BREAKING: DNC Wanted To Use Latino Voters to Gerrymander Permanent House Majority

WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 15: About fifty pro-immigration reform demonstrators gathered for a rally outside the United States Supreme Court January 15, 2016 in Washington, DC. Organized by immigraiton advocacy group CASA, the demonstrators called on the Supreme Court to take up and overrule a lower court's ruling against President Barack Obama's 2014 immigration executive actions, including the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA) program and expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) guidelines. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The recent Guccifer 2.0 leak provided some insight into the strategy and mindset of the Democratic National Committee back in 2010, 2012, and 2014 — and it’s not all clean. One of the documents in the leak shows the DNC planning to use Latino voters as a wedge to help them massively in giving themselves a long term House majority via redistricting. Not only that, it hopes to use constant and unrelenting litigation to help expedite the process and get them to their goal.

Not only that, they wanted to pin the Republicans as racist in trying to argue that they are gerrymandering districts along “racial and political lines” and going too far in doing so.

The document states:

“I suspect the focus will shift towards preparing for litigation. Data will be a crucial part of these cases. Lawyers and expert witnesses will need to understand how we constructed the data and what the important pieces are. In places where Republicans control the process, we will need to provide strong arguments that they are going beyond reasonable bounds in gerrymandering districts along racial and political lines. Where we control the process, we’ll need to show that our districts do not dilute minority influence, that our districts are purely partisan gerrymanders (so far protected by the Supreme Court), and not in violation of the myriad other opaque precedents that currently govern redistricting. The growth in Hispanic population – lacking equal growth in citizen voting-age population – will result in new legal challenges that will require massive amounts of data research and preparation to defend adequately in court. Redistricting case law, which is clear in only a very small number of instances, will likely be re-examined in the 2nd half of 2011 in both state and federal courts, with data underpinning every argument.”

In terms of litigation, they planned to hit them with nonstop lawsuits.

They also had secret links to companies that had redistricting software, like Maptitude, and planned on purchasing it and using it country-wide to help them redistrict in their favor: “State parties will be able to purchase Maptitude for Redistricting for a fixed, discounted price of $5000.”

How this all ties together is this: all of these plans were for future implementation in 2012 and 2014. If the Republicans hadn’t done so well in 2010, Democrats would’ve been able to use these tactics to gerrymander a long term — or even permanent — in the House.

The following two tabs change content below.
The main account, used for editorials and guest author submissions. The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions. Contact the Editor at [email protected]

Latest posts by Being Libertarian (see all)


  1. It’s hard to imagine a quoted document that more directly undermines the premise of the article. Since when did a call for a clear understanding and communication of data, or a call for a legal strategy that addresses the relevant standards that courts use when reviewing redistricting, become anything other than sound preparation for a process that WILL OCCUR after the next census?

    Is the author unaware that the GOP controlled redistricting after the 2010 census, such that in the 2012 election Democratic candidates received a nationwide plurality of more than 1.4 million votes in all House elections, yet the GOP nonetheless won a 33-seat advantage? The current districts are gerrymandered to diminish the voting power of blacks and Latinos; were it not, we would have Democrat House majority. Pointing that out is not “pinning” anyone as racist. It is an accurate political observation.

  2. “The growth in Hispanic population – lacking equal growth in citizen voting-age population – will result in new legal challenges”

    A curious turn of phrase, implying that the new Hispanic population would consist of other than citizens.

Comments are closed.