The GOP Redistricting Position in December of 2014

Due to the GOP’s spectacular success in the 2010 General Election, the Party
found itself in a commanding position to take full advantage of the 2011
redistricting process. This was particularly true with regard to congressional
districting. The party’s gains in 2010 were protected by its control of the line
drawing process in states containing over 200 seats, while the Democrats only
controlled the process in states containing just over 40 seats – a five-fold
advantage.
Democrat seat gains in states such as Arizona, California (both commission states);
as well as Illinois, and Maryland were more than counter-balanced by GOP gains
in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia and Texas. We were also able to retain
seats in states such as Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania, even though those states
lost seats in the House in the reapportionment following the 2010 Decennial
Census. The Democrats were forced to take the “hit” caused by the loss of seats in
reapportionment.
Electoral success in a good election cycle, such as 2010, can be chipped away in
successive elections, but a successful line-drawing process both creates districts as
well as constituting a buttress against losses in subsequent, less-favorable
elections.
The problem the GOP needs to come to terms with is that redistricting does not end
with the enactment of initial plans. We see this problem manifesting itself in
myriad of new lawsuits in which the Democrats are investing millions in legal
resources challenging our districting plans and resisting our challenges against
their plans.
We must remind ourselves the GOP’s success in redistricting actually had its
genesis in a decade-long struggle in the federal court system beginning in the
1980’s. The GOP gained partisan advantage at the same time African-Americans
and Latino minorities gained control of their own districts due to the application of
Sections 2 & 5 of the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965.

 GOP attorneys and redistricting experts successfully fought three decades of court
battles which culminated just this November when the GOP gained full political
control of the entire South from Texas through North Carolina. The last state to
turn “red” was Arkansas just this last month.
As this multi-decade long process unfolded, the Democrat Party’s base in the
South turned more and more liberal as moderate Democrats were replaced by
Republicans. As more and more minority districts were created, Democrats
became less and less able to take advantage of strong Democratic minority areas to
create districts which would elect non-minority Democrats to both state
legislatures and Congress.
Subsequently, Democrats have turned to state and federal courts in an attempt to
claw back their lost districts by trying to convince courts that majority-minority
districts are not required by the Voting Rights Act. Democrats are seeking to
establish new law which will mandate minority voters the right to maximize their
votes, as DEMOCRATS, by substituting “influence”, “crossover” and “coalition”
districts with minority percentages in the 30s and 40s for majority-minority
districts in excess of 50% minority populations.
In Alabama, the Democrats are even attempting to convince the United States
Supreme Court that minority districts should be deliberately underpopulated to
allow Democrat-rich minority voters to be spread out into neighboring districts to
aid in the election of more white Democrat legislators and members of Congress.
There is currently ongoing or prospective litigation, in Arizona, Texas, Alabama,
Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia and in several states there are
multiple cases. The stakes are extremely high in this litigation. Not only could
congressional and legislative plans favorable to the GOP be overturned and
replaced by plans more favorable to the Democrats, but legal principles could also
be established that will severely weaken the GOP’s position going into the next
redistricting cycle in 2020. If the Arizona Legislature wins its current case before
the United States Supreme Court, which has already been set for argument, then
congressional redistricting plans will have to be redrawn in as many as four states,
Arizona, California, Washington and New Jersey. Given that the Supreme Court
has already noted jurisdiction in this case, the Arizona Legislature's chances of

 winning are at least 50-50, if not better. Furthermore, due to our recent electoral
success in the 2014 elections we now have the opportunity to redraw the legislative
and congressional map in Nevada in order to solidify the recent gains.
If the Democrats are successful in their current round of lawsuits, they will
continue to challenge additional GOP-drawn maps for the remainder of the decade.
They are not going to tire or give up as long as there is any chance of success since
they are funded by a coalition of three unions.
Democrats have already enjoyed limited legal success in Texas, Alabama and
Virginia, primarily due to the GOP drafters unwillingness to remain attentive to the
required legal guidelines recommended by the RNC legal team. Should those
states’ redistricting plans be tossed out by the courts, they will need continuing
legal and technical assistance to avoid becoming ensnared in the same legal traps
the second time they are required to draw plans.
At the present time Dale Oldham is currently involved in litigation in Alabama,
Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Arizona and Texas providing expert legal
advice, drafting and litigation assistance. Tom Hofeller is currently involved in
North Carolina and Virginia. He could soon become involved in Alabama,
Arizona, and Texas. Mike Wild is providing vital data and technical support for all
these efforts. Dale and Tom also continue to update and monitor potential
Republican stakeholders in states which are not currently undergoing litigation,
tracking the pertinent operations at the United States Bureau of Census as well as
monitor potential litigation which may arise from unexpected jurisdictions as well
as legislation which may alter the legal principles under which redistricting
currently operates.
Dale’s monthly retainer being billed by Geographic Strategies ($16,914)
constitutes payment for 49 hours in terms of his low-end hourly billing rate. Tom
Hofeller’s retainer is currently $5,333) and is the equivalent of just under 18 hours
per month. Mike Wild’s full time salary at the RNC is $12,000.
We can rest assured that these legal challenges will not end until the Democrats
attain their goal of defeating GOP-drawn maps and replacing them with courtdrawn or Democrat-drawn maps. The stakes are just too high for them to ever give
up.

 Just this November, the Democrats gained a favorable ruling against our
congressional plan in Virginia which could potentially cost us 1 to 3 seats.
Additional congressional seats at stake are: 3 to 4 seats in North Carolina, 2 to 4
seats in Florida, and 1 to 2 seats in Texas.
With the successful challenge waged against Sections 4 and 5 of the Voting Right
Act (Shelby County), the entire set of jurisprudence governing the application of
Sections 2 and 5 of the Voting Rights Act is now in a state of flux. The Democrats
fully intend to rework this law fully to their advantage. If they are successful, we
can expect further challenges to both congressional and legislative redistricting
maps favorable to the GOP. This is not speculation on my part, but a strategy fully
enunciated by Democrat legal strategists from the very beginning of the current
redistricting cycle. Our majorities in many state legislatures could be weakened
due to redrafted plans – often overseen by Obama-appointed federal judges.
We must win or hold our own in this redistricting legal battle or the maps drawn in
the next cycle (2021) will be considerable less favorable to the GOP.
The RNC redistricting team is the ONLY GOP resource which bring a
comprehensive national perspective to this vital legal struggle and to what may be
subsequent redrafting processes throughout the Nation as this multistate legal
process unfolds. We are presently involved in all the critical redistricting cases
presently underway and expect further challenges to be mounted by the Democrats
over the next couple of years.
It is important to remember that the last U. S. Supreme Court decision of the 2000
redistricting cycle was not handed down by the Court until 2009 - NINE years into
the decade. This decision was critical to our legal position in this present
redistricting cycle, and came perilously close to being abandoned and lost merely
by the unwillingness of the GOP to commit resources.
Like it or not the 2010 redistricting process is far from complete, and the
Democrats would gleefully celebrate our abandonment of the battle field just as
Obama abandoned our military gains in Iraq. The RNC’s annual rate of
investment of less than $411,000 per year in an active RNC redistricting operation
represents an amount could reasonably be considered petty cash when compared to

 the billions now being raised in each election cycle. Even more notable is that it
need not be supported by FECA dollars.
In addition to the legal process, the GOP still has not developed a redistricting data
strategy to preserve its present data assets and build this decade’s redistricting
databases for the next cycle in 2020. Even though the RNC may only be a partner
in this endeavor, it is essential that we provide input, leadership and experience in
the creation of the proper vehicle to undertake this vital function. The Democrats
already have such a vehicle which is the fully functional. This is the National
Committee for and Effective Congress (NCEC).
The RNC current Redistricting Office is the only nationwide source of redistricting
data and technology. Access to these resources needs to be maintained if we are
going to have the ability to continue providing an effective level of support to
litigation across the nation. As the decade further unfolds, more and more of the
expertise out in the states will be lost as key legislators and staff move on or are
replaced. At the present time, we only have one person left at the Committee able
to fulfill this critical role.
This is also the opportune time for the RNC to consolidate its historical legal
archive. We must discard documents which are no long needed and convert
remaining documents to electronic format. While many court decisions are already
available online, other decisions, as well as briefs, and expert testimony are not
available on the internet.
Redistricting is one of the most profitable and business like investments that the
GOP can make. Even if it results in only the gain or preservation of one or two
additional congressional seats for 10 years, it is more that worth this investment.
For this reason, I urge the Committee to continue its effort throughout the next few
years, or until it can be transferred to another secure funding source.