This article is Part 5 of a series. Information covered in the prior units is not included in this article. Go to our Florida Redistricting 2022 webpage to see all of the articles.
The ability to vote for our lawmakers is the cornerstone of our Democracy. Access to the ballot box has evolved over time and has, until recently, demonstrated progress toward equity. African slaves were freed in 1865 but were not awarded the right to vote until the passage of the 15 Amendment in 1870. At that time only men could vote but even when the 19th Amendment gave “women” the right to vote in 1920, Black women were not able to vote in many states. Despite the legal right to vote, insurmountable barriers were created, especially in the South, to keep Black people from voting. A landmark for minority voting rights was the 1965 passage of the Federal Voting Rights Act. This allows voters to file a lawsuit against a state or local government that has denied or limited their voting rights on the basis of race, color or membership in a language minority group.
We are now seeing Florida, and other states, pass laws eroding the progress we have made in increasing the ability of all eligible citizens to vote. In the 2021 legislative session, Florida passed a law that is expected to suppress voting and specifically reduces access to methods more likely to be used by people of color.
Over the last several decades in Florida, one party has become a consistent majority in the legislature and has been using its political clout to maintain and expand its dominance. An effective strategy for protecting a political party is through the redistricting process. Our state and congressional lawmakers are elected to represent designated areas of the state called districts. Using historical voting data, districts can be gerrymandered, that is, drawn to increase the likelihood of one party winning. In addition to political bias, districts can be drawn to reduce the impact of minority voters. Common gerrymandering tactics are “cracking”, which refers to dividing minority populations into more than one district to dilute their influence, and “packing” which means putting more minorities in a district than necessary to reduce the number of districts which they can influence.
In 2010 the League of Women Voters and other fair district advocates pushed for, and voters passed two constitutional amendments, one governing state legislative districts and the other for congressional districts. The amendments prohibit political gerrymandering and enshrine minority rights in the Florida constitution. The Florida Constitution says “…districts shall not be drawn with the intent or result of denying or abridging the equal opportunity of racial or language minorities to participate in the political process or to diminish their ability to elect representatives of their choice…”.
The Florida constitution clearly protects minority rights. However, redistricting is highly technical, so determining if district maps are constitutionally compliant is extremely complicated and can only be done by voting experts. Districts can be constructed that are “majority-minority” which means the minority group represents more than 50% of the voting aged residents. Districts can also be “minority-opportunity”, which means they can elect a candidate of their choice; for example, 44% of voting aged residents in a district may be Black, but 60% of the total vote in 2020 was for Biden.
The League of Women Voters of Florida has been testifying before the Senate and House redistricting committees to urge them to analyze their proposed maps to ensure minority rights. The League is insisting the committees conduct an analysis of the entire state using recent census data, which is important because Florida had more minority residents in 2020 than it did in 2010.
Assuring minority voting rights requires a two-step analysis. The first step is to determine the total number of minority opportunity districts needed. This is called a “racially polarized voting analysis” and is based on the size of the minority populations in the entire state. The second step, called a "functional analysis", is to determine how the minority opportunity districts will perform in an election – in other words to see if minority voters have the opportunity to elect a representative of their choice.
Although there are several senate maps circulating, they are similar and, in general, about 25% will be either majority-minority or minority opportunity districts. Five would be controlled by Black voters and five controlled by Hispanic voters.
In a recent statement, a Senate spokesman claims, “a functional analysis of the minority districts…confirms that they do not diminish the ability for racial and language minorities to elect candidates of their choice.” This response is consistent with their previous statement that the current maps maintain the minority opportunity districts established by the Florida Supreme Court in 2016. These current districts are based on 2010 census data and do not reflect our current population. A functional analysis by itself is inadequate to ensure protection of minority voting rights; an assessment of the number of minority districts that should exist must occur first.
All House maps (both congressional and state house proposals) have received statewide criticism as being gerrymandered and if not revised prior to passage are likely to be litigated. The House redistricting committees have not been forthcoming on policies used to draw the maps nor time frames and action plans. The maps, almost certainly, have not been subject to any assessment of minority voting rights. If they have, the committees have not released any data analysis used to support district decisions.
Diane Dimperio is the LWVAC Redistricting Contact. If you would like more information or to get involved, please reach out to info [at] lwv-alachua.org.
