<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Civitas Review &#187; partisanship</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.civitasreview.com/tag/partisanship/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.civitasreview.com</link>
	<description>The Blog of the Civitas Institute</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 21:27:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Competitive Districts Can Reduce Partisanship</title>
		<link>http://www.civitasreview.com/politicians/competitive-districts-can-reduce-partisanship/</link>
		<comments>http://www.civitasreview.com/politicians/competitive-districts-can-reduce-partisanship/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 18:38:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Sutton</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Elections & Campaigns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legislative Activity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politicians & Politicking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Rucho]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[partisanship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redistricting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US House of Reprentatives]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.civitasreview.com/?p=8729</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The News &#38; Observer is reporting that Senator Bob Rucho (R-Mecklenburg) will chair the Senate redistricting committee.  The article says that the GOP “could district lines that make it easier for GOP candidates to win elections.”  A fair and impartial drawing of the electoral map, as opposed to the obviously gerrymandered districts we currently have, [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <em>News &amp; Observer</em> is <a href="http://projects.newsobserver.com/dome/home">reporting</a> that Senator Bob Rucho (R-Mecklenburg) will chair the Senate redistricting committee.  The article says that the GOP “could district lines that make it easier for GOP candidates to win elections.”  A fair and impartial drawing of the electoral map, as opposed to the obviously gerrymandered districts we currently have, would certainly make it easier for Republicans to win.  Have a look at the current US House districts in North Carolina.  A map can be found <a href="http://www.nationalatlas.gov/printable/images/pdf/congdist/pagecgd110_nc.pdf">here</a>.  Note the especially contorted 2<sup>nd</sup>, 3<sup>rd</sup> and 12<sup>th</sup> districts.</p>
<p>Our obviously gerrymandered districts were drawn by Democrats after the 2000 Census.  Hopefully the GOP will resist the temptation to gerrymander and will draw districts that adhere to county and municipal boundaries.  In fact, more competitive elections would benefit the state.</p>
<p>Much of the electorate decries excessive partisanship and the ideological rigidity that plague the political system.  Competitive electoral districts tend to draw more centrist candidates because party nominees are forced to appeal to the middle in order to win instead of to their respective bases.  Moderate candidates serve as a means to limit partisanship.  Whether that is a good thing depends on your own political perspective.  As always, the redistricting process should be interesting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civitasreview.com/politicians/competitive-districts-can-reduce-partisanship/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is the N&amp;O Too &#8220;Partisan&#8221;?</title>
		<link>http://www.civitasreview.com/education/is-the-no-too-partisan/</link>
		<comments>http://www.civitasreview.com/education/is-the-no-too-partisan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:41:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brian Balfour</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Education]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News & Observer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[partisanship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wake county school board]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://civitasreview.com/?p=4818</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The N&#38;O continues its whining about last fall&#8217;s Wake County School Board election results. This time, they complain that the elections became too &#8220;partisan.&#8221;  Partisanship of the same kind we&#8217;ve come to know and love when it infects Congress or the General Assembly was in full swing. In the end, four district seats went to [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/editorials/story/329958.html">N&amp;O continues its whining </a>about last fall&#8217;s Wake County School Board election results. This time, they complain that the elections became too &#8220;partisan.&#8221;</p>
<blockquote><p> Partisanship of the same kind we&#8217;ve come to know and love when it infects Congress or the General Assembly was in full swing. In the end, four district seats went to Republican-backed candidates who had made an issue of their opposition to the diversity policy aimed at balancing student bodies and avoiding segregation, and who also opposed the mandatory year-round schools intended to provide the most efficient use of buildings.</p></blockquote>
<p>The forced diversity policy and year-round calendars were unarguably the two most prominent issues in the school board elections. But were these issues indeed &#8220;partisan?&#8221;</p>
<p>A look at the results from <a href="http://www.nccivitas.org/media/poll-results/november-2009-wake-county-schools-survey">Civitas&#8217; November 2009 Wake County Schools Survey </a>suggests not. When asked &#8220;Do you support or oppose the school board’s current policy of assigning students to schools based on achieving diversity, instead of sending students to the school closest to their home?&#8221; (question #2)  79.7% of Republicans said they opposed the policy, while 58.5% of Democrats and 70.6% of Independents also said they oppose the policy. Only 14.1%, 28% and 21.7%, respectively, said they approve of the policy.</p>
<p>Moreover, when asked &#8220;Do you support the current school board policy of assigning some students to mandatory year round schools or should parents be given a choice between sending their child to a school that is year round or traditional calendar?&#8221; (question #5)  85.8% of Republicans, 67.8 % of Democrats and 73.4% of Independents said parents should be given a choice. Only 9.6%, 24.2% and 18.2%, respectively, said they support the current policy.</p>
<p>Hardly seems like the winning candidates&#8217;  issues were &#8220;partisan&#8221; at all, but rather supported by an overwhelming majority of people in Wake Co., regardless of political affiliation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.civitasreview.com/education/is-the-no-too-partisan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Object Caching 232/265 objects using disk

 Served from: www.civitasreview.com @ 2013-05-21 22:17:59 by W3 Total Cache -->