Fighting Fair District's rule shameful
By Barbara Brenner
Created 06/10/2011 - 12:38am
Editor: If Gov. Rick Scott and his Republican cohorts in the Legislature had done only the dirty business of cutting the budget on the backs of the poor, the sick, and the state workers it would have been shameful enough. But it gets worse. Now they've decided to use state money, at least $20 million of it according to reliable sources, to fight against the Fair Districts Law which we voters passed by more than a 60 percent majority last November and which is now part of the Florida Constitution.
In other words, this Republican Legislature not only doesn't care what we need or want, they don't even care what we vote for. They want to continue twisting the map so they control the votes and the power and the patronage. And so they're going to court, with, that's right -- our own taxpayer money -- to fight us. It's beyond shameful. It's an insult to the voters, to the taxpayers and to our democracy.
St. Augustine
http://staugustine.com/opinions/2011-06-09/letter-fighting-fair-districts-rule-shameful
This is a great shame that has been perpetrated by both parties through the years. This is the worst example because we just voted for it.
Did you just say... That it is shamful and insulting to go to court to get what you want??
Come on BT this is shameful just like when Corrine Brown threatened to take this to court. They know we don't want districts drawn up for the purpose of making sure certain people are elected as opposed to representing cohesive areas. Going to court doesn't make it noble or shameful. The purpose here is what is shameful.
And yes taking us to court with our own tax money is poring salt in the wounds.
I am sure to hear... "There goes BT again..." BUT... this is a common and accepted practice amongst democrats everywhere. Don't like the law... bring a lawsuit... don't like the election... sue. Cant get a law passed... find a judge who will rule the way you want.
COME ON! ::) ( can we get a bigger rolleyes? :))
I'm not even saying I agree with what Scott and company are doing. But whatever it is... going to court to get it is certainly is not shameful... nor insulting... unless of course the unending laundry list of frivolous suits by Dems is also shameful and insulting. Then we could agree. :)
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 10, 2011, 01:35:33 PM
I'm not even saying I agree with what Scott and company are doing. But whatever it is... going to court to get it is certainly is not shameful... nor insulting... unless of course the unending laundry list of frivolous suits by Dems is also shameful and insulting. Then we could agree. :)
So why don't we just agree that both are shameful and insulting (as is just about everything that any politician in any party ever does)? Then we can move on to the real fight, which isn't Dems versus Repubs, but rather representative who serve the people versus representatives who serve themselves.
Quote from: stephendare on June 10, 2011, 01:46:02 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 10, 2011, 01:35:33 PM
I am sure to hear... "There goes BT again..." BUT... this is a common and accepted practice amongst democrats everywhere. Don't like the law... bring a lawsuit... don't like the election... sue. Cant get a law passed... find a judge who will rule the way you want.
COME ON! ::) ( can we get a bigger rolleyes? :))
I'm not even saying I agree with what Scott and company are doing. But whatever it is... going to court to get it is certainly is not shameful... nor insulting... unless of course the unending laundry list of frivolous suits by Dems is also shameful and insulting. Then we could agree. :)
I think this is a pretty poisonous non productive way to deal with things, bridge troll and it usually just ends in nothing getting done.
The answer to everything simply cannot be "Well, so and so did it too!".
Its just a way to avoid ever doing anything about anything.
Im sure that you arent for that.
I tend to agree with you Stephen... I submit less of that would happen if one side was not calling the methods of the other side shameful and insulting when they consider their very own use of the same tactics as honorable and noble.
I suppose it matters which side of the mirror you are on huh...
Quote from: PeeJayEss on June 10, 2011, 01:49:54 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 10, 2011, 01:35:33 PM
I'm not even saying I agree with what Scott and company are doing. But whatever it is... going to court to get it is certainly is not shameful... nor insulting... unless of course the unending laundry list of frivolous suits by Dems is also shameful and insulting. Then we could agree. :)
So why don't we just agree that both are shameful and insulting (as is just about everything that any politician in any party ever does)? Then we can move on to the real fight, which isn't Dems versus Repubs, but rather representative who serve the people versus representatives who serve themselves.
I like THAT idea PJS!
You must be refering to the tactic of "demonizing your opposition" method of debate... Lessee... who oh who is the master of this?
Quote from: stephendare on June 10, 2011, 02:15:30 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 10, 2011, 02:07:24 PM
You must be refering to the tactic of "demonizing your opposition" method of debate... Lessee... who oh who is the master of this?
So you are still deflecting by pointing out that someone else did it as well?
Well OK. Doesnt sound like you agree with PeeJayEss at all.
I... agree with PJS... you however seem to have a problem with it.
Quote from: stephendare on June 10, 2011, 02:20:13 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 10, 2011, 02:18:39 PM
Quote from: stephendare on June 10, 2011, 02:15:30 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 10, 2011, 02:07:24 PM
You must be refering to the tactic of "demonizing your opposition" method of debate... Lessee... who oh who is the master of this?
So you are still deflecting by pointing out that someone else did it as well?
Well OK. Doesnt sound like you agree with PeeJayEss at all.
I... agree with PJS... you however seem to have a problem with it.
Well apparently your Right hand has no idea what your moderate hand is agreeing to. Thats all Im sayin.
We actually get along with each other quite well. Communication is the key.
This is tantamount to attempted election fixing. It is shameful to do this by any party with the courts or any other method.
I don't see how Faye's original post spins it as only shameful because Mr. Scott is going to court. It is because of what he is trying to do and get us to pay for.
Quote from: PeeJayEss on June 10, 2011, 01:49:54 PM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 10, 2011, 01:35:33 PM
I'm not even saying I agree with what Scott and company are doing. But whatever it is... going to court to get it is certainly is not shameful... nor insulting... unless of course the unending laundry list of frivolous suits by Dems is also shameful and insulting. Then we could agree. :)
So why don't we just agree that both are shameful and insulting (as is just about everything that any politician in any party ever does)? Then we can move on to the real fight, which isn't Dems versus Repubs, but rather representative who serve the people versus representatives who serve themselves.
There's a representative who serves the people instead of his/herself? Which one is it? ;D
The people speak in an overwhelming referendum and the politicians try to stop what the people have voted for. Yes, that's shameful.
If the Republican party was paying the legal fees it would merely be partisan.
Quote from: Dog Walker on June 13, 2011, 05:14:40 PM
The people speak in an overwhelming referendum and the politicians try to stop what the people have voted for. Yes, that's shameful.
If the Republican party was paying the legal fees it would merely be partisan.
So... the state should not get a court ruling on a referendum? What if the folks passed a referendum banning or encouraging something you deemed questionable. My guess is you would not oppose going to court to have it overturned. I understand you disagree with the republicans position... and I am not sure I agree with it. I do know states and individuals have been going to court over referendum results for a long time.
When this passed it was a huge defeat for the Repubs and The Chamber of Commerce. About the only one they have suffered in Florida in a long time.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 14, 2011, 07:04:03 AM
Quote from: Dog Walker on June 13, 2011, 05:14:40 PM
The people speak in an overwhelming referendum and the politicians try to stop what the people have voted for. Yes, that's shameful.
If the Republican party was paying the legal fees it would merely be partisan.
So... the state should not get a court ruling on a referendum? What if the folks passed a referendum banning or encouraging something you deemed questionable. My guess is you would not oppose going to court to have it overturned. I understand you disagree with the republicans position... and I am not sure I agree with it. I do know states and individuals have been going to court over referendum results for a long time.
No problem with someone going to court over the legality of a referendum. The problem is that it is being done by elected officials who are supposed to be the representatives of the people not their opponents and especially not using taxpayer money to oppose the clearly stated will of the same taxpayers.
If you or the Republican Party or the Chamber of Commerce want to take the referendum to court, fine, but don't use my money to try to subvert my clearly expressed will.
06/24/2011
Sentinel's Scott Maxwell on Redistricting: The secrets, lies and shenanigans
Great column today from Scott Maxwell.
Feeling overwhelmed by all this talk of redistricting?
Well, the topic may sound complex, even boring. But you have a lot at stake.
That's why I've produced: "Lies, secrets and shenanigans: The top 10 ways redistricting affects your money, your votes and your life in general."
Yeah, I know it's a long title. But there's a lot of stuff going on. So let's get started.
•Right now, the system's rigged. Instead of voters choosing their politicians, the politicians choose their voters. The pols predetermine which districts should be Republican and which should be Democratic â€" and then carve out snake-like districts to suit their fancy, often splitting communities in two. This unites politicians from opposing sides because they have the same self-centered goals of protecting themselves and their buddies.
•This is why your "representative" can live 100 miles away. That's how it works for both U.S. Reps. Corrine Brown and John Mica. The Democrat Brown lives in Jacksonville â€" yet represents parts of Orlando. And the Republican Mica must drive more than 100 miles from his Winter Park home to get to his congressional office in St. Augustine. Neither wants too many members of the opposing party in their districts. So you end up with two districts that make political sense … and geographic nonsense.
•This system leads to extremism. When a district is drawn specifically to elect a Democrat or a Republican, there's little reason for moderate candidates to run. The race usually gets decided in the primary. That's good for the party extremists â€" not so much for the moderate majority.
•You and I are trying to fix things. More than 3 million of us voted to end gerrymandering last year when we supported the Fair Districts amendments to the constitution. More than 60 percent of voters demanded that future districts be drawn based upon compact, geographical sense rather than party affiliation. It was a very good day for democracy.
•Corrine Brown and Dean Cannon hope that good day never dawns. Brown and a Republican Congressman from South Florida â€" both beneficiaries of gerrymandered districts â€" sued to try to overturn your Fair Districts vote. Then, in a galling act, House Speaker Dean Cannon decided the state Legislature should join the lawsuit â€" and spend your money trying to overturn your vote.
•This is still America, right? Think about that last part for a moment: If a Cuban dictator or some other third-world leader spent the public's money trying to overturn its own vote, Americans would be appalled. Here in Florida, though, it passes for business as usual. Cannon's office reported paying lawyers up to $300 an hour to fight your will. And they've set aside as much as $30 million for all the legal issues they expect to come along with the once-a-decade redistricting process.
•Many opponents of Fair Districts are big fat liars. Anyone who claims the entire Fair Districts movement is about hurting Republicans is lying. Good-government groups and the media have been calling for fair districts for decades â€" way back to the days when Democrats ran the state and played the same dirty tricks. In 1993, this very newspaper called for change after describing the Democrats' own version of gerrymandering as "a spectacle of self-serving politicians protecting their turf…" Just because many of the politicians are hypocritical hacks doesn't mean everyone is.
•Your state districts will change, too. Most of the hubbub involves congressional districts, because they look the loopiest and are the only part of the Fair Districts vote being challenged in court. But the Legislature must redraw state House and Senate districts as well.
•Watch out for timing tricks. Legislators have planned a listening tour to get comments from residents. That's good. But they have also stretched the timeline out so far that residents won't know what new districts will look like until the deadline for declaring a campaign is close. That's designed to help incumbents and limit challenges. Most states will complete redistricting this year. Cannon's office said Florida definitely won't finish until 2012.
•The pictures tell the true story. I can write words until I'm blue in the face. But nothing tells the story of gerrymandering as well as the maps themselves. So that's what I'll share with you Sunday â€" the pictures that show everything from a district so narrow that it encompasses only a highway to another district drawn specifically around a certain politician's house.
http://leagueorangecounty.typepad.com/blog/2011/06/sentinels-scott-maxwell-on-redistricting-the-secrets-lies-and-shenanigans-.html
Quote from: FayeforCure on August 24, 2011, 04:17:06 PM
06/24/2011
•Right now, the system's rigged. Instead of voters choosing their politicians, the politicians choose their voters. The pols predetermine which districts should be Republican and which should be Democratic â€" and then carve out snake-like districts to suit their fancy, often splitting communities in two. This unites politicians from opposing sides because they have the same self-centered goals of protecting themselves and their buddies.
Thanks Faye for bringing this second article to the conversation.
Both sides are out to divide and conquer for their own goals and gain.
Until we eliminate the liars and cheaters, (which is most of the RNC & DNC) we can't have a Govt. that is truly for the people.
Those in power will work together on self preservation and nothing else these days.