House Democrats quietly kill redistricting reform

Legislative Information System

House Democrats ran out the clock on SB 203, killing redistricting reform for at least 4 years.

69 thoughts on “House Democrats quietly kill redistricting reform

    1. The House passed it with an amendment that pretty much rewrote the Senate bill SB203, making the commission meaningless since the GA would be free to alter it as it chose. The Senate refused to accept the changes and a conference committee was assembled but did not act. A second conference committee was called for but never appointed by the House or Senate leaders.

      It was, from the start, just a rope-a-dope to run out the clock without action.


      1. “From the start” ? Cynic much?

        My initial read is that you’re essentially correct, but it’s difficult to get the complete picture. I’m going to stay on this because it concerns me greatly.

        I’ll be surprised if it’s “game playing” with no real intent to move forward, but if it is the DEMs will have royally screwed the pooch…

        Liked by 1 person

      1. @Tabor

        “Hypocrite in chief?”

        That is a swing and a miss. And NOT just because virtually every thing that you NOW support is the opposite of what you were saying when Barrack Obama was our President.

        More specifically, there is nothing hypocritical about my post. My “Too bad” remark was not irony. I have made it clear that I favor reforming the process to make it the work of demographers instead of politicians. That has not changed. But, if it is not going to be reformed, I am glad the process is in the hands of the Democrats who are, after all, the majority party in this state.

        By the way, how many Republicans supported the needed reform? It would not have taken many of them to form a winning coalition on this issue.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. They wouldn’t even consider it until they saw the writing on the wall in 2017. That was the election when their majority shrunk to 1 or 2 seats. They knew what was coming in 2019, so they quickly decide that redistricting needed to be a priority BEFORE they got their political asses handed to them.

          Cynical? Maybe. Accurate? What do you think?

          Liked by 1 person

  1. I have emailed VA2021 to find out. But I think this was an effort to change SJ18, the Amendment bill, and should not affect redistricting.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I am not savvy on the intricacies of bills, votes, committees and other ingredients in sausage making. I think I would have heard from VA2021 as I am on their donor list. That’s how I found out the status of the amendment before.

        We’ll see.

        Liked by 2 people

          1. Generally speaking, my mind is chock full of totally irrelevant and mostly useless information.

            Did you know that the smallest weasel, the “least weasel”, about 6 inches long, has the strongest bite in the animal kingdom. That is in the “pound for pound” category. A long skull relative to body size allows for better leverage by muscle arrangements for the jaw. This allows for quick kills or dismemberment so the little guy can get the hell out of Dodge before the bigger guys come around.

            (I am a huge fan of Nature on PBS.)

            Does this help?

            Liked by 1 person

          2. You remind of my son. He’ll fall asleep watching a show similar to NATURE and wake up in the morning and know all of that shit. Couldn’t get him to read a book growing up, but he learns a lot through other mediums. And apparently through osmosis.


        1. But I don’t think this affects SJ18. It was expected that bills would arise to amend details as time went by by.

          We’ll see. I hope you are wrong on this.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. SJ18 might be OK, though I don’t know why SB203 would have been there if SJ18 did the same thing.

            Hopefully it will get fixed in the Veto session.


          1. I think perhaps that was the bill introduced that would have CHANGED what was passed last year. And that would have prevented the amendment from going to We, the people in VA.

            While the amendment may not be perfect, it needs to be passed now and companion legislation next year can be used to perfect (not that everyone will EVER think it is perfect.) it.


        2. After a second cup of coffee, I think the bill to which you are referring is the one that was proposed this year that WOULD have put redistricting on hold for another 4 years. My other posts show it will be on the ballot this November.


    1. I believe you are correct. They had discussed using yesterday’s session to make adjustments or some other companion rules to protect some of the potentially negatively affected population groups.

      But it is just like Don to overreact to something he THINKS happened or MIGHT happen.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. But don’t touch his Social Security or Medicare. You make sure to tell the that there gubmint to keep their damned hands off of that…..Until I am done with it and the rest of my progeny can do something else. Like invest in surgical masks and rubber gloves.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. If you want to end Social Security, I’m all for it, just first make me whole for the 15% of my income taken my entire working life without my consent. plus the rate of return I could have expected from am index fund.


          2. Not me. Libertarians believe the program should be scrapped. But as usual, folks who want government programs scrapped tend to forget that those programs are the ones that help keep them afloat.

            And your consent was overruled by VOTES. Ya. know democracy. That is PART of our democratic representative form of gubmint?

            Liked by 1 person

          3. I know that SS was passed and has been ruled Constitutional, but it is still a bad idea and much of the reason for the wealth inequality liberals claim to disdain.

            But if you want to end it after forcing me to pay into it, I want my money and the yield I could have gotten on it returned.


          4. SS is a Ponzi scheme disguised as a mandatory retirement savings plan. I object to mandatory but assuming we are going to force people to prepare for retirement, If there was no SS, but instead the 15% was withheld for an IRA in your name, we would all be owners of American Wealth.

            The average middle class worker would retire a millionaire.


          5. “The average middle class worker would retire a millionaire.”

            Maybe. But how many of your fellow Americans would actually do what is necessary to make that happen? Yeah, I know it is mandatory through SS. But they are better off with that then with an extra Starbucks each week.

            Yerp. Personal responsibility, like G-d given free will, can be a bitch.

            Liked by 1 person

          6. @Tabor

            “SS is a Ponzi scheme”

            No, it is not.

            More like a Tontine with benefits.

            Privatization is a really bad idea. If the last two weeks have not taught you that then you do not want to learn.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. What do you think the last 2 weeks had to teach?

            If you keep 3 years needs in cash equivalents, you can wait out downturns.

            Besides, if you die with funds in the IRA, you can pass a headstart on to your kids, But if you die before you get SS, or before you have drawn much, nothing passes on to kids.

            Are you in favor of more equitable wealth distribution or not?


          8. “If you keep 3 years needs in cash equivalents, you can wait out downturns.”

            That is an out-of-touch with reality statement. Not many can afford to accomplish that goal. To not acknowledge that shows how out of touch you appear with the realities of around 40% (or more) of the populace.

            Liked by 1 person

          9. You’re missing the context.

            I recommended SS be replaced by an IRA type account and Paul cited the recent downturn as evidence against that concept.

            But if we were all having 15% of our incomes put in an IRA our whole working lives, everyone would be able to have a properly managed retirement kitty.


          10. …”if we were all having 15% of”… How do you come up with that percentage. The total deduction from paychecks is around 7.5%. (1.2% is Medicare) The other half is paid by the employer. Yes, if you are SELF-EMPLOYED you do pay that yourself, but if SS goes, the other half of it also goes. So it would only be $500,000-aires, not millionaires.


          11. How is the “employer contribution” different from your payroll deduction?

            You never have control of either part, the only difference is how it is printed on your pay stub.

            The employer pays both parts, as part of his cost of employing you, and it would otherwise be part of your compensation in a competitive market.

            It’s all your pay, you just never got to touch either “part.”


          12. @Tabor

            So, not want to learn it is.

            But even if you pretend not to get it because – gee, you hate the government and everything it does – the lesson is obvious. Investments in stocks looks great until they don’t. And that is if you make good investments to start with. As smart an investor as you might be, the average American isn’t and the people in business to “help” them are mostly scam artists out for themselves.

            Your argument about not being able to pass on Social Security and Medicare benefits is plausible until you consider that without it, most seniors would have nothing to leave behind without it. That is true now and would be even more true if life savings had to be used to pay living and medical expenses in old age.

            Liked by 1 person

      1. Years ago, when we debated on the Pilot forum, a few of us met for beers a couple of times. I met Don then.

        We don’t agree on much politically, but the conversations were amiable.

        Well, we did agree that we are each well meaning but misguided. So there is that.


        Don, feel free to chime in since we are talking about you.

        Or not. 😎

        Liked by 2 people

          1. Don, while I appreciate the thought, would it not be wiser to not have beer ANYWHERE near the range? I mean, you could take out all of your opposites in one fell swoop with your semi-automatic, 30 round magazine weapon of choice. And then there is plenty of nearby swampland to dispose of the bodies. 😉😘😜🧨


          2. I can’t speak for your crowd, but my side has great impulse control. and the self discipline to wait until the rifles are put away before opening the cooler.


          3. When I was much younger, I had issues with it, but I’m fine now.

            And not being a “gun guy” I would still be interested in the fellowship. Anyone else who wants to shoot, can do so. I would take a pass and admire all of those others for their marksmanship.

            Which leads to the question: May I imbibe while the rest of you bang away at the hay bales?


          4. I have not shot my Ruger since my back and hip surgeries. I miss it. But now the bionic Len will be a force to reckon with against those nasty paper targets.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. Shoot! That’s nothin’.

            I could put 8 out of 10 rounds of 22LR into a 3” circle at 11 yards with my Mark IV pistol with a Volquartsen trigger and a red dot sight.

            And that was when I was shooting weekly.

            (I guess that is not really very good, come to think of it.)


          6. I barely qualified with .45 and 9mm during my Navy career. The broadside of a barn would be safe with me shooting at it. (At least I know and admit my limitations.)


          7. A suppressor doesn’t do that much., it just quiets the muzzle blast by about 100dB

            There’s still the mini sonic boom of the bullet as well as the gong(which really just goes ‘ping’)

            We’re having a friend over who has suppressors to help us make our selection and start the paperwork. Should have the suppressors in about 8 months.


          8. I’m sure your neighbors will be pleased.

            By the way. Regardless of the online rhetoric, I’m down for any get together at the compound. If you’ll have me.


          9. As you would be hosting, I believe it is entirely up to you to decide when. It is a Saturday this year and the pandemic should be cleared, so keep us in the loop.


          10. @Adam
            I do not share your optimism about the pandemic being cleared by July 4th. It may have peaked in terms of growth rate but it will still be widespread making it dangerous for vulnerable populations – such as those over 70 – to give up social distancing. It will not be over until a vaccine is widely available and that will likely not happen this year.


          11. It is a wait-and-see situation to be sure, but I suspect that even with our best efforts we will all have been exposed and survived, thus not needing vaccination, or not, unless a vaccine can be brought to market very quickly at least for vulnerable populations.

            With a disease that kills 15% of those vulnerable people, and leaves those it spares permanently disabled by scarred lungs, we can skip the screening for rare side effects.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s