Author Topic: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census  (Read 907 times)

Offline Hypestyle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 5869
  • Intellectual Conqueror
    • View Profile
    • Hypestyle's Homebase
Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« on: February 09, 2019, 11:12:31 am »

REP. ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ is prepared for the possibility that Democrats in New York could redraw her district after the 2020 election, she told The Intercept in an interview. 

Following the 2020 census, every state will draw new district boundaries to reflect changes in the population, the political implications of which will stretch for at least the next decade. In 2014, New York approved a constitutional amendment establishing a nonpartisan redistricting commission, which is set to take over the redistricting process starting in 2020. The 10-member commission, meant to be independent from the legislature, is made up of individuals selected by leaders from the state Senate and Assembly, and the original eight members pick two additional members.

But Ocasio-Cortez’s most determined adversaries are not partisan Republicans, but Democrats who say that she has been a disruptive influence. The Hill recently reported that at least one member of Congress has been urging New York party leaders to recruit a Democratic primary challenger to Ocasio-Cortez. But the news led to a surge of donations to Ocasio-Cortez, suggesting that a more efficient means of ousting her might be simply to eliminate her district.

The 29-year-old congressperson noted (accurately) that it’s generally expected that New York will likely lose a seat, despite the city itself growing at a consistent pace. “I don’t know if that means that all of our districts are going to be redrawn dramatically, because they have been historically gerrymandered, or what will happen, but there’s certainly a possibility, if not a guarantee, that my district in the coming years will not look like my district today,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “So I think it’s entirely possible, and New York politics being what it is, we have no idea where things are going to go.”

New York politics are famously insular, with a tight circle controlling major decision-making for years. That began to shift in 2018, not just with Ocasio-Cortez’s victory, but also wins from a number of insurgent candidates against Democrats who had caucused with Republicans in the state Senate.

Ocasio-Cortez, during a podcast interview with The Intercept, was joined by former North Carolina Rep. Brad Miller, who earned his “former” status as a result of statewide redistricting that eliminated his seat in 2012. The 2010 tea party wave handed control of the legislature to Republicans, who drew him out of the district. He decided not to run for re-election. He told The Intercept that his work on the House Financial Services Committee taking on powerful banks “probably” played a role in the redistricting. “And Republicans, it turned out, did not value my service, and they divided my district six different ways, and there was no one piece that was really recognizably the old district. And also it was true on the Democratic side,” he said, noting that his own party leaders weren’t thrilled with his work in a state dominated by financial interests, such as Bank of America.

Miller, however, did not have Ocasio-Cortez’s national profile, suggesting that the lesson may be that if you’re going to be a problem for party bosses, it’s better to be a huge problem than a medium-sized irritation.

Indeed, Ocasio-Cortez could just run, and probably win, in any nearby New York City district the party may try to draw for her. She noted that when it comes to future redistricting, she’s in a unique situation because her name recognition is so strong “that even when I won my primary in New York [District] 14, we won like a third ballot, a third-party primary in a different congressional district the same day.” And that was in November 2018, before an endless media cycle that has been all Ocasio-Cortez, all the time.

Moving her into a different district would pit her against another incumbent Democrat, and that Democrat has an incentive to avoid that race. ”Maybe some people wouldn’t want trouble for themselves,” she noted.

Another reason not to target Ocasio-Cortez would be Chuck Schumer. The Democratic Senate minority leader, and a major player in New York politics, is up for re-election in 2022. The commission redrawing the lines may be technically independent, but Schumer’s power is no secret. If Ocasio-Cortez were gerrymandered out of the House, she’d need something new to do — and primarying Schumer would be an obvious option on the table. That could make Schumer Ocasio-Cortez’s strongest advocate at the redistricting negotiating table.

The potential loss of a congressional district as a result of falling population has focused extra attention on the Trump administration’s push to add a controversial citizenship question to the next census. That ploy is driven in significant part by a desire to dampen participation in the process. “This is one of the reasons why we’ve been fighting the 2020 census question, and between the federal government really looking to fund the census at a much lower rate, communities like mine are the ones that are essentially targeted by the current administration,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Opponents say the citizenship question would intimidate immigrants and their families into not completing the form, reducing the participation of people of color and undercounting the population. A federal judge earlier this month blocked the citizenship question, but the Trump administration is appealing the ruling in the lead lawsuits. Aside from the court battles, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is set to testify about the citizenship question before the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, which Ocasio-Cortez is now a member of.

“Communities that are poor, more working class, communities that are diverse, communities that have high immigrant populations, whether they’re documented or not,” she said. “It’s all, all the actions that the administration is taking is around really dense urban areas losing congressional seats.”

Join Our Newsletter
Original reporting. Fearless journalism. Delivered to you.
I’m in
So far, the effort to primary Ocasio-Cortez, however, isn’t going well. The Daily Caller followed up on the article in The Hill and spoke to New York Democratic consultant Hank Sheinkopf, who said three names were floating around as potential challengers to Ocasio-Cortez: New York City Council Member Jimmy Van Bramer, Sen. Julia Salazar, and Assembly Member Catalina Cruz.

“The Daily Caller is trash. 1. I would never primary @AOC, even if I lived in her district (which I do not). 2. I have no intentions of ever running for Congress. 3. Who on earth calls Jimmy Van Bramer ‘James?’” Salazar tweeted.

Van Bramer tweeted “This whole thing is crazy. I’m kind of loving having @AOC as my Congressmember! I’m not taking her on. I’m backing her up!”
Be Kind to Someone Today.

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9523
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2019, 02:58:49 pm »
Mild mannered, Morena from the Bronx becomes Representative AOC, a new superhero in Washington, D.C.

Able to leap tall federal buildings in a single bound!

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9523
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2019, 10:38:36 am »
Variant cover of  ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ and the Freshman Force

« Last Edit: May 25, 2019, 10:12:30 pm by Battle »

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9523
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« Reply #3 on: June 25, 2019, 06:56:39 pm »
Tuesday, 25th June 2019
DOJ urges definitive ruling from U.S. Supreme Court on census citizenship question

The Trump administration made an unusual last-minute plea to the Supreme Court Tuesday, telling the justices that actions by lower courts make it urgent to act quickly to resolve the legality of adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

The Justice Department move followed an appeals court order earlier Tuesday, which returned one lawsuit over the census to a district court judge to address recently-discovered evidence that the addition of a citizenship question may have been intended to diminish the political impact of the Latino vote.

The latest tumult in the litigation was prompted by citizenship question opponents gaining access to evidence that the views of a deceased GOP redistricting expert, Thomas Hofeller, may have played a role in a Justice Department request that led to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross adding the citizenship query to the census questionnaire.

In a two-page letter to the high court, Solicitor General Noel Francisco essentially invited the justices to shut down the pending lawsuits by declaring that Ross’ decision was lawful and that further inquiry into the motives for the decision is unnecessary.

“The Fourth Circuit’s order underscores the need for this court to address the equal-protection claim and the immateriality of the Hofeller files in its disposition of the above-captioned case so that the lawfulness of the secretary’s decision can be fully and finally resolved,” Francisco wrote.

He said the government needs a quick and clear decision by the end of this month in order to finalize the print version of the census forms for use next year.

Before the Justice Department’s latest salvo, civil rights groups celebrated the order from the Richmond, Va.-based 4th Circuit as an indication that their arguments against the citizenship question were gaining traction.

“The always-flimsy house of cards shielding the Trump administration’s biased and nefarious intent in adding a citizenship query to Census 2020 is rapidly collapsing,” said Thomas Saenz of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, or MALDEF, one of the groups fighting the added question.

“We look forward to presenting our enhanced case demonstrating the unlawful nature of the late addition of the citizenship question, and to vindicating one of our most enduring and important constitutional principles.”

The puppetine administration has maintained that it added the question to enhance Voting Rights Act enforcement, but opponents say it was done for partisan reasons to discourage citizen and noncitizen immigrants from responding to the census.

Three federal judges have ruled that the addition of the question was illegal because it was justified inadequately by the officials involved.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling on the issue this week.

Decisions in some cases are expected Wednesday and additional releases are possible later in the week before the justices depart for their summer break.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9523
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2019, 10:32:31 am »
Sunday, 14th July 2019
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is right, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has a women of color problem
by Sophia A. Nelson

No, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is not a racist.

Yes, she has been an ally of women of color for her entire 31-year career in Congress.

I have seen her up close and personal, when she spoke at an event my Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority held last year in Washington, D.C. at the Library of Congress to honor a historic black woman.

She is all in on black women’s advancement and policy issues.

To argue otherwise would be untrue.

Yet freshman Representative Alexandria Ocasio Cortez has it right — Speaker Pelosi is old guard.

She does not like her new, high-profile women of color members nipping at her heels.

She paid her dues.

She worked her way up through the male dominated congressional system for decades to become the nation’s first female Speaker of the House.

The daughter of a powerful Baltimore Mayor, Pelosi was raised in the 1950s and came of age in the early 1960s.

She remembers a time when women were like "Leave it to Beaver” or “Father Knows Best” moms, known for their pearls and perfectly coiffed hair.

Pelosi remembers an America where women were largely silent, and could advance in politics, but only through steady party loyalty, staying in their place, waiting their turn, and never running their mouths to the media.

This is Pelosi’s formation as a politician and to a large degree as a person.

Enter New York’s 29-year-old "AOC,” as she is known, and her Democratic colleagues Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan.

These bold, young women of color — unbought and unbossed in the spirit of the late Rep. Shirley Chisholm — have turned the Democratic caucus on its head.

They are unafraid to speak out, to call out, and demand the change that we are so often asked to delay or deny as women of color.

The current tensions erupted after the four women opposed a border spending bill they said failed to protect migrant children from the acting-president's policies.

Pelosi criticized them  in interview with New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, the women fought back, and AOC told the Washington Post that Pelosi had been "outright disrespectful."

She accused her of "the explicit singling out of newly elected women of color."

The issue here is NOT that Pelosi is a racist.

The issue here is what we academics call “intersectionality" — the combined impact of racism, sexism and other types of discrimination on people and groups.

In practice, it means that white women in power often take on the same characteristics of white men in power toward women of color.

The effect on women of color is widespread.

White women earn 77 cents on the dollar compared to white men.

Hispanic or Latina women earn 53 cents on the dollar.

Black or African-American women earn 61 cents.

White women have made notable advancements in industry, politics, academia and corporate America, whereas women of color make up only about 5% of corporate executives and there is only one woman of color heading a Fortune 500 company.

In medical schools, law schools  and law firms, while women overall have achieved parity or better, women of color lag far behind.

I could go on and on with data points, but that is not the issue at hand.

When you need puppetine to defend you as not being a racist, you must stop and consider why.

What do I mean?

On Friday, puppetine told reporters that AOC had been "very disrespectful" to Pelosi.

"I don't think that Nancy can let that go on," he bleeted.

What the heck?

What puppetine really meant to say is that older white people like him, Biden, and yes, Pelosi, simply do not yet know how to deal with women of color being in power and holding their feet to the fire.

Black women are deemed “angry.”

Latina women are deemed "fiery".

And Muslim women are “radical.”

These words often used to describe us are meant to marginalize and silence us.

The solution here is not for Speaker Pelosi to silence AOC or condemn her.

It is to listen and learn and find a way to work together.

This is not Congress in 1978, 1988 or 1998.

This is 2019. People of color have a voice.

Women of color have a voice.

These women are members of the United States Congress.

These women of color have a national platform that empowers them and indeed demands of them that they speak up for themselves and their constituents.

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9523
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« Reply #5 on: July 15, 2019, 06:08:44 pm »
Monday, 15th July 2019
Congresswoman Lizzie Fletcher Statement on the President’s Remarks Against Members of Congress

(Washington, DC) – Congresswoman Lizzie Fletcher (TX-07) issued the following statement regarding remarks made by President Trump about members of Congress on Twitter yesterday and at the White House today:

“Yesterday, the President of the United States made comments on Twitter urging some of my colleagues in Congress to ‘go back [to the] places from which they came.’ Today, he repeated those comments, identifying some members specifically and suggesting that they leave the country.

“The President’s statements are an affront – to duly elected members of Congress, to the constituents they represent, and to all Americans. It is disrespectful, it is divisive, and it is dangerous.

“Underlying the numerous factual errors, the baseless assertions, and the racist statements, is a clear message from the President: women, immigrants, and others—even if members of Congress—are not entitled to a say in ‘how our government is to be run.’

“But the people are precisely the ones who decide how our government is to be run. And we do so through our members of Congress, and our representatives in offices across the country. The President’s further claim that citizens cannot, through their elected representatives or otherwise, criticize our government, advocate for policy, or work for change reflects a fundamental misconception of our government and its purpose: it is—and must be—a government of, by, and for the people.

“I have the privilege of being a part of that government, representing one of the most diverse groups of citizens in the United States. Our community is one of immigrants – from across the country and around the world. We come from many places, backgrounds, faiths, and traditions. We have a diversity of experiences, beliefs, views, and priorities. And we have a say in how our government is to be run. It is not just our right, it is our responsibility.

“We have a long and imperfect history in this country. But we also have a long tradition of people using their voices to make this country a more perfect union. Today, I join Americans across the country in denouncing this divisive, demeaning, and damaging attack on our American values, our fundamental beliefs, and our democratic system.”

Would You Like To Know More?

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9523
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« Reply #6 on: July 16, 2019, 08:50:10 am »
Tuesday, Sixteenth, July Two Thousand and Nineteen

Condemning President Trump's racist comments directed at Members of Congress.

Whereas the Founders conceived America as a haven of refuge for people fleeing from religious and political persecution, and Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison all emphasized that the Nation gained as it attracted new people in search of freedom and livelihood for their families;

Whereas the Declaration of Independence defined America as a covenant based on equality, the unalienable Rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and government by the consent of the people;

Whereas the Declaration of Independence defined America as a covenant based on equality, the unalienable Rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and government by the consent of the people;
Whereas Benjamin Franklin said at the Constitutional convention,

''When foreigners after looking about for some other Country in which they can obtain more happiness, give a preference to ours, it is a proof of attachment which ought to excite our confidence and affection'';

Whereas President Franklin D. Roosevelt said,

''Remember, remember always, that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and revolutionists'';

Whereas immigration of people from all over the Earth has defined every stage of American history and propelled our social, economic, political, scientific, cultural, artistic and technological progress as a people, and all Americans, except for the descendants of Native people and enslaved African-Americans, are immigrants or descendants of immigrants;

Whereas the commitment to immigration and asylum has been not a partisan cause but a powerful national value that has infused the work of many Presidents;

Whereas American patriotism is defined not by race or ethnicity but by devotion to the Constitutional ideals of equality, liberty, inclusion, and democracy and by service to our communities and struggle for the common good;

Whereas President John F. Kennedy, whose family came to the United States from Ireland, stated in his 1958 book ''A Nation of Immigrants'' that ''The contribution of immigrants can be seen in every aspect of our national life. We see it in religion, in politics, in business, in the arts, in education, even in athletics and entertainment. There is no part of our nation that has not been touched by our immigrant background. Everywhere immigrants have enriched and strengthened the fabric of American life.'';

Whereas President Ronald Reagan in his last speech as President conveyed ''An observation about a country which I love'';

Whereas as President Reagan observed, the torch of Lady Liberty symbolizes our freedom and represents our heritage, the compact with our parents, our grandparents, and our ancestors, and it is the Statue of Liberty and its values that give us our great and special place in the world;

Whereas other countries may seek to compete with us, but in one vital area, as ''a beacon of freedom and opportunity that draws the people of the world, no country on Earth comes close'';

Whereas it is the great life force of ''each generation of new Americans that guarantees that America's triumph shall continue unsurpassed'' through the 21st century and beyond and is part of the ''magical, intoxicating power of America'';

Whereas this is ''one of the most important sources of America's greatness: we lead the world because, unique among nations, we draw our people -- our strength -- from every country and every corner of the world, and by doing so we continuously renew and enrich our nation'';

Whereas ''thanks to each wave of new arrivals to this land of opportunity, we're a nation forever young, forever bursting with energy and new ideas, and always on the cutting edge'', always leading the world to the next frontier;

Whereas this openness is vital to our future as a Nation, and ''if we ever closed the door to new Americans, our leadership in the world would soon be lost''; and

Whereas President Donald Trump's racist comments have legitimized fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the House of Representatives

(1) believes that immigrants and their descendants have made America stronger, and that those who take the oath of citizenship are every bit as American as those whose families have lived in the United States for many generations;

(2) is committed to keeping America open to those lawfully seeking refuge and asylum from violence and oppression, and those who are willing to work hard to live the American Dream, no matter their race, ethnicity, faith, or country of origin; and

(3) strongly condemns President Donald Trump's racist comments that have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color by saying that our fellow Americans who are immigrants, and those who may look to the President like immigrants, should ''go back'' to other countries, by referring to immigrants and asylum seekers as ''invaders,'' and by saying that Members of Congress who are immigrants (or those of our colleagues who are wrongly assumed to be immigrants) do not belong in Congress or in the United States of America.

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 9523
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Alexandria Cortez's district may be gone after 2020 Census
« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2019, 07:08:34 am »
Sunday, 22nd December 2019
(originally published Wednesday, 22nd May 2019)
Representative AOC was among a growing chorus of Democrats who spoke out in favor of impeachment.
by Alison Durkee

House Democrats' call to begin impeachment proceedings grew even louder Tuesday, as former White House counsel Don McGahn's refusal to testify before the House only intensified Democrats' argument that an impeachment inquiry may be the only way to break through the Trump administration's stonewalling.

Among those adding their voice to the chorus was Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who forcefully spoke out about the need to start the impeachment process.

Our institutions “have been damaged greatly today with the unwillingness to impeach,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted.

“Failure to impeach now is neglect of due process.”

The freshman congresswoman continued to advocate for impeachment in an interview Tuesday evening with Reuters, in which she pushed back against House Speaker Representative Nancy Pelosi's argument that an inquiry is not worth the political risk.

“I think that, at a certain point, this is no longer about politics,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

“This is about upholding the rule of law.”

Though the New York representative emphasized that she “respects” Pelosi's leadership and knows that she's “working very hard to bring the party together,” Ocasio-Cortez criticized the logic of Pelosi's argument, claiming,

“Just as impeaching without cause could be construed as, and is, politically motivated, choosing to not impeach when there is an abundance of cause could also be construed similarly.”

Ocasio-Cortez was far from the only Democrat making pro-impeachment overtures Tuesday, as lawmakers including Representatives Madeleine Dean, Don Beyer, and Ilhan Omar made statements in support of starting impeachment inquiries.

The Huffington Post noted that one-third of the House Judiciary Committee's Democratic majority now supports impeachment, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus met Tuesday to discuss ways in which an inquiry could begin.

“In politics there are always risks of acting and risks of not acting,” House Judiciary member Representative Jamie Raskin said in an interview with the Washington Post, adding that the power to remove the president was built into the Constitution as “the people’s last line of constitutional self defense against a president who tramples the rule of law and acts like a king.”

“If we don’t respond constitutionally to the evidence advanced by the special counsel, have we dramatically lowered the standards for presidential conduct?” he asked.

And early steps toward impeachment could be happening sooner rather than later.

Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee vowed Tuesday to introduce a “Resolution of Investigation,” which she described as a method of “educating the American public” that could ultimately result in impeachment.

The growing calls for impeachment have further divided the Democratic caucus, though, as many members remain aligned with Pelosi's view that now is not the time to start the process.

Representative Ro Khanna said said he thinks Pelosi “has it right,” while Majority Whip Representative James E. Clyburn said in an interview with Meet the Press that he believes if a secret ballot were cast on the issue among House Democrats, the majority would vote no.

“A majority will be for staying steady, staying focused, because this thing is moving in our direction,” Clyburn claimed.

Over on the other side of the aisle, the only Republican to break ranks and call for impeachment is Representative Justin Amash, who has been swiftly chided by his party for speaking out against Trump.

“I don’t think it’s going to be a trend-setting move,” Senator Lindsay Graham predicted to the Washington Post about Amash's position.

Yet the day-long swell of pro-impeachment arguments could be a sign that the tide is about to turn.

Pelosi said Tuesday she would call a closed-door meeting on Wednesday to discuss the caucus's Trump strategy, a move that was seen as a response to the mounting Democratic pressure.

While House Majority Leader Representative Steny Hoyer claimed that he doesn't “think we're there at this point in time,” the lawmaker did acknowledge that

“I don't probably think there's any Democrat who probably wouldn't in their gut say, you know, [Trump has] done some things that probably justify impeachment.”

“If the facts lead us to a broader action, so be it,” Hoyer added.

Ultimately, Ocasio-Cortez predicted that given how defined the issue is by its political consequences, the Democratic battle may come down to public opinion.

“I think it really depends on everyday Americans,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

"If you have a representative that is in a close seat and you think that we should be upholding the rule of law, I think it’s time to give your representative a call.”