Column-Democrats: It's the States, Stupid (Part 2)
Since the government shutdown, public opinion of the Republican Party has hit a new low. Yet the Democrats might not be able to gain from it. Despite the GOP's fall from grace — and even if they suffer a lower vote count in the 2014 midterm elections — the Republicans might still control the House of Representatives and many state legislatures after the polls close.
Our Constitution is unique in that it gives state legislatures virtually complete control over how we elect the president and Congress. In other democracies, the national government runs elections, usually through an impartial commission. Our system, however, lets the party that controls the state legislatures manipulate election rules to help itself and harm its opponents in both the state and House races.
Realizing this, powerful Republican leaders, including former Bush White House Counselor Ed Gillespie and Senior Adviser Karl Rove decided in 2009 to concentrate on winning control of the state legislatures. Through a combination of money, luck and skill, in 2010 the Republicans captured almost a majority of the state legislatures, and then added a few more in 2012. This has given them the power not only to shape the electoral rules and control the House, but also to pass other laws that shape many aspects of our lives. . .
As I wrote for Reuters here, after the GOP's crushing defeat in 2008, party strategists poured money and talent into the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) — formed in 2002 to centralize all GOP state efforts. Gillespie took over the chairmanship and installed a senior aide, Chris Jankowski, as president. The goal was to win enough individual state districts to control the state electoral process, and then gerrymander congressional and state districts to ensure that Republicans win the House and state legislature seats for years to come.
The GOP's 2010 " shellacking" of the Democrats gave the Republicans what they wanted — control of the redistricting process in more than 20 states. . .
So far, the Democrats have done little to improve their position. It won't be easy in any case.
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2013/10/29/us/29reuters-column-great-debate.html?hp
= new reply since forum marked as read
Indeed, state control over electoral processes greatly influences the ultimate makeup of congress and, in turn, the direction taken by our country.
However, I don't think there's going to be a lot of outside help coming to the red states, at least not all of them.
The change is going to have to come from the grassroots first, at least to some degree. I live in a very red zone of a somewhat blue state. Michigan. We go blue for the WH & Senate but red everywhere else. We here in the red north are quite used to having to go it alone when it comes to resources. We started out small, had a few stumbles here and there but now can raise money, field candidates and have made actual headway on winning votes. Not elections yet but soon as we hit closer each time.
Of course we suffered set-backs after the latest redistricting. 
Damn but I wish progressives could stop thinking about the damn WH long enough to win some elections in between-times.
Julie
