‘Their goal is to sneak in partisan advantage for Democrats while pretending to support nonpartisan goals…’
Holder, who assumed leadership of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee after leaving his post with the Obama Justice Department, had previously claimed he supported nonpartisan commissions being used to redraw the electoral maps, rather than empowering state legislatures, as many do.
But that quickly changed after Democrats assumed control of Virginia’s General Assembly and proceeded to enact a wave of radical laws designed to secure their own majority.
A proposed referendum, passed by the Virginia House of Delegates with support from all 45 Republicans and nine Democrats, would establish a 16-person panel comprising both citizens and legislators while giving final authority to the state Supreme Court—as it likely would have, regardless, if any sort of legal challenge were waged.
After Holder pointedly refused to support the Virginia referendum, the Wall Street Journal criticized his duplicity in a Tuesday editorial.
“Democrats in Virginia said they were worried the state Supreme Court’s conservative majority would wind up drawing maps to favor Republicans,” it said. “This is ironic since liberal federal judges last year redrew the state House map to help Democrats after Mr. Holder said districts were racially gerrymandered.”
To be sure, the Wall Street Journal acknowledged that the convoluted referendum had its flaws, including a cycle in which partisan legislators appointed the judges who would then help to determine and oversee their legislative districts.
It pointed to the criticisms of one Democratic delegate in a recent Washington Post op-ed.
““I fear any ‘democracy’ in which control of the legislature is chosen by judges who were chosen by a legislature that was chosen by the judges chosen by the legislature in a never-ending loop that permanently circumvents voters,” wrote Del. Mark Levine, D-Alexandria.
In Virginia’s neighbor to the south, North Carolina, Holder has waged a similar war, using the courts to force several redrawals of the state maps since the 2016 elections, with the most recent one (still opposed by some radical leftists) likely adding three congressional seats for Democrats in once-red districts.
State Sen. Ralph Hise, who was among those fighting the legal battles waged by Holder-backed partisan activist groups against the Republican-led legislature, noted the exposure of Holder’s true intent.
“Redistricting reform is and will continue to be part of the conversation,” Hise said in a statement.
“But phony advocates like Eric Holder are revealing the true motives behind some ‘reformers’ on the left,” he continued. “Their goal is to sneak in partisan advantage for Democrats while pretending to support nonpartisan goals.”
If anyone tells you that @EricHolder is “fighting against gerrymandering” and for “fair maps,” just look at the form his organization filed with the IRS. The truth: their mission is to “FAVORABLY POSITION DEMOCRATS FOR THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS.” pic.twitter.com/1f6J2SnIlX
— Scott Walker (@ScottWalker) August 22, 2019