"While America has the watch, the Taliban have the time" Thoughts On Afghanistan

[US consumers of news get lots of click-bate photos and headlines, but very little depth on any topic. This post offers a peek at the complexities involved in predicting the future of Afghanistan. ] 

I was going to sort out my thoughts on the US pulling all troops out of Afghanistan.  What exactly did I know, not know?  What do I think the likely consequences might be for the people of Afghanistan, the US, and the power dynamics of Central Asia.

My basic sense was that Afghanistan is likely to be taken over by the Taliban - that an extreme male oriented version of Islamic law would be imposed and those associated with the US would be assassinated, 

This would lead to lots of headlines blaming Biden for 'losing Afghanistan,' losing face for the US internationally, and give the Republicans one of their most effective weapons for the 2022 and 2024 elections.  

So I outlined those ideas, including the context that I didn't think would be included - that already England and the USSR have tried to take control of Afghanistan and eventually withdrew.  That others - particularly Afghanistan's neighbors - would work to keep Afghanistan stable and safe for them, as well as developing more extensive beneficial relationships between their countries.  I also saw come comparisons with our war in Vietnam and the kinds of rhetoric used when it was clear we had lost and were going to withdraw.  

Then I started googling to find out more about the interests and relationships Afghanistan has with its neighbors.  

After reading a number of articles on Afghanistan's relationships with its neighbors, my outlook is more hopeful.  The people of Afghanistan have suffered a great deal over the last 40 years - including the Taliban.  The US' departure may give the Taliban the symbolic victory they need to work more cooperatively with the Afghan government, and more importantly, with neighboring governments.  

Iran and Pakistan have vested interests in a friendly Afghanistan.  Iran's Shi'a government has serious issues with the Sunni Taliban.  But all the countries in the region have interests in regional infrastructure - roads, power, communications, trade.

Most significantly, China's been aggressively building a road to Pakistan as well as infrastructure projects in Africa, and trade agreements with Europe.  China's border with Afghanistan is the smallest, but China's power and expansionist interests the largest.  

While some of the terror people expect when the US pulls out completely may happen, I suspect the long term outlook for Afghanistan is not so grim.  China will spread its largesse among the Taliban and the Afghan government in exchange for a more secure country and an extension of their  Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and their China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).  

No matter what actually happens, we can count on the GOP to focus on the worst aspects.  But if they don't have any real issues with Biden, they would fabricate some fantastic tales.  

So here is my original outline and below are some links you might find interesting.

These are thoughts about the US withdrawal from Afghanistan.  

1. The GOP will try to use Afghanistan to defeat Biden in 2024.  Even though the GOP is not too interested in women's rights in the US, they used women's rights as one of the reasons to go into Afghanistan and defeat the Taliban. We will see images and stories after the US pulls out completely of assassinations, of girls being barred from schools, of imposition of Taliban rules like before US troops entered the country.  
2. The stories we won't hear 
1. A serious evaluation of why, after 20 years, the Afghan government couldn't defeat the Taliban.  
2. What would likely happen in Afghanistan and the cost to the US if we stayed and continued our 'nation building'
3. Calls for US troops to intervene to help the millions of people around the world whose lives are as difficult, as at risk, or worse, in other countries (remember how Trump helped the Syrian people?)
3. Stories we may hear:
1. How the British and Russians both withdrew from Afghanistan, unable to defeat local resistance.
2. How our initial goal was to get Al Qaeda and bin Laden, not to do democracy building
3. How getting into war is easier than getting out of it
4. How this is a humiliating defeat for the US
5. How Vietnam was also a humiliating defeat for the US, but eventually has become a thriving country, doing much better without us, even though we portrayed the Communist North as evil demons
6. How Afghanistan is not Vietnam 
4. The biggest irony, I think, is that the corruption we hear about in the Afghan government is, if not the result of, certainly greatly magnified, by the billions of dollars of US money and weapons and contracts that have flooded the country.  For those in a position to scoop up some of that largesse, it was an irresistible opportunity to make one's fortune, with hopes to leave when the spigot got turned off.  
5. Likely outcomes of leaving
1. The initial outcomes will favor the Taliban, 
2. The opposition to the Taliban, without the cushion of US money, will either be killed, flee the country, or take on the Taliban more seriously and without the fighting over US money
3. Neighboring countries (there are six - can you name them? Three were part of the Soviet Union which no longer has a border with Afghanistan.  See map below) will begin to adjust their Afghan policies when the US is gone and exert influence to protect their own interests such as
1. those who supported the Taliban because they were fighting the US will likely have a strong influence on the Taliban and/or withdraw their support
2. concern for radical religious beliefs destabilizing their own populations (Taliban are Sunni Muslims. Iran are Shi'a)
3. protect their borders 
1. stem tide of Afghan refugees coming over their borders
2. prevent military threats
4. exploit minerals and develop infrastructure projects and other economic opportunities  in Afghanistan
5. make deals to export their products to their nearest neighbor

US voters have short term memories.  Pulling out in 2021 gives Biden three years for this action to be lost in the flood of events that will occur between now and the election.  There may even be glimmers of good news to emerge from Afghanistan - but I think that will take longer.  

Source:  Geo Politics of South Asia and MENA

Don't miss the tiny, but significant border with China.  

Some interesting background:

Iran's Influence on Afghanistan (June 23, 2020) Middle East Institute - SourceWatch lists MEI's biggest funders as the world's major oil companies.

Iran-Taliban Growing Ties - What's Different This Time? (Feb 16, 2021)  The Atlantic Council - Media Bias/Fact Check says it's factual with a center-right bias.

Iran's Influence in Afghanistan (2014) Rand Corporation - AllSides rates Rand as "Leans Left" (Note, this was before Trump was seen even as a viable candidate)

No-Win War:  The Paradox of U.S.-Pakistan Relations in Afganistan's Shadow - Event Recap - (May 11, 2021) Wilson Center - MediaBias/Fact check rates Wilson Center between "least biased" and "left of center"

The headline quote of this post comes from this article and is attributed to Zahid Hussain quoting a Taliban leader

How Qatar came to host the Taliban (2013) BBC - Interesting background on how the Taliban leaders came to have their headquarters in Qatar.

Turkmenistan:  The Afghan connection (Jan 12, 2021) Eurasianet   Media Bias/Fact Check gives Eurasianet a high rating in factual reporting and a slightly left of center bia.Gives a sense of the kinds of issues  and projects that connect the two countries - particularly infrastructure projects. 

China Has a BIG Plan for Post-U.S. Afghanistan—and It’s Worth Billions: Beijing just can’t wait for the U.S. to get out of the way.(July 4, 2021) Daily Beast

Who are the Taliban? ( July 1, 2021) BBC

Will Turkey take over at Afghanistan's main airport?   (July 9, 2021)  Al Jazeera - Al Jazeera, like the Taliban, are headquartered in Doha, Qatar.

If China does move into the vacuum there are many possibilities.

• The GOP will trumpet how Biden 'lost' Afghanistan to China, as they did about losing Vietnam to the Communists and earlier, how Truman 'lost' China.  Of course, the US never 'had' any of those places to lose in the first place.
• The Afghan resistance to foreign rulers has been impressive.  They may quickly find China to be one more foreign nation trying to exploit them.  And they know how China is treating their fellow Muslims the Uighurs in the Chinese province of Xinjiang, which has China's tiny border with Afghanistan.  
• Tired of 40 years of war, the Taliban (they fought under other names before they became Taliban) may be ready to use the US withdrawal to declare victory and enjoy peace.  Though fighting is the one activity they are really good at and so may be more comfortable in that, and they may see this as their turn again to rule Afghanistan.  

Alaska's COVID Numbers Are Going Back Up

In the Alaska Daily COVID-19 Count 3 tab below the banner up top, I've got a spreadsheet with Alaska COVID stats since March 15, 2020. It's 3 because numbers 1 and 2 got so long and bulky, I needed a new one.  I started it because the state just kept replacing yesterday's numbers with today's and it was hard to know if things were getting better or worse.  They've got fancy dashboards now with graphs, but they are only posted three times a week now.  This week only twice because there was a holiday Monday.  Along with updated numbers on the chart.  I post some comments to give the numbers a little more meaning.  

In the last few weeks, the numbers have changed.  They were going down.  Then they seemed to level off.  And now they are going back up.  This isn't over yet.  I've kept my COVID posts mainly in the COVID tab, but given that we are moving up again, it seemed useful to repeat yesterday's (Friday) comments here in the main section of the blog.  You have to go to the tab to see the chart.

Friday, July 9, 2021 - Our direction has definitely changed.  We're going back up.

Two new deaths reported today for a total of 370 Alaskans. Note, reported doesn't tell us when they happened.  We don't know if it was in the last two days or ta while ago and that stats are just catching up.

There were 14 new hospitalizations.  27 COVID patients are hospitalized in Alaska.  There are 48 ICU beds available in Alaska.  That's a reasonably high number for the time I've been following it.  But it could drop if hospitalizations spike. That number is also affected by non-COVID patients.

You know that most of the hospitalizations lately are of unvaccinated people.  Not only are these people risking themselves, they're giving the virus time to mutate into ever more contagious and severe versions.  AND they are endangering all those under 12 who haven't been approved yet for vaccination. And they're using up medical facilities and the patience and time or health care workers unnecessarily. Most of the kids will probably have slight or no symptoms, but a number of them will get sick enough to be hospitalized.  But the anti-vaxers really don't seem to care about anyone but themselves.  It's like a bunch of are in a big rowboat trying to get to shore, but part of the group insists on jumping up and down and rocking the boat.  

117 more people tested positive in the last two days.  Nearly 60 a day.  

But what concerns me most is that Test Positivity was reported at 2.43.  That's the highest number I have (there were days when the numbers weren't available) since April 30, 2021.  There were about   6600 tests since Wednesday.  

Redistricting Board Goes To Redistricting Seminar in Salt Lake City Next Week

I was tempted put the word 'junket' in the title, but I wasn't sure everyone would know that I was just joking.  This is a serious conference that the Board members and staff should attend.  Not only will they get more information about the latest ideas on redistricting (like how the recent US Supreme Court decision to weaken Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act might mean), but also to meet people from other states doing redistricting.   

The latest announcement from the Board:

"Alaska Redistricting Board Member Attendance at NCSL

A quorum of the Alaska Redistricting Board will attend the "Get Ready to Redistrict" seminar hosted by the National Conference of State Legislatures in Salt Lake City Utah from Wednesday, July 14 through Friday, July 16 for educational purposes only.  No Board action will be taken.

What: Educational seminars, NCSL Redistricting Conference

Where: Downtown Marriott at City Creek, Salt Lake City, Utah

When: July 14 - July 16, 2021"

While this is NOT a board meeting where official action will be taken, all the Board Members, apparently, are going to Salt Lake City, so they are required to post an announcement.  It's one of those sticky areas.  Surely, they will have three or more members together talking about what they learned.  Maybe over lunch or dinner.  And those conversations should be available to the public by law.  

When legislators go to such conferences, only a few go to anyone single conference, so there's usually not a quorum.  Perhaps it would be useful for a Board member or the staff to do some unofficial minutes of any meetings of three or more members to let the public know what they're learning and how they think it affects what they'll be doing.  

The conference is put on by the NCSL (National Council of State Legislatures).  Their mission is:

"NCSL: Our Mission

NCSL, founded in 1975, represents the legislatures in the states, territories and commonwealths of the U.S. Its mission is to advance the effectiveness, independence and integrity of legislatures and to foster interstate cooperation and facilitate the exchange of information among legislatures.

NCSL also represents legislatures in dealing with the federal government, especially in support of state sovereignty and state flexibility and protection from unfunded federal mandates and unwarranted federal preemption. The conference promotes cooperation between state legislatures in the U.S. and those in other countries.

In addition, NCSL is committed to improving the operations and management of state legislatures, and the effectiveness of legislators and legislative staff. NCSL also encourages the practice of high standards of conduct by legislators and legislative staff."

This organization has traditionally been bi-partisan, with the goal to promote effective and efficient practices in state legislatures.  I haven't kept track of them lately, but their values used to be (and probably still are) following the rule of law for the public interest.  

Highly partisan organizations, like ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council), have tried to mimic the look of NCSL, but with a heavily partisan twist.  While NCSL offers states model legislation to neutrally (as I said above, to promote the rule of law and the public interest) ALEC offers model legislation that pushes the agenda of their sponsors, like the Kochs.

Here's the agenda for the conference next week. (You have to scroll down the page and then select the day you want.  This is pretty long, so you might consider reading these on the days they are happening.)

Wednesday, July 14

2-3:30 p.m.: Optional: Redistricting Basics

If this is your first redistricting cycle, join us for this session. Experienced legislative staff will provide a foundation on redistricting based on NCSL’s Redistricting Starter Kit.

3:45-5 p.m.: Option A: Race and Redistricting: Civil Rights Groups Speak

French fries and ketchup. Sunscreen and the beach. Redistricting and lawsuits. Three classic pairings. Hear from groups that represent minority communities in the U.S. on what they’re focused on this decade when it comes to redistricting. Who knows—maybe what we learn will forestall a lawsuit or two.

3:45-5 p.m.: Option B: Census Redistricting Data Program Evaluation | Primary Topic: "Geography"

In this session, census redistricting program liaisons and other users of census redistricting geographic data are invited to come talk through the strengths and weaknesses of the already completed geographic definition and delivery of geographic materials from the 2020 census. Feedback on the 2020 redistricting data program's geographic operations will be used in the formulation of the 2030 census redistricting data program. Feedback is also welcome on other aspects of the program.

5-7 p.m.: Welcome Reception

Thursday, July 15

6:45 a.m.: Optional Morning Run

Studies show exercise improves brain functionality. This run, though, is all about going slow and being social.

7 a.m.-3 p.m.: Registration

7:30-8:45 a.m.: Breakfast and Welcome

Eat first, then at 8:15 a.m. we’ll welcome everyone and review what's ahead

9-10:15 a.m.: The Census

Option A: Census and Data for Beginners

Are you a non-data expert working on redistricting? This session is for you. Learn what data the census will be released, a bit about how it can be used and an introduction to other types of data used in redistricting so you and your data colleagues can communicate effectively with each other.

Option B: Census and Data for Experts

In this advanced session, we’ll cover differential privacy (and if it makes a difference), working with race and ethnicity data, how election turnout impacts the accuracy of political data, and the use of party registration as a data layer. Warning: nerding out likely.

10:30-11:45 a.m.: Take Your Pick

Option A: Meet with Your Redistricting Software Experts

Your state has probably chosen its redistricting software by now. Here’s your chance to meet your software vendor, discuss its features and pick up tips. These sessions will be run by the vendors themselves, not by NCSL.

Option B: Short Takes on Three Key Issues

Gain insight into three issues that are easy to overlook: local redistricting (yes, it’s required by law); the “hand off” of redistricting data to election officials so they can prepare for next year’s primaries; and why some states are adopting inmate data reallocation laws.

Noon-12:45 p.m.: Lunch

1-2:15 p.m.: Choose Your Own Adventure

Option A: Balancing Conflicting Criteria

Criteria (or principles) are the rules of the road in redistricting, and they vary by state. Sometimes, though, they pull in opposite directions and it’s hard to comply with them all. Hear veterans of the redistricting process explain how to strike a balance between potentially irreconcilable mandates.

Option B: Data Details

What can redistricters learn from data sources beyond the census? For instance, in redistricting, what does voter registration provide and how does it differ state to state? Does it matter whether votes were cast by mail, in-person on Election Day or during an early in-person voting period? How does party enrollment data inform decision-making? Is there a way to know just how independent the non-D and non-R voters are? What’s turnout got to do with it? Dig deep with data experts.

2:30-3:45 p.m.: Redistricting Litigation in the 2020s

Redistricting litigation for the 2010 cycle didn’t end until 2019. Will the coming cycle be just as intense? Hear nationally recognized litigators discuss the current state of the law, new trends to watch in the 2020s, and possibly make predictions for the future.

4-5:15 p.m.: Threading the Needle: The Voting Rights Act and Racial Gerrymandering

Two federal requirements governing redistricting involve race. The Voting Rights Act directs states to ensure that certain minority groups have the opportunity to elect candidates of their choice, whereas the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment prohibits race from predominating during redistricting decision-making. Confusing, right? Listen as two expert litigators parse the nuances created by the U.S. Supreme Court and how states can walk the legal compliance line.

5:30-6:30 p.m.: Connecting With Your Peers

Option A: Republicans

This is an ancillary session run by Republicans, for Republicans. For more information, contact Kylie Bongaart.

Note: This is not an NCSL-sponsored session.

Option B: Democrats

This is an ancillary session run by Democrats, for Democrats. For more information, contact Jeff Wice.

Note: This is not an NCSL-sponsored session.

Option C: Nonpartisan Staff Reception

If you’re a legislative staffer and don’t belong at the partisan sessions, get to know your colleagues from around the nation.

Evening on your own

Friday, July 16

7 a.m.: Optional: Walking Tour

See the sites with Brian Bean, a staffer with the Utah Senate. Meet in the lobby.

7:30-8:45 a.m.: Breakfast

Eat first—then at 8 a.m., choose which break out session at attend.

8-9:15 a.m.: Getting Along

Option A: Lowering the Temperature When Legislatures Redistrict

If you read the press, redistricting boils down to just one thing: power. Is that really true? Bring your breakfast to hear from legislators who have threaded their way through the trials and tribulations of legislative infighting.

Option B: Working With Your Commission

In states where commissions have primary responsibility for redistricting, what’s the legislature’s role? Bring your breakfast and hear from former commissioners and legislators who worked with commissions to find out how colleagues in prior decades stayed engaged while respecting the legal division between line-drawers and policymakers.

9:30-10:45 a.m.: Unseen Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

You don’t know what you don’t know. Fortunately, there are people who have done redistricting who DO know what you don’t know. Attend this session to learn from attorneys the pitfalls that can trip up the best-planned redistricting process—so you can avoid their mistakes.

11 a.m.-Noon: Legislative Privilege and Transparency

Legislative privilege is a critical part of the lawmaking process. Without it, policymakers wouldn’t be free to ask candid questions and talk openly with their staff. And yet, in this cycle “transparency” is being heralded. Learn the nuances of this area of the law so you can better understand what will happen when you end up in court over redistricting.

12:15-1:30 p.m.: What Court Will Look Like (and Box Lunch)

Odds are, you’ll be sued over redistricting. What will that lawsuit look like? This panel of litigants, litigators and a judge will walk you through the life of a redistricting lawsuit so you have an idea of what may happen if your maps end up in court. Bring in your box lunch.

1:30-2 p.m.: Ask Us Anything

Faculty will answer anything anyone cares to ask so we leave the Beehive State with exactly the information you need for the redistricting work about to begin.

3-4 p.m.: Optional: Tour of Utah State Capitol 

Living Through A Pandemic Is A Little Like Living Abroad For A Year

Back in June there were various news stories about how high school students felt that they were being robbed, by the pandemic, of sacred high school experiences, like prom and graduation.  My reaction was that in ten years, their pandemic year stories will be much more meaningful than most people's graduation stories.  

As I thought about it more, it seemed that the pandemic has been, in many (not all) ways - a lot like living living abroad for a year.  

Of course, there are lots of ways to live abroad - with work, in the military,  a school year overseas, traveling from country to country, etc.  The impact of the year (or more) abroad ranges widely, depending on whether you live in an ex-pat bubble or you're the only foreigner in your community. Most people's experiences are somewhere in between those two extremes.  

Some key factors that affect the experience include:

• whether you have to learn and to speak the other language(s)
• how many others from your culture are there with you
• whether you work with locals or not

But regardless, there are certain things that happen to many people living in another culture.

• your new culture makes you think about your home country differently
• you think about things you miss, but also learn that the new culture has alternatives, some of which are better 
• you start comparing the two cultures, which is the first step to realizing that the way you've always lived isn't the only way to live, or even the best
• things you thought were necessary turn out not to be
• you see that your new culture interprets news about your culture differently - whether it's in the newspapers or comments from your new friends and colleagues
• you start thinking about what the new culture does better than your old culture and vice versa
• if you learn to speak the language well enough to negotiate life in it
• you find out that your native language is just one of many, many ways to communicate
• that translation is not simply substituting the foreign words for your native words 
• you learn that there are words in the new language that don't exist in your own, that give you different ways of thinking about the world, 
• as you master the grammar, what first seemed awkward or just plain weird, now becomes an alternative to what you once thought was the only way words could be arranged together
• there's a certain freedom to navigating without ever using your native language, a liberation from the biases and limits every language imposes on its native speakers
• If the new language has a different alphabet or characters instead of letters, you have to rearrange brain cells to adapt even more

• when you return you are not the same person who left - your mind and expectations have been expanded
• there's the pleasure of old food favorites and seeing friends and family
• but you start missing food specialties from the new culture 
• and your old friends haven't gone through what you've gone through and they don't realize you see things differently, and while they like the exotic pictures, they don't understand the less visible aspects of the other culture and how that's changed you

The list can go on and on.  But overall being in another country forces you to see your own country differently and also to see yourself differently.  You see that there are other possibilities than the life you used to live.  This is true if you went to the other country voluntarily or not (say, if your parents took you.)

I think the same will prove true for all of us who have lived through the pandemic.  

• It interrupted our routines and forced us to find other ways to do things.  
• We learned to order delivery or use curbside pick up for groceries and other items.  
• We learned to wear masks and gloves.  
• We learned to use zoom and streamed a lot more videos.  
• There were many things we didn't understand - particularly about the virus and how to respond to it - and it took time to figure out what worked and what didn't.  
• Some people resisted changing their routines. 
• They refused to believe that the virus was real.   This happens, say, to US citizens overseas who insist on only eating US food and will only speak English and think they are not subject to the new country's laws and customs
• We've had more time home alone or with our families.  Time to think.
• We've learned new vocabulary, from COVID to community spread and Zoom

Changes are already being reported.  I'm hearing news of people who want to keep working from home post pandemic.  Or even rethinking whether they want to stay in the same job or profession.  

Some people get back from an overseas stay with new insights, but gradually fall back into their old routines.

Other people's lives are profoundly different when they get back.  They gravitate to new friends who have overseas experiences too and can understand their new perspectives.  They cook their favorite foods from overseas and try to find ways to keep up their language skills.  They see bias in the media covering their new country.

Nobody chose to spend these past two years in a pandemic, but some people took advantage of the changes while others endured it kicking and screaming.  But even they will have learned from this experience.  I think of my son who did not want to spend a year in Hong Kong and didn't particularly enjoy all the changes in his life.  He was 15 at the time.  But he used his overseas experiences in his college essays when he got back.  Later he took Chinese in a community college so he could speak to work colleagues using their own language.  He taught English in China for a year, worked a year in Europe, and got a masters degree in SE Asia.  I don't think those things would have happened without the year in Hong Kong.  

One obvious difference between the pandemic and a year abroad is that the whole world participated in the pandemic at the same time.  And the pandemic exposed inequities between nations and within nations.  

For all of us, 2020 and 2021 will be landmark years in our personal lives and in the history of the world.  If we're lucky we will have learned a lot.  We'll be better prepared for a future pandemic.  We'll take climate change more seriously. We'll realize that changes to our routines to combat climate change may be initially challenging, but they will also offer opportunities we didn't expect.  

Will The Real Justin Levitt Please Stand Up

 On the tv show To Tell The Truth, there were three contestants who all said they were the same person and a panel of four asked them questions to determine which one was the real, in this case, Justin Levitt.  When the questions were done, the host would say, "Will the real [Justin Levitt] please stand up."

I discovered Justin Levitt ten years ago when I was blogging the Alaska Redistricting Board.  Levitt is a voting rights expert from Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles.  I've been following him on Twitter.  So I sent him a direct message when I found out who the Redistricting Board's Voting Rights Act consultant was.  Did he know him?  Was he a good choice?  I didn't get a response right away.  In the meantime I read the whole winning proposal and saw that Justin Levitt was one of the experts listed on the proposal.  So, I direct messaged Levitt again saying that I saw he was on the proposal and so I understood why he hadn't responded.  

Then he did respond. There were two Justin Levitts, and yes he was the one at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, and no, he wasn't part of the winning proposal.  

Justin Levitt - LMU and White House

Instead, it turns out, according to his university profile, 

"As of April 8, 2021, Professor Levitt is on leave from Loyola, serving as the White House Senior Policy Advisor for Democracy and Voting Rights."  

And he does have a website called All About Redistricting. 

Justin Levitt -National Demographics
Corporation

Meanwhile, there's another Justin Levitt who is also an expert on redistricting.  He's  the Vice President of the National Demographics Corporation and got his PhD in political science at  UC San Diego.  The dissertation is titled, "“Beyond the Circle: Geographic Constraints on Tradeoffs in Redistricting.”

This is the Justin Levitt who is listed on the winning Voting Rights Act proposal.

So, the Justin Levitt I'm familiar with and whose redistricting page I've visited and whom I follow on Twitter, is NOT the Justin Levitt who will be part of the Voting Rights Act consultant's team.  

But I couldn't help but recall the old tv show To Tell The Truth, so here's the episode of To Tell The Truth Bruce Adelson of Federal Voting Rights Consulting ... July 3, 1961 - 60 years ago this week.  One of the panelists is a very young Johnny Carson.  And the first guest was the fireworks director at the Los Angeles Coliseum. 

But in our case, there actually are two Justin Levitts who both work in the field of voting rights and redistricting.  The Levitt I contacted did say that they have met.  It's probably fairly common to have to people working in the same profession, but in this case the name is not too common and the field is pretty specialized.  

It seems to me To Tell The Truth could have up their game by having three contestants who all had the same name.  

Talk To Your Opposite - NPR's One Small Step

Have you given up on dialogue with people who vote differently than you? NPR is asking for volunteers who still believe they can talk over political fences.   

An Alaska Public Media webpage has this description:

"No matter their political leanings, a majority of Americans agree that divisiveness is a major problem impacting our ability to deal with the pandemic and serious challenges facing our country. There is hope: A majority of Americans also say they are optimistic that our country can overcome political divisiveness in the years ahead.  At a moment like this, aren’t we called to try to find a better way forward — together?

One Small Step is an effort to reconnect Americans, one conversation at a time.

Apply to be matched for One Small Step"

The map shows seven locations where they are trying this:  Anchorage, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, California, Nevada, and Vermont.  I can't tell from their map the cities in the other states.  I'm not sure how diverse a group you get from people who listen to NPR.  Maybe it's more diverse than I realize, but I think the audience leans left. But maybe it just leans rational.  But that no longer includes most Republicans.

Let's see if this goes anywhere.  

Florida Condo Squabble Over Repairs, Good Metaphor For US

The US in the title is for both the United States and 'us' as individuals.

 

Source

The headline of this Washington Post article republished in the Anchorage Daily News is probably a good reflection on the US democracy in general.  

Condo owners belong to associations and have to make group decisions about how to manage the condos.  Most stuff tends to get done by the board, but bigger issues have to get approved by the membership.  Things like making major repairs.  

I'm imagining the basic debates the owners had:

1. Technical Stuff:  How do we actually know how serious the problems with the structure are? How much repair do we really have to do to?  
2. Emotional Stuff:  How much is this going to cost me?  Am I really in danger?  Is someone trying to rip us off?

Engineering reports are fairly technical and most owners probably won't read them that carefully if at all.  And if they do read them, many don't have an engineering education they would need to judge the level of urgency of the required repairs.

And when they see the price tags - $80,000 to $300,000 per unit - they have to assess how that affects their life expectations and goals.  If that amount of money would seriously jeopardize their economic security, then they're much more likely to downplay the urgency.  

But we know, in this case, there are (as I write) 24 known dead and 124 missing.  Different owners are being affected differently, regardless of the positions they took on the repairs.  There's the dead and missing.  The other residents who now have had to evacuate their homes.  The owners who don't live there, just rent out their condos.  There are people who were visiting who knew nothing about the issue.  

The condo collapse is a very tangible (I'm resisting the term I'd normally use here - concrete) example of where we are in the US today on issue after issue - from COVID to guns to climate change.  

1.  We argue over the facts, over the science, over the likelihood of different scenarios.

2.  Our involvement is affected by our emotional involvement, our life dreams, our fears, and for the leaders, the level of their personal need for power.  How many people are Board members for the good of the condos or because it gives them power and some sort of standing, prestige?  Same question for our legislators.

3.  For US issues (and this is true around the world) we have a factor that probably didn't play a big role in the condo association - deliberate misinformation campaigns to stir doubt about everything, which lets the venal continue their actions in the confusion.

There were visible signs at the condo of the dangers - cracking, water seepage, concrete deterioration -  so that people could see something needed to be done.  The visible signs of climate change keep piling on, but we're like members of the condo association - squabbling rather than taking the obvious necessary actions we need to take. [A carbon fee and dividend is by far the most effective and viable way to prevent the most carbon release.  You can see more about that here. But Republicans (mainly) throw up roadblock after roadblock.]]

There are human variations that affect how people make decisions:

• Ability to deal with change 
• Ability to comprehend complex, abstract issues
• Comfort with risk and uncertainty
• Personal sense of power and ability to make a difference

Some of the items above are influenced by genetics, but also by the conditions we grew up with:

• Economic security and ability
• Educational opportunities and choices
• Amount of love we got from our families and communities

I'm sure you can all add to the lists.  

Step One to a better democracy:  people need to learn about themselves and where they are on these and other factors and what their relatively strengths  and weaknesses are.  

The obstacles for many people are not out there in the world, but lurking in our own sense of self.  

Want An Inside Look At Alaska's Redistricting? They're Hiring An Administrative Assistant

From the email:

"Good morning subscribers -- a note to let you know that the Board is seeking professional administrative help for the coming map drawing cycle.

 

The applicant must work well under pressure and be able to quickly shift from various administrative tasks including reception, travel arrangements, correspondence, and document preparation.

 

The job listing is here –>

Peter Torkelson
Executive Director
Alaska Redistricting Board"

and from the link:

"Job Search ResultsJob Title Job TypeSalary Closing Posted DepartmentLocationCategory

Administrative Assistant

Seasonal$1,873.50 - $2,477.25 Biweekly

07/16/21 06/24/21

Legislative AffairsAnchorage, 

AKAdministrative Assistant"

Redistricting Board Meets To Learn Mapping Software

 I stopped by the Legislative Information Office in Anchorage yesterday (Tuesday) to see part of the 2nd day of training.  This is what the whole room looked like when I came in to sit down.  The only other spectator turned out to be the son of the trainer.  But I heard that several people were there Monday. 

The Board members are up front.  To the left are the Board's two attorneys, to the right are the staff.  With his back to us is the consultant who flew up to do the training.  He and his son ended up sleeping Sunday night on the floor at SEATAC because a bunch of flights were cancelled due to the weather.  [All the photos open larger and sharper if you click on them]

To the left are Board members Melanie Bahnke and Nicole Borromeo.  (Brief bios of all the Board members are here.)

On this side we see (left to right) Board chair John Binkley and members Bethany Marcum and Budd Simpson.  

Attorneys Lee Baxter and lead attorney Matt Singer.   This was the only shot I took of the two and Singer was actually sitting up attentively most of the time.  

And here's Eric Sandberg and Peter Torkelson, executive director.  The previous post was about my meeting with Peter and TJ last week.  TJ was out picking up sweets for the Board when I got there.  Eric was a Dept. of Labor computer guy who was a technical expert for the previous board and my understanding is they have a similar arrangement this year.  Eric was the go-to guy for all the technical problems.  

The meeting turned out not quite as boring as I expected.  Well, first, I stayed less than an hour, and second, Peter invited me to play with the software on his computer.  Although this was an official meeting because more than two Board members were meeting (and so it was posted ahead of time and people could attend or call in), it was really a training session and much more informal.  Nicole Borromeo at one point asked me who I was taking pictures for (all the meetings ten years ago, there were never any audience members addressed or allowed to speak.)  When I told her, the Chair welcomed me.  (We had communicated by email a few times.)  Monday was, as I understand it, the first time the Board members had all been together and met each other in person.  

I looked up "autoBound EDGE" the software they're using.  

and got this brief description here.

You can see this better if you click on it or go to the website

One of the attorneys told me they are working to have software available for the public to use when the census data arrives in August so people can experiment and make their own maps.  I think that's important for two reasons:  1) it helps people understand how complicated it is to divide the state into 40 districts with equal population and meeting the federal and state requirements for compactness, social/economic integrity, and contiguity, among a few other parameters.  

My brief introduction to the software told me its complicated (there are lots of options for what maps you look at (blocks, tracts, districts, and subdivisions of each of those and lots of options to use different tools to add area into a district or take it out, etc.)  The most complex software I use regularly is Photoshop and I've taken university level classes on it and I only use a small fraction of what it's capable of.  This seems to have the same level of depth and breadth.  

This webpage gives some visual examples of some of the layers the Board will be using and it also says there's a version for citizens to use.  Let's see.  I'll keep prodding the Board to get the software available to the public before the data arrives so that people can start learning how to use it.

There are online videos for how to work this software and it's available to the public.  Though I'm not sure that when we get to the free software for the public, that it will be the same software the Board will be using.  And I haven't found that page yet.  

But I hope that there are lots of folks out there who might think about the mapping of Alaska's legislative districts and a challenging game and jump in.  

Went To My First Indoor Meeting - At The Redistricting Board

I'm slowly moving out into a more normal life.  Wednesday I met with the Alaska Redistricting Board Executive  Director, Peter Torkelson, and the Deputy Director, TJ Presley. 

 Here's some of what we talked about.

1.  This is a waiting period.  The total number of Alaskans as of the 2020 census has come in.  While the actual number is constantly changing, this is the number that will be used:   733,391.  That means each district needs to be as close to 18,335 people as possible.

18,335 comes from dividing 733,391 by 40, the number of Alaska House seats. There are 20 Senate seats, each made up of two House seats. So Senate districts will be just about 36,670.  

But the detailed numbers for each census tract are NOT yet available.  Last time (2011) they came March 15.  But because of the pandemic and other counting issues, it's taking longer this time.  So the staff has some time as they await the data which is due maybe mid-August to beginning of September.   

2.  What they're doing while waiting for the Census numbers to come in?   jjj

The two have been giving presentations to city councils around the state recently.  Generally it's Peter or TJ. If a Board member is in the area they might drop by.  They've been to Ketchikan, Kodiak, Barrow, Bethel, Soldotna and Valdez, and to Homer and Seward by zoom.  A couple of places said they weren't interested in a presentation.  Below is a copy of the slides they've been using.  Remember that when they give the presentation they can talk and explain what this all means.  But much of it is probably self explanatory.  If you have question,  contact the redistricting board staff.

Redistricting Introduction 6-16-21 by Steve on Scribd

An Anchorage presentation is set for June 25 - whoops, guess I missed it.  But I think the Botanical Garden was a better choice anyway today.  The Juneau presentation is set for August 9.  

They've also been keeping up on redistricting news and technology and trying to make sure this round of redistricting goes as smoothly as possible.  

3.  Mapping Software Training - Monday - Wednesday June 28, 29, 30 at the LIO (Legislative Information Office).  The public is invited to attend and watch.  There won't be opportunities to use the software.  There's nothing more boring than watching other people get software instruction when you don't have access to a computer with that software.  However, the board is looking for other software that the public can use to make their own maps.  They believe that if people can work with the actual data to make their own maps, they will have a better idea of the difficulties of trying to get 40 districts with 18,335 people that meet the other constitutional requirements of compactness, contiguity, and socio-economic integrity. (These are terms from the Alaska State Constitution.) There's more detail on this in a post from the previous redistricting board here.  That post looks at Federal and State requirements.  Scroll down for the State requirements.  

Where:

  -  Anchorage Legislative Information Office

  -  1500 W Benson Blvd, Anchorage, AK 99503

  -  Denali Conference Room, 1st floor

When:

  -  Monday, June 28 from 10am - Noon and 1:30 - 3:30pm (approximate)

  -  Tuesday, June 29 from 9:30am - Noon and 1:30 - 3:30pm (approximate)

  -  Wednesday, June 30 from 9:30am - Noon and 1:30 - 3:30pm (approximate)

There's more information on my Redistricting Board tab on top, or click here.  It includes phone numbers to call in and I think you can watch it remotely - that's why it's in the LIO.

4. Testing the fairness of the maps the Board makes.

We also talked about the Voting Rights Act consultant the Board chose.  It seems that Michigan will use him too and the Republicans there are steamed.  But given Michigan Republicans - remember they did a practice takeover of their capitol well before January 6 - that's probably a good sign.  I mentioned that the VRA consultant is less important now that Alaska isn't required to get preclearance before deciding on their maps.  But Peter and TJ disagreed, echoing one of the consultant candidates (they said), that Section 2 of the VRA still applies and requires that minority districts not be diminished.  

We also talked about the impact of Ranked Choice Voting - since one of the VRA applicants mentioned they had someone who could analyze that.  But there seems to be conflicting opinion on how that will affect minority voting.  

They also mentioned that the Board isn't going to have political parties in the data so that they can't be accused of using it to manipulate the districts, though we all agreed that Alaska is small enough that lots of people have a sense of neighborhoods that are particularly partisan.  

Also, they've agreed, as I understood it, not to have a policy of protecting incumbents.  

5.  Location of Alaska Redistricting Board Office

 The Board's Office is in the University Mall, Room 141.  This is the far south hallway.  The DMV is on the east end.  Didn't know there was a DMV there?  Neither did I.  It's where the UAA offices used to be.  Which were where the University theaters used to be.  

The office space is sort of open concept.  The previous Board  had offices in the Sunshine Mall.  I think they were smaller, but better configured.  Maybe that even had some walls moved around.  I don't know.  

Here's looking down the hall to the DMV.  You get in through the South entrance to the mall.