Little more than a half century ago, racial segregation was an acceptable practice in many parts of the United States. Schools, transportation, and public places were racially divided under the flawed excuse of “separate but equal.” Thankfully, Americans legally and morally rejected racial segregation; it became illegal and socially reprehensible. We do not divide people or measure people by race, so why should such division remain in politics?

Consistent with the absolute rejection of racial segregation, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in “Louisiana versus Callais” that using race as a factor in drawing Congressional districts is unconstitutional which has set off frenzied redistricting efforts in about a dozen states. Red states relieved of the racial requirement are scrambling to undo court ordered racial gerrymandering and blue states are jumping in to counter any Republican gains.

The immediate Democrat backlash to this ruling has been unhinged. Alabama State Senator Rodger Smitherman swears this will usher in “the third coming of Reconstruction” with renewed “Jim Crow” laws and poll taxes to suppress black voters. He may be somewhat confused because Reconstruction gave blacks the vote and fostered blacks getting elected to Congress. It was the Democrat response to Reconstruction that brought about “Jim Crow” laws to deprive blacks of their votes and drive them from office.

All of that blather is hyperbole and fear-mongering; there will not be any return to “Jim Crow,” so no need to panic. Let’s, however, explore what is really going on. First, this is not a racial issue; it’s purely a partisan issue. No one wants to suppress any voters, but both parties want to maximize their representation and minimize the other. This is a partisan battle, not a racial struggle.

Gerrymandering is not illegal and was a common practice for two centuries. In each state, the party in power draws electoral districts to benefit their party best. However, gerrymandering can be excessive and is often used to protect incumbents. In Alabama, a competitive general election is rare because districts are drawn to favor one party or the other, almost all seats are decided in the party primaries. Therefore, one party generally cannot unseat the other unless the lines are shifted; and quite frankly, incumbents of both parties tacitly like having their seats protected.

This is another discussion, but if legislative districts were drawn to be competitive with balanced Democrat and Republican voters, we might get more moderate candidates from both parties. In balanced competitive districts, candidates would have to campaign to win independents and swing voters in the general election. That might bring stability or mediocrity.

Considering race in drawing electoral districts is fundamentally racist. It’s racist to tell blacks they have to live in one city or go to one school, so why is not racist to tell them they have to vote in one district? It also presupposes blacks will only vote for blacks and whites only for whites. Most but not all blacks tend to vote Democrat, but lumping all together is racial profiling. Every elected black Republican was elected in a predominantly white district.

The past six decades, the reality is blacks have voted historically for Democrats almost monolithically, so again this is partisan gerrymandering to ensure Democrats get elected and race is coincidental to that end. Yes, a 65% or more black district will more than likely elect a black Democrat but has black fealty to Democrats really benefited them? Is concentrating black voters in particular districts empowering them or perhaps diluting their electoral influence?

Instead of 70% plus blacks in one district, would 35% in two districts not wield significant influence in two districts? The point is putting blacks in majority black districts allows Democrats to hold them hostage. Since blacks tend to vote reliably Democrat, Democrats take them for granted and Republicans ignore them. If black voters were available, both parties would compete for their votes. The status quo has not really benefited the black community, so this change may liberate them and ignite renewed black voter influence.

While elections are designed to allow every voter to have a voice, there is the individual aspect but also the state aspect. Blue and red states want Congressional delegations that represent their state, so they draw Congressional districts to maximize partisan representation. Massachusetts voters are about 36% Republican, but they have 9 Democrat Congressman and no Republicans. Perhaps they could put all Republicans in one district to allow one Republican, but they are a blue state so is it unexpected that they have a Democrat dominated delegation?

Most blue states and some red states are similarly constructed, but that is our system. Elections have consequences. The new SCOTUS ruling rightly eliminates race as a factor in electoral districting, so red states thusly relieved are only pursuing redistricting for partisan advantage not to deny any race the right to vote.

Despite all the gnashing of teeth, this is not about race; it’s all about partisan power. This a battle royale for control of Congress and continuing President Trump’s agenda. If Americans and the states give control of Congress in November to Democrats, we will have two years of gridlock and daily impeachments. If Republicans retain control, Trump will complete implementing his agenda. It may appear unseemly, but stakes are high so it’s not unexpected or unreasonable that states would seek to preserve their partisan interests.

Black voters will not be disenfranchised, but some Democrats may lose seats in red states as some Republicans may lose seats in blue states. It will be brutally partisan, but we will be better for removing racial profiling. Nothing is guaranteed, but all may be surprised by the new electoral dynamics with black voters liberated from electoral segregation.

“A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.” Proverbs 11:1

Pete Riehm is a Navy Veteran, conservative activist, and columnist in south Alabama. Email him at peteriehm@bellsouth.net or read all his columns at http://www.renewamerica.com/.