Locking Up the Vote: Prison-Based Gerrymandering and its Impact on the Black Vote

[BLANK_AUDIO] In SCI Huntington, a prison located just outside of a small town in Central Pennsylvania, the national debate about the politics of redistricting are playing out in real time. So in SCI Huntington, I would say maybe 75, 79% of the prison population was black and Latinx. And the surrounding community, no exaggeration, 95% was white. However, this population was counted as residents of that community as opposed to being residents of the communities that we come from, which was predominantly Philadelphia, Allegheny County, Pittsburgh. And for me, that really resonated because those communities every day, that prison every day made it very clear that you're not one of us, right? The state representatives that were from those districts also made it very clear that you are not my constituents. So when we had problems within the prisons, whether it was abuse, whether it was racism, whether it was poor medical care or treatment. If we would contact the local legislators for that district, they would always say, why are you calling me? You should be calling your legislator in Philadelphia, right? So they made it very clear to us that you're not my constituents. [MUSIC] This is justice above all. I'm your host, Kisha Moore, senior researcher at the Thurgood Marshall Institute. Who you've just heard from opening the show was Selene Holbrook, community activist and the executive director of the abolitionist law center. Selene first became aware of prison-based gerrymandering while he was incarcerated in Western Pennsylvania. Prison-based gerrymandering is the practice of counting people who are incarcerated as residents in the communities in which they are imprisoned rather than in their home communities. It is a result of historic redistricting policies that continue to dilute black political power. The Constitution requires a census, a total and complete count of the entire population of individuals living within our country. The goal of the census is to count everyone. Count them only once and count them in the right place. This census data is used for a wide variety of decisions by federal, state and local governments, including the allocation of government funds and services and the distribution of political power through the redistricting process. Redistricting involves drawing maps to determine the district boundaries for congressional, state and local elected officials. Now and where district boundaries are drawn will often determine if your community can elect representatives of choice for your local school board, city council, state legislature and congress. The composition of districts is also likely to influence whether your elected officials are responsive to your needs, such as ensuring equal educational and economic opportunities or a racially just criminal justice system. Prison-based gerrymandering artificially inflates or increases the political power of predominantly white rural communities with state prisons and artificially dilutes or weakens the political power of many black and Latinx urban communities. As Saleem said, it bothered him that his body was being used to build the political power of the town where he was imprisoned and not his home community of Philadelphia. As our nation begins this important process of redistricting, we are grateful to have a chance to talk with Saleem who illustrated for us that prison-based gerrymandering tells a much deeper story. It's not just about drawing lines or political parties fighting to concentrate their power, but it's a story that is inextricably linked with disenfranchising communities of color and upholding the prison industrial complex. We recognized very early on, I would say immediately upon reading it, that this was part of that historical process of disenfranchising and disempowering black communities in the United States, because most of the prisoners swept up in mass incarceration are black and Latinx people and this captive population that is being moved from urban areas to rural areas, they are being counted in these rural areas and that political capital that could have been otherwise counted in our communities is being deprived from us. Unfortunately, however this plays out and wherever this issue plays out, black and Latinx communities are the losers in this process because it is diluting our voting power and our political power, and that is a power that we need to not only ensure our rights further our rights, but to ensure that we have safe communities, to ensure that we have healthy communities, to ensure that we have government that represents us, because that is important in this context, and that is important anywhere in the world to have a government that represents you, that you can see yourself in and see your interests, and even if you are behind bars, that is something not to diminish or forget. Because of the explosion of mass incarceration and the racialized nature of mass incarceration, prison-based gerrymandering has massive electoral consequences, nationwide the state prison population more than quintupled in size between 1974 and 2000, mostly due to the war on drugs. Along with the population, black people are incarcerated in the state prisons at a rate of 5 times that of white people, and Latinx people are imprisoned at a rate of 1.4 times higher than whites. Today, the prison population is over 2 million people and larger than 15 individual states. If the incarcerated population could form its own state, it would qualify for five votes in the electoral college. Tied to this massive increase in state prison populations is the exponential increase in the construction of state and federal prisons. Between 1980 and 2004, 936 prisons were constructed across the country. The majority of these new prison constructions are located in rural or small town areas, such as SCI Huntington in Pennsylvania. Karen Maclellan, assistant counsel at the Legal Defense Fund, says that in Pennsylvania, this practice of county incarcerated persons in areas where they're incarcerated instead of their home areas, not only works to dilute the political power of black communities, but it's potentially a violation of the Voting Rights Act and Pennsylvania State Constitution, because prison-based gerrymandering distorts the principle of equal population within districts. Under our Constitution, there is a principle of one person, one vote. That means that when states draw legislative districts, the Constitution requires those districts to have roughly the same number of people. But districts that contain prisons have fewer total voters than other districts, meaning that if you live in a district with the prison, your vote is worth more than it would be in another district, because you're competing with fewer other voters. Across the country, prison-based gerrymandering weakens minority voting strength and transfers political power from urban communities of color to predominantly white areas. And that's because prisons are primarily located in predominantly white areas. And as a result of mass incarceration and the history of institutional racism, people who are incarcerated are disproportionately coming from urban communities of color. This implicates the Voting Rights Act because it has the impact of diluting the vote of people who are coming from urban communities and communities of color, while increasing or strengthening the vote of people in communities where prisons are located. And it impacts the votes of communities of color disproportionately. And this disparity, this racial disparity, is what implicates the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. There's a lot tangled within the dark, sticky web of prison-based gerrymandering and its implications are far reaching. In many communities across the country, prison-based gerrymandering will determine the process of redrawing district lines to determine where you can vote, who you can vote for, and whether the elected representative will be responsive to your concerns. Prison-based gerrymandering is not just a reinforcer of mass incarceration. It undermines the political power of black communities and inflates the power of white, rural communities where most prisons are housed. In over 120 counties in the state of Michigan, the majority of black people counted in those counties are in prison. This pattern of having a larger black and prison population than free population existed in many counties across the nation, creating a distorted picture of the county's demographics. So there was actually a study out of Villanova University that looked at this. And they found that, first of all, if people who were incarcerated were counted in their home districts instead of where they are temporarily being held during the period of incarceration, the average black Pennsylvania resident would gain 353 new voters in their district. Latinx residents would gain 313 new voters in their district, while white Pennsylvania voters would lose an average of 59 voters in their district. The results in terms of political influence and power are really substantial. For Pennsylvania legislative districts would be too small to qualify as a district, and for Pennsylvania districts would be too big to qualify as a district because it's black and brown communities that are underrepresented. And actually Philadelphia would get another majority minority district if we account it for people where they were actually from, and the reality would be having to create an entirely new district. We've seen that prison-based gerrymandering represents a distorted view of communities and dilute the political power of black and Latinx communities. But does it also draw funding away from black and Latinx urban communities and direct that funding toward predominantly white rural communities that house prisons? Not that there's a funding piece there, but where it counts when it comes to our communities and funding from our communities. That's where the argument could be made that it's found in the legislature, right? By not having a state representative in the legislature fighting for more state funding toward education, toward health care, toward decarceration. I think it's the big picture funding as opposed to reaching down into the districts, the data, it's sophisticated enough that they can make those distinctions. So the primary point is that it impacts the state legislature and how resources can be distributed or rather fought for within that legislature. To have another legislator in that arena, another state representative in that reading fighting for more services to Philadelphia or Pittsburgh or Black and Latinx communities where that funding battle will play out, not on the individual district level. So that's a great way of putting it. We're not really talking about changes and funding formulas that districts are going to see right away. But rather what we've been talking about is influence and power as Selene just rightly put it. While it's true that a lot of funding depends in some way on census data, this funding is an alumsum that can be converted to a dollar amount per head. As Seleman Cara have both illustrated for us, the practice of prison-based gerrymandering is pervasive. Its roots are tied up in distorting the balance of power, shifting power from urban communities of color to rural white communities, disenfranchising communities of color, and denying communities accurate representation. But all hope is not lost. There is a growing national movement to end this practice of prison-based gerrymandering. In Pennsylvania, state representative Joanna McClinton from Philadelphia has introduced legislation that would count prisoners in the jurisdictions. Count them as residents of the jurisdictions that they came from. In that case, it would overwhelmingly benefit Philadelphia and Pittsburgh because of the majority of prisoners in Pennsylvania come from those two counties, as well as other urban counties across the state. So that's some work that people are doing in terms of advocacy in Pennsylvania, advocating for that bill to get passed. Of course, it's an uphill battle because of the makeup of the legislature in Pennsylvania and how every attempt that legislation is so politicized. So that's one area. Another area folks are advocating for in Pennsylvania is the state legislative reappointment commission. It's a commission that can make recommendations on prison gerrymandering in general. So people are trying to put pressure on that commission or committee to issue a rolling that prisoners should be counted in the jurisdictions that they, as residents in the jurisdictions that they come from, that they were in communities they come from, as well as pressure on the governor to use his bully pulpit, to use his power to talk this issue more. And the issue more into the consciousness of people and legislators that something that is very important to be addressed. So those are three advocacy areas that are going on in Pennsylvania. Then there continues to be the exploration of the litigation at LDF is spearheading. That's the landscape around prison gerrymandering in Pennsylvania. A lot of advocacy pushing is being done, but also narrative because for us again, this is about the larger narrative of disenfranchisement of black communities in this country and a need for us to contest that wherever we find it. According to the Brennan Center, as of May, there have been at least 389 voter suppression bills introduced in 48 states in the 2021 legislative sessions. That is why now more than ever, it is crucial that you join this fight. There are many ways for you to join us. Volunteer and take action. It's always hard to say this. It would be a win for democracy for those of us who have been pushed out of democracy historically in this country. And it's hard sometimes for us to speak in terms of democracy is winning because oftentimes in democracy, we are the losers. Whether it's even when we win, our wins are never secure, right? Because we always have to, like I said, you know, perfect example again is Georgia. Perfect example is North Carolina. Whenever African Americans turn an election, the conversation is never great job. You all save democracy. You came out for democracy. You're exercising your rights. The opposition who unfortunately is usually conservatives says, how do we suppress that vote? How do we suppress that turnout? How do we suppress that power? Right? And this is the problem with prison gerrymandering. It's a problem with political gerrymandering. It's a problem with the entrenchment of racial injustice in the American system that we continue to have to push back and fight against. And so we come to a point where when we carry an election, when we push a political party over that hump, the response is not how can we suppress this vote? The response is, how do we bring more people out? Because that's what we want. You you you would never hear black and Latinx people talking about suppressing someone's vote. You know, we want people to be in the right position. people to go to the polls, all people, not just black and black, not next people. We want all people to have access to the polls to increase their political power, to increase their representation, to have a government that looks like them and represents them. Right? So for me, that would be winning to get to that point. We are in the middle of a redistricting cycle. Please help us understand how the way we draw the lines now influences the democratic process for the next 10 years. So the census currently counts incarcerated people as residents of the political districts where they are incarcerated instead of their home districts. Most states and localities use this census data when drawing legislative boundaries. And prisons are generally located in rural or suburban districts that are predominantly white. This means it is easier for people who live in a district with a prison to get their concerns heard by their legislator because their district contains what we call phantom constituents. In extreme cases, prison gerrymandering allows some districts to meet the legal definition of equal representation only because they have a prison full of phantom constituents. This implicates the next redistricting cycle because we have an opportunity to address this and ensure that the principle of one person, one vote, is actually appelt. And it's a decision that local and state governments are able to meet. There are now 11 locations where states have decided to actually count people who are temporarily incarcerated in the district that they're from where they're going to return after they serve their period of incarceration and where they maintain ties and where representatives are actually accountable and responsive to them. But not every state has made this change. There's also some localities that have made this change, which is possible. It's easy to do. And it's something that the census provides the data to allow states to do if they make that decision. So this is really a question of a little cool will. Our states and the next district cycle going to take action to comply with what the Constitution requires and what are principles of democracy require, which is equal representation and equal influence in the democratic process. And so we really encourage everybody to call their elected officials and encourage them to take action because the principle of one person, one vote, is really the bedrock of our democracy. Thank you for listening to Justice Above All, a podcast of the Legal Defense Fund's Thurgood Marshall Institute. A very special thank you to Saleem Holbrook, Community Activist and Executive Director of the Abolitionist Law Center, and to Cara McLellan, Assistant Council at the Legal Defense Fund for sitting down and talking with us about prison-based gerrymandering and the work that they're doing to make sure communities of color are accurately and fairly represented within Pennsylvania. So we've discussed prison-based gerrymandering and the power of redistricting. There's something you can do right now. Take our We Draw the Line pledge and commit to this movement. Go to bit me/We Draw the Line. That's B-I-T, period, L-Y, forward slash capital W-E, capital D-R-A-W, capital T-H-E, capital L-I-N-E. That's bit me/We Draw the Line. And pledge to fight for the Saleem's of our community through redistricting. This episode is a product of the Thurgood Marshall Institute. It's produced and edited by Amrich Chen and Kisee Devini. To support and keep up with the work of the Legal Defense Fund, visit www.nacpldf.org. To support and keep up with the work of the Thurgood Marshall Institute, visit www.tminstituteldf.org. And if you've enjoyed this episode, it would mean a lot to us. If you would rate it or whatever platform you're using to listen, leave a comment or share with a friend. Thanks for listening. [MUSIC PLAYING]