should have studied more for.But look, that is what you get when you tune in to Yes, Unfortunately, This Will Be On The Test with Austin Downers.The point is, for the past year, Republicans and Democrats have been at war over congressional maps, with governors, state lawmakers, and especially the Supreme Court playing key roles.In fact, it's been predicted that thanks to this latest batch of redistricting alone, Republicans could gain between three to 12 more seats in Congress than they'd otherwise have done, which is significant, because remember, the last election gave them just a five -seat majority.

And given so many of these fights center on breaking up majority black districts, People in them are understandably furious.

Chaos at the Tennessee Capitol in Nashville Thursday as Democratic lawmakers and protesters tried to stop legislation breaking up the state's only Democratic House seat.Yelling, holding signs, calling the move Jim Crow 2 .0, even burning a printout of the Confederate flag.

Yeah, burning a printout of a Confederate flag is a pretty powerful response there.It effectively communicates two things.One, we won't stand for rights being stripped away.And two, I'm mad enough to put up with some pretty weird looks from a Staples employee when we printed this out.And if you've been seeing scenes like that and wondering how we got to this point, tonight, we thought we'd try and explain the current redistricting battle.Specifically, how damaging they could be and what could be done going forward.

And let's start with the fact that redistricting in and of itself is not a bad thing.Populations aren't static and district lines should account for that.But the thing is, exactly how and where you draw them matters a lot.Because as we've discussed before, you can put a heavy thumb on the scale of who gets elected.

Imagine a hypothetical state with a population of 25 people.10 belong to one party, 15 belong to the other.Now let's say they get to send five representatives to Congress.Draw the lines horizontally, you get proportional representation.Two reps for the gray party and three from the white.But draw the district lines vertically and the gray party would get none because the white party would have a majority in every district.

Exactly.Depending on how you draw the lines, you can give yourself a major advantage.And while I do appreciate the diagram there, there is simply no need to imagine a hypothetical state with 25 people that is just Wyoming.You are talking about Wyoming.That practice of manipulating maps to get the outcome that you want is known as gerrymandering, and it's been a problem in the U .S.

for centuries.And you should know, most of the world doesn't let its politicians do that, and for very good reason, as this professor explains.

Every fall, I speak to five or six members of the British Parliament that come over to shadow members of Congress.And one of the things I have to explain to them is, here's how you get elected to the House.I have, you know, I see these shocked looks on these British faces.And one time, one stood up and said, well, that's terrible.That's not the voters choosing their representatives.That's the representatives choosing their voters.

Hey!Hey!It's OK for me to do that voice.It is not OK for you to do it.Also, as an American, I do think you'd have been well within your rights to say to those British politicians, you know what?I don't want to hear shit about how maps should be drawn from anyone from Great Britain, which, by the way, is, I'm pretty sure, a direct Gandhi quote.

The point is...In many states, the way we draw districts is deeply flawed.And even before the past year, the Supreme Court have managed to make it even worse.For instance, it used to be that redistricting was only done once a decade after the census.But in 2006, the court ruled that states can do it as many times as they want.

Then in 2013, they effectively tossed out a requirement that areas with a history of discrimination get preclearance before redrawing maps.In 2019, they ruled that federal courts couldn't stop states from drawing lines on a partisan basis.So, if, in the helpful framing of that clip from earlier, the white party wanted to draw lines in a way that would take seats away from the non -white party...And there was no state law preventing it.The only thing stopping them would be their own sense of shame.All of which leads us back to last summer, when one of the most shameless presidents in U .

S.history made a pretty bold request of Texas to redraw their maps.And he was not shy about why he was asking.

I'm Texas.How many more seats do you want the Republicans to draw?I think we'll get five.and there could be some other states.We're going to get another three or four or five in addition.Texas would be the biggest one, and that'll be five.

No, no, just a very simple redrawing.We pick up five seats.

Yeah, that's pretty direct.He ordered five more Republican seats from Governor Greg Abbott, and as a result, in August, Abbott signed a new congressional map into law designed to do exactly that.So basically, Trump demanded more seats, and he got them.Which I know sounds like the answer to the question, why is Jeffrey Epstein's plane so full, but it's also true here.And in the wake of Texas's redistricting, Democratic leaders, for once, actually hit back hard.In fact, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced a ballot measure to implement new maps that'd give Democrats up to five more seats, essentially offsetting what Texas had done.

Here he is making his pitch.It's not good enough to just hold hands, have a candlelight vigil, and talk about the way the world should be.

We have got to recognize the cards that have been dealt.

And we have got to meet fire with fire.He's right, and now, unfortunately, I find myself in the unpleasant position of having to admit that Gavin Newsom is right about something, because, to be clear, I'm not a huge fan of that man, for many reasons, from his general Andrew Cuomo, but California vibes, to the...to the fact he vetoed a bill to limit solitary confinement to his responding to book bans by posting this photo of himself reading page .5 of Beloved.With the caption, reading some banned books to figure out what these states are so afraid of.Featuring the most orchestrated by a publicist stack of books I have ever seen.Oh, make sure 1984 is peeking out from under To Kill a Mockingbird, but not too much.

That wouldn't seem organic.Oh, and this is very important, please make sure that genderqueer is barely visible.And look, Well, I don't love the logic of Texas disenfranchised a bunch of Democratic voters, so in response, we're gonna disenfranchise a bunch of California Republicans.I do also get that the only real alternative was to whine about fairness and then lose.And apparently, a lot of Californians agreed because Newsom's proposition passed easily.But the thing is, by the time that happened, more red states had already entered the fray.

Missouri passed new congressional district boundaries in September, likely giving Republicans one more seat.And North Carolina did the same in October.So in response, Democrats in Virginia put a referendum to voters there that would allow them to do a particularly aggressive gerrymander that would potentially give them ten seats to Republicans one.

To make the map more blue, Democrats would carve up deep blue Fairfax County.Where I'm standing would be the intersection of three congressional districts, so that the apartment buildings over here would be in one congressional district, those over there would be in a second, and then right over here, these folks would be in a third congressional district.If you drove just a short distance away, you'd find a fourth congressional district, and then a fifth.

That's led to a new Republican catchphrase, Don't Fairfax Me, popping up.Countering that, Texas started it.Bumper stickers.

Now, I mean, that is obviously very petty, but also, as a slogan, Don't Fairfax Me is just nonsense.Is it the worst one I've ever heard?No, because that would be Domino's new slogan.you can't say Domino's without saying, mm.Although, I will point out, you also can't say Domino's without saying no, which feels much more relevant to me.Now, the good news for Democrats is Virginia's referendum passed in April, and at that point, they basically fought Republicans to a draw, with Hucking Jeffries even promising maximum warfare if Republicans continue to redistrict.

Unfortunately, soon after, everything fell apart.Because not only did Virginia State Supreme Court wind up invalidating that referendum on technicalities, just a week earlier, the Supreme Court had handed Republicans this massive gift.

The Supreme Court escalating an intense back -and -forth battle for control of Congress with a landmark ruling that's already affecting some elections.The court's conservative majority ruling 6 -3 that Louisiana's current congressional map with two majority African -American districts is unconstitutional.Democrats blasting the ruling, arguing it weakens a key provision of the Voting Rights Act aimed at prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, adding that other majority black black districts are now vulnerable to being erased.

Yeah, from the six justices who brought you such banger decisions as, the president is untouchable, your uteruses are legal property, and oops, all smog, came a brand new decision on voting rights.Very basically, under the Voting Rights Act, minority voters could previously challenge a map if it diluted minority representation in their state, regardless of whether that was the intention.It was to comply with that law that Louisiana drew a map that contained two majority black congressional districts.In that Supreme Court case, a group of 12 self -described non -African -American voters claimed that their personal dignity had been injured by the map, which they said racially stigmatized, stereotyped, and maligned them.And while I do appreciate them specifying that they were non -African -American, honey, that was already clear.This map hurt my feelings, and now I want to talk to your manager?

More than covered it.The court sided with them with Alito writing that going forward, anyone challenging a map could only prevail if they had strong evidence the state intentionally drew its districts to afford minority voters less opportunity because of their race.Basically, unless state lawmakers were shouting out slurs while drawing the lines, they were gonna be in the clear.And by issuing that ruling, the court immediately set off a new lightning round of gerrymandering, because even though Louisiana had already received more than 40 ,000 absentee ballots for its congressional primaries, their governor quickly declared a state of emergency and suspended the election so that new maps could be drawn.And unsurprisingly, those maps then eliminated one of Louisiana's two majority black districts.So right now, only one of the state's six districts is majority black, despite the fact its population is about one -third black.

Now, understandably, many voters there were upset about this, but when Louisiana's governor was asked about that, he seemed personally offended.

I think a lot of African -American voters in this state might say they need that protection when it comes to the ballot box.

I mean, we go back to Martin Luther King, right?Judge a person based upon the content of their character rather than the color of their skin.Wow, that is powerful stuff, Landry.

You know, that actually reminds me of another Martin Luther King quote when he said, hey, can white people please learn more than two of my fucking quotes?But for the record, history shows that without majority black districts, black candidates in Louisiana have basically no chance of getting elected.In fact, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama have never elected a black representative outside a majority black district, and no black candidate has been elected to statewide office in Louisiana since Reconstruction.And to her credit...Landry's interviewer actually pressed him on that point.

Black voters in Louisiana have told me that they feel like it's true, someone who looks like you, who has not lived their experience, does not address their concerns as well as someone who has lived their experience.

Well, how is it that a little country boy who grew up in a town that was primarily black, not live through those experiences.

But I do think a lot of folks might say those experiences are not necessarily the same.

Well, you're saying I should not judge a person just because the person is black.And I agree with that.But isn't it the opposite that I shouldn't be judged just because I'm white or Hispanic or Indian?I mean, here we are after all of the different cases, after all of the rectification of the sins of the past, which certainly no one has denied.And yet we're still trying to find some sliver of discrimination in race.

I think a lot of people would say you don't have to try to find it, it's there.

I would say that it would reside in people's hearts, not in their laws.Okay.

That man is clearly a historic idiot, but I will agree with him on one point.He shouldn't be judged just because he is white.He should be judged because one, he just had to have the concept of racism explained to him on TV.Two, he's for some reason dressed like 30 Rock's Leap Day William.And three, he sounds like Elmer Fudd if he exclusively went to schools named after Robert E. Lee.But Louisiana was not alone in moving fast after that Supreme Court ruling.

Tennessee also quickly approved a new map that slices Memphis, a majority black city, into three extremely long districts that drag into rural areas.And while doing so, Tennessee Republicans insisted that they were acting for purely partisan reasons, which, remember, the Supreme Court has said is okay, and that they were completely honest.that in doing so, they were screwing over black voters.And while I've shown you this clip before, it is worth seeing again just how flagrantly dumb they were willing to pretend to be.

To the sponsor, are you aware that Memphis is predominantly African -American?

Senator Stevens to respond.Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I am not.

Senator Lamar.Thank you, Mr. Speaker.So to my sponsor, who went to law school at the University of Memphis and lived there for three years, you're telling me you're not aware that Memphis is predominantly African -American.Am I correct?

Senator Lamar, he's answered that.Next question, please.

Next question, please?Oh, I've got a question for you.Are you fucking kidding me?Because you know that guy's answer was bad.When it got a laugh so big, it sounded like that debate was being filmed in front of a live studio audience.Meanwhile, Alabama also called a special session to force a series of votes on its maps at both the state and congressional levels.

As you will hear this state senator point out, it forced one of those votes through, even as the building was being evacuated for a tornado warning.

Now, you know what?This don't even make sense.We should have gone into a recess and then waited until after the weather to take this vote.But they want to do this so bad.That's ridiculous.That is ridiculous.

It's true.They forced the votes during an evacuation, which isn't just disrespectful to Alabama voters and those who fought for civil rights.Somehow, it even manages to be disrespectful to the tornado, doing its very best to extend from the base of a cumulonimbus cloud and form a rapidly rotating column of air.And state legislators are just like,ignoring that to implement racist voting maps.Have some fucking respect!

And in case that wasn't a potent enough summary of things, when the Supreme Court gave Alabama final clearance to use a congressional map that had previously been found to be racially discriminatory, the state's AG released this celebratory video.

My job in this office was to put the legislature in the best possible legal position to draw a congressional map that favors Republicans 7 to 0.My office has never taken the charge of our state model lightly.We dare defend our rights.Stay tuned.

Wow!What a smile that is!He looks like Mr. Rogers if he made a famous episode in favor of segregation instead of against it.But despite what he just said there, implementing racially discriminatory maps is not actually an A .G.'s job at all.It's like if you went to a Build -A -Bear workshop and one of the employees said, my job in this store is to baptize every stuffed animal so that they may enter the kingdom of heaven.

No, it is very much not that.You just wanted to do it.And to be honest, I'd like my platypus to go to hell, thank you very much.But incredibly, I'm still not done, because Florida also passed a new map which could add three to four Republican seats.Now, plans for that had technically been in the works before the Supreme Court decision, but Ron DeSantis seemed extra confident afterwards, and I'm gonna warn you, you are not ready for the choice he makes midway through this clip.

Sometimes you got people in D .C.and New York, uh, who may not like, and they may say different stuff.And we've got this guy, Hakeem Jeffries okay, and you know he goes out there, and he's like We're gonna do maximum warfare against Republicans, Florida RepublicansUF around, you gonna find out all this stuff.

Holy shit!I never thought I'd see blackface without the makeup, but it seems there's a first time for everything.I don't have a ton to say about that really, except, A, fuck you!And B, maybe someone showed that clip to Governor Lollipop here the next time he describes racism as something you need to try and find.And when you take this whole redistricting back and forth together, it will, as I said earlier, probably give Republicans up to 12 seats in the House, which doesn't mean they'll automatically win the House in November.but it makes the margin for Democrats meaningfully smaller.

Also, everything you've seen so far only addresses what was able to be done before the midterms, but it won't end there.In the coming years, Republicans in the southern states could ultimately eliminate majority minority districts altogether, taking America back to the Jim Crow era, when there were no black representatives in southern states with sizable black populations.And there'll likely be major impacts on other levels of government too, from city councils, to school boards, to state legislatures.And for those who fought so hard for their voting rights, watching them get stripped away this fast is brutal.Because it is worth remembering, the progress that's currently being undone happened in living memory for many.In fact, just listen to this man outside the Florida State House in April, as they were passing their new map.

Being 79, I come from a Jim Crow era.where blacks were second -class, it will not happen again.I feel bad about it.Not for me, because I have a short time being here.For my grandchildren, my great -grands, I do not want them tothrough what I experienced.

Yeah, and if that doesn't make the point here, I really don't know what does.So what do we do?Well, Democrats aren't completely out of options.After November, more states under Democratic control could pursue partisan gerrymanders to try and offset the damage, from New York to Maryland to Illinois, where one House Democrat has said there's a nuclear option of a 17 to 0 map, meaning no Republican districts at all.And while initially, The idea of total warfare here is undeniably satisfying.It is worth remembering there are more red states that could jump in and respond too, and you may not like how that fight ends.

Look, the long -term goal here should probably be to find a way to try and unfuck every state's maps.And if Democrats are able to get back into power, there are ways to get to that point.For instance, Congress could pass a new version of the John Lewis Act, which would, among other things, modernize and revitalize the Voting Rights Act and ban partisan gerrymandering.The House actually passed it in 2022, but it couldn't get past a Senate filibuster.But the hard truth here is, we may need to think bigger than that.Because a new voting rights law isn't going to mean much if the Supreme Court just steps in to undo it.

That is why we also need significant Supreme Court reform.There's actually a House bill that would be a start there, providing each president equal opportunities to appoint justices by establishing staggered 18 -year term limits for the court.And who knows?Maybe that could bring about the change that this magnificent home, this beautiful, beautiful motor home could not.Look, the current situation is clearly untenable, which is why all options should be on the table to get us to a system where, ideally, If I may quote someone using what turned out to be by far the least offensive accent you have heard tonight.The voters choose their representatives, not the representative choosing their bloody voters.