E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Supreme Court jumps squarely into the partisan battles of 2014 Monday, refereeing a legal fight that could help determine whether Republicans take control of the House of Representatives.
Texas, by virtue of its expanding population, is entitled to four new seats in in the House, bringing its total to 36. Nearly 80 percent of that growth came from an increase in the state's Latino and African-American populations, groups that tend to vote for Democratic candidates. But the Texas legislature drew a new map of congressional districts that virtually guaranteed three of the new seats to Republicans. Civil rights groups immediately sued, and a federal court came up with a map of its own on an emergency basis for this year's elections.
Both sides are asking the Supreme Court to rule by early February on which map to use -- the one drawn up by the Republican controlled legislature, or the court-drawn map, which would likely give Democrats more of the new seats. Due to its history of discriminating against minority groups, Texas is among the states required to get permission for any change in its election process. Texas opted to seek that approval from a federal court in Washington, D.C., but several Democrats and civil rights groups filed a separate lawsuit in Texas to block the new map. It is that case which is before the Supreme Court.
Recommended: First Thoughts: A New Hampshire surprise?
The state argues that the Texas court exceeded its authority in drawing up its own map and should have ordered instead that the legislature's map would be used on an interim basis for the 2014 election, while the state pursues permanent approval for its redistricting plan.
The Texas court, argues Paul Clement, the lawyer for the state, should not have tossed out the legislature's new map and substituted one of its own.
"Redistricting is an inherently political process," Clement said. "In the absence of some violation of statutory or constitutional law, it is wholly committed to the discretion of state legislatures."
However, the groups challenging the revised state map say the legislature went out of its way to dilute the voting power of Latinos and African-Americans by splitting up politically active portions of those populations and replacing them with residents who tend not to vote.
"Although Hispanics and African Americans together now outnumber Anglos in Texas, the congressional redistricting plan the legislature enacted actually reduced the number of districts in which minority voters would be able to elect their candidates of choice," says John Devaney, a lawyer representing the challengers.
The state's plan, Devaney said, reflects an effort to "pick off, split up, and drown out minority voters to ensure that minority population gains would not translate into minority electoral gains."
The case also involves a challenge to the state's plan for redrawing districts for state legislative elections. Both sides urge the court to act with unusual speed. "Usable maps must be in place by February 2, 2012, even in order for the delayed primary elections to go forward," Clement said.
Lurking in the background of the case is the future of a key part of the federal Voting Rights Act. Section 5 requires states with a history of discrimination to get permission, known as preclearance, before changing any of their election procedures. While Texas does not challenge the constitutionality of that provision directly, some civil rights advocates worry that the case could present an invitation for the justices to strike it down.
The Supreme Court came close to weakening Section 5 in a 2009 decision, also involving a Texas voting change. While the justices declined to overturn the preclearance requirement, several suggested it may no longer be needed.
"Things have changed in the South," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts. "Blacks now register and vote at higher rates than whites," he said, in some covered states. Roberts said the historic accomplishments of the law are undeniable, but added the federal burdens it imposed "must be justified by current needs."
The civil rights groups challenging the new Texas congressional map urge the court to steer clear of reviewing Section 5.
"The question whether those burdens are justified is neither raised nor necessary to a decision," says John Devaney, the lawyer for the groups. "It must be left for another day."
Many legal scholars doubt the Supreme Court will reach the Section 5 question in this case.
"The court recognizes that it must act more quickly than usual, given the time pressures involved with primary elections looming shortly down the road. For all those reasons, the court is likely to focus on the narrowest issues needed to resolve the particular legal issues presented," says Prof. Richard Pildes, an election law expert at the New York University School of law.
Leave a Comment:
Nothing new here!
If you can't beat... cheat em!
WAT TO GO FEISTY RED you get me everytime. That puts it in a NUTSHELL ! !! !!!
They want to argue that preclearance shouldn't be necessary because they don't discriminate any more----then they go out and discriminate against African-Americans AND Latinos. Tone deaf much?
Q: Why there are so many unsolved murders in Texas?
A: Because there are no dental records and everyone has the same DNA.
Republicans in Texas do whatever they want. I am white, lived in Texas my whole life and am still sick and tired of the way our state is run. Perry wants evolution out of the science classrooms, college students going to school with guns and women forced to watch sonograms before abortion even in cases of rape and incest. It says a lot that out of all the GOP's choices he has the lowest electability percentages but wins this state in a landslide.
Feisty- Delinating an area for in a party's favor is nothing new. BOTH parties love that trick when it's offered to them. A quick recent (6/11) example:
Illinois governor Quinn redrafted their boundaries after Republicans made large gains in the 2010 election. Per the Chicago Sun Times: "The way Statehouse Democrats rejiggered the region’s congressional boundaries put five incumbent suburban Republicans into hostile Democratic turf or in potential primaries against one another."
So, the "cheat'em" comment goes to both parties. Thanks anyways for the descrimination comment.
Joe: You have a point. I think it should be out of the majority parties hand. I'm not sure who the third party would be but I'd rather it be in the hands of a court than someone I KNOW has an agenda.
Feisty, how do you get the first comment every time? Just curious...btw, I agree with you just about all the time and on this one too..well stated, they're crooks trying to limit our votes!!!
Obama/Biden 2012
And the white power establishment in Texas cannot come to grips with the reality that the majority needs education and healthcare.
I hope justice is done this time and the voters' rights are upheld. The nation and the world are watching.
Oh, my, let me guess how this one will come out.
To say courts do not have agendas is just plain oblivious.
Especially THIS Court, which has to be THE most partisan, ideologically-oriented Court in my lifetime.
Let justice be done. Yeah, right.
Let special interests be served. Yeah. Right.
Sorry Joe,
That dog won't hunt...
IL does NOT have a history of discriminating against minority groups!
Thanks JezzaBelle! (love the moniker BTW)!
PS: It's a secret! ☺
Yes Feisty and the Obama White House along with the DNC driven liberal judges did just that for the party....they committed particular discrimination in my State district...they zoned an African American Republican right out of the district she was running in....there was no rhyme or reason for the line to be drawn except they wished to disconnect good local candidates from running in the districts they have supported for years. Fortunately, she has moved back into the zone and is continuing her campaign....Why wouldn't the Obama White House and the DNC wish to see a well educated and dedicated African American woman succeed? I suppose the only answer is they are selectively racist.
If you look at the maps before and after you will find that the legislature did their job reasonably...If you look at the judges maps you will see the major metro areas look like cookie cutter shapes that have no specific design except to dilute strong Republican districts.
The Supreme Court needs to do their job wisely....Then they need to release Texas from draconian Federal requirements and put the Legislatures maps back in play.
More obfuscation from the red head. The dog hunts just fine. Democrats are just as guilty of redistricting to favor the democrat vote as is the republicans. Stop throwing discrimination in there as a deflection. Just because some group of liberal activists say it's discrimination, that doesn't fly. Republicans will favor republican districts and democrats will favor democrat districts. This has been going on for years. Everytime a republican legislature does it, the democrats scream discrimination. Everytime the democrats do it, republicans scream favoritism.
If they did their job "reasonably", it would reflect the majority demographics of the population, not the partisan electability quotient. Republicans need to use every trick in the book, including the latest ID requirements, because quite simply they represent a minority of Americans.
Rarely do I see a more non-sequitur than that one.
One of those maps is designed to protect Republicans, and the other one isn't. Guess which.
By the way, isn't your Texas-two-step folk hero hero Tom Delay in prison for the last one?
Don't moralize to us.
marlen101917
Q: Why there are so many unsolved murders in Texas?
Marlen....the real answer is:
Slick Rick has wrongly executed someone for the crime. (murder solved in his mind)
No, Feisty, the Dems do not have a record of discriminating against minorities. They just have a long record of screwing minorities, by promising them pie in the sky to get their votes, and then doing nothing at all to make good on them.
And, sadly enough, the poor little lambs blindly vote Democrat year after year, and never see any improvement in their lot. Same old poverty, failing schools, etc.
Unfortunately, the main reason for the Supreme Court to get involved is to legislate from the bench by invalidating the Civil Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution by saying that gerrymandering is okay.
The new strategy appears to be to give corporations the right to vote, and then take voting rights away from any type of minority group. Soon people will not be allowed to vote at all unless they pull in a million a year.
I'm glad to see the Feds are coming to the rescue of the Texas citizens. We need help against the powers of wrong. ATX
Aren't the democrats just as guilty of moralizing Anna? It seems just about everytime the republicans do something, the democrats step up and scream discrimination. If it's not discrimination, it's class warfare. In the minds of liberals these are moral equivalents. The harsh reality is, democrats are just as guilty of thes same infractions. Wordsmithing is quite obvious when it comes from the left.
Proof is in the way they demonize candidates like Allen West, or Clarance Thomas, or a number of conservative members of the black race. Why isn't this racism?
There are more rich democrats than republicans in congress. Yet the democrats constantly say republicans are the party for the rich. This is nothing but class warfare. Isn't Obama a member of the 1%? Isn't Pelosi, or Reid?
So what about moralizing? It's an equal opportunity dilemma.
And it's WRONG whenever either of them does it, because it violates the Equal Protection clause.
Bad, SCOTUS, bad!
Dear commonsense,
You just don't understand. When a judge rules to protect the rights of individuals, s/he is a liberal-activist-revisionist. When a judge rules allow a local ruling class to oppress their fellow citizens, he (and it's almost always a he) is being faithful to the Constitution. There are a few apparent inconsistencies (read Bush v Gore), but generally speaking conservative justices prefer states rights to individual rights, despite the fact that the Constitution does not once mention any "states rights".
Where on earth did that come from? Every little thing the Democrats do, the Republicans label it partisan. And I do think that Republicans are the ones who first injected the term "class warfare" into the current political debate.
See what I mean?
Imagine it. The malcontented lower classes.
A true historical anomaly. Never before has a boy (or girl) wanted more.
By the way, who first imagined themselves as the "upper" class in this scenario? I always thought we were supposed to be a classless society.
But, I guess George Orwell was right, after all. Some pigs ARE more equal than other pigs.
And so is Warren Buffett. So what? Unlike the current crop of conservative candidates, as well as Republican leaders in Congress and the State Houses, Buffett and the others you name are calling for higher taxes on the wealthy -- i.e., themselves -- rather than placing more burden on the middle class.
They would prefer that wealth trickle up, not down.
What's your problem with that?
And by the way, before you begin carping about how all of us are free to pay more in taxes voluntarily if we want to, why don't you set the moral example -- just make a copy of the check, and post it here. I'll be delighted to follow where you lead.
You ARE a leader, aren't you Brianb?
Because Democrats are equal-opportunity demonizers, that's why. John Ensign, Larry Craig, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich, John Boehner, George W. Bush, Michelle Bachmann, Marcus Bachmann, Sarah Palin, just to name a few .... We've got all the bases covered.
No, it isn't. To be qualified to moralize, you have to be introspective.
And in the exact moment that you claim not to understand me, you'll have proven my point.
Culheath
What the legislature, in the district I am familiar with, did was to shrink our congressional district around the edges. The City I live in has experienced tremendous growth (middle to upper middle income growth with many foreign nationals) over the past several years. The legislature left the lines and the demographic pretty much as it was. We were a strong Republican district slated to remain a strong Republican district....
What the Judges did was to divide the district and incorporating them with low and no income areas with large pockets of illegal immigrants. In the process redistricting the African American Woman I wish to vote for as well as another Republican candidate.
To...Spider""""
That will definitely get the repubs the minority vote ...
It's more like the Democrats want Republican controlled states to "Do as I say, not as I do." Democrats have gerrymandered forever, and continue to do so or go to court when they can't.
You people really are chattel. Rallying behind a paid political poster. That is all Feisty Redhead is and you simple-minded fools can't even see it. The blind leading the blind. Truly pathetic!
Anyone who expects a fair and impartial decision from this Supreme Court is delusional.
The Republican by hook or crook we win,style of politics.Voter fraud laws{the teapots can't count thier own votes without fraud {see vote count in Iowa}.The vote manipulation in the 2010 .IT's all about JOBS,then what's the first item on the docket the affordable health care act, planned parenthood,nice try Teanuts.The Roberts Supreme court of CORRUPTION will make certain the DINGLE BERRY PERRY party maintains the power.
I understand you well Anna. I just disagree with your philosophy.
Who cares who coined the term "class warfare?" It's class warfare if one side claims the other to be only for one group of economic conditions. We know the democrats never ever do this? How many terms have the democrats claimed lately? Progressive is one that liberals prefer. It's not new, but it's been resurrected.
Aren't liberals chiding against the 1%ers? How come they never chide against liberal 1%ers? By rote, they always mention republican 1%ers. Must be living hell to not see the liberal rich as 1%ers.
If Warren Buffet is not trying to keep as much of his money, how come he's in trouble with the IRS for not paying his taxes? He makes claims that the rich should pay more, but only the other rich... not him.
You mistake me for someone that feels he doesn't pay enough in taxes already. Why should I give the IRS more? So the government can increase entitlements to those who make excuses for their economic condition? Or so the government can give money we don't have to other nations? I'm all for spending cuts. I guess that makes me a loony right winger.
You are telling me that the democratic party never moralizes because they are introspective? They never look into their inner thoughts to formulate their agenda? Hmmmm. Interesting
Section 5 is a burden and outdated. Each side of this is politically motivated. We will see Obama sue and sue and sue for votes. The Justice Department will act as judge, jury, and executioner every time unless cut off at the knees by the US Supreme Court.
The fact the Supreme Court even is accepting this case upsets the Obama administration.
We might as well get used to this under this administration.
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
"Nothing new here!
If you can't beat... cheat em!"
Maybe they are just taking a page out of the Illinois handbook of corruption. How many Texas governors have been found guilty of felonies lately? Illinois had 3 in a row.
Will the black guy running as a Republican in new Texas 33 (white district) have to switch parties??
He has won state wide races in the past as a Republican and still black.
Seems dumb that only blacks can represent blacks and only blacks can be democrats.
Some how and some way, I don't claim to know how, the drawing of district lines needs to be taken away from the politicians. This is obviously an ongoing and expensive deceptive practice that needs to be gotten under control. Just look at the boundary lines and it's obvious theft of representation.
Please, flip on the news anytime in Texas and guaranteed some cop has shot or harassed some minority somewhere in the state. This state is in your face racist and by far the most racist place I have ever lived. But fortunately every year more and more Blacks and Latinos are educating themselves and each year Texas slides slightly to the left. Keep it up republicans, soon none of you will have jobs, because clearly you will never win over Latinos with your anti-Latino/Black/any one not white agenda.
Since the "community" decided to collapse Fiesty Redhead's comments, and I think they bear being heard, I'm going to repeat them:
Nothing new here!
If you can't beat... cheat em!
Though it is a circus and great entertainment, be careful of what else is happening while these GOP primaries occur - as this article points out. Control over states redistricting gains control over our states, which gains control over our government, which makes whomever is in the White House more irrelevant. Listen to all the state's rights advocacy being espoused by candidates and be aware, be very aware.
Grass roots action is necessary now at the local and state levels more than ever before. Follow the money, and the amount, being thrown at Walker in Wisconsin to prevent his recall and you'll understand this goal of controlling your state. Walker has amassed more money to fight his recall than any other candidate has ever raised in this state - a record amount, just to fight his recall, with over 50% of the monies coming from out of state.
Be aware, be afraid, then get mad and take action to take your state back.
The Dems have destroyed the black family! Now they want to enslave and destroy the latinos! Check out how the blacks have done since voting majority dem, starting with kennedy in the early 60"s. Murder rate, Illiteracy rate, Marraige rate, Poverty rate. The destruction of blacks brought to you by the DEMOCRATS!
Heaven help us. The Supreme Court is going into the business of deciding elections. Guess they enjoyed doing it so much in 2000 that they want to keep at it.
Q: What does the average Texas Tech University student get on his SAT?
A: Drool.
You would prefer the majority party denying the minority voting power?
Phine- If you want to get concerned about elections, check out what's happening to State Attorney General elections around the country. There is an active campaign to elect liberals into these seats around the country. Why does that matter? The state AGs have the power to impact election results, disputes, and legislation. They are much more dangerous when it comes to policy and elections.
I see we have some sensitive Texas Tech graduates here. LOL
No, phinephancy, the Supreme Court is looking at a problem of voter manipulation in order to decide elections, they are not deciding elections. They did that when they halted the recounting of Floridan votes in Bush vs Gore.
Joe -- Actually, it's the other way around, or at least it was in my state. Getting a Republican AG was the first priority to ensuring that a Republican governor could do what he pleased.
In fact, our AG seemed positively tickled when he got to defend the Governor by actually arguing against himself -- i.e., an opinion he had issued just a few months previously on the interpretation of the open records law that was directly contrary to the position he took in front of the state Supreme Court.
They have an ethical rule that calls for candor before a tribunal, but our REPUBLICAN AG appears to have slept through that particular session in law school.
So what's your point again? I seem to have missed it under all the partisan bickering going on here and everywhere. And it ain't just democrats.
@ Windy Citizen -- You seem young in the ways of the world. The Court's decision in this case WILL potentially decide elections. AND they know it.
This smells of 2006 (mid-decade redistricting) when the TX Legislature pulled the same dirty trick and then were forced to change.
This probably has Tom Delays fingerprints all over it.
As Rev Al says, 'when you do unpopular things, you become unpopular'!
This TX Legislature has no qualms about violating laws!
Anna Molly: Thanks for calling me young. I didn't say that the Court's decision won't impact election results, I just meant that their job is not to decide the election in this case, but to look at what the Republicans are proposing in order to prevent a map that is drawn to dilute the power of voting blocs based on racial criteria.
It doesn't matter what their JOB is. They're going to decide the election results, by giving the okay to anything that will rig future elections in favor of the modern Republican Party. And that requires eliminating miniority voting power as much as possible, by any means.
To..Brian"""
""Proof is in the way they demonize candidates like Allen West, or Clarance Thomas, or a number of conservative members of the black race. Why isn't this racism?"""
You forgot cain ...three in twenty years.. ya libs demonize and discriminate conservative blacks...Wow...
And you're saying the repubs aren't the party for the rich ..Huh..?
Some how and some way, I don't claim to know how, the drawing of district lines needs to be taken away from the politicians. This is obviously an ongoing and expensive deceptive practice that needs to be gotten under control. Just look at the boundary lines and it's obvious theft of representation.
Ahhh, Texas. The birthplace of Rent-a-Center, Payday Loans (sharks) and creationism in our childrens text books.
Let's see....Republicans took 11 Governorships from Democrats in 2010......they took control of 19 Democrat State Legislatures.....Hmmm
AND, it was also a Census Year....
Then you guys get your panties all in a wad when the Republicans do the redistricting and undo the redistricting the Democrats had done in their favor in the past.....
Who was it that said " Elections have consequences"....Oh yeah...Obama
The same thing is happening with the Congress right now.....A Tactic (Pro Forma Sessions) created by Harry Reid in 2007 to block Bush from making Recess Appointments is now seen by Democrats and the WhiteHouse as NOT VALID....when a Democrat is President.....The hypocrisy is overwhelming....
Let's see a Republican Conservative court that gave the 2004 election to Bush, Citizens United to Corporations, now they want to give Texas the right to disenfranchise voters. Sounds like legalized vote rigging to me.
I suspect that the time has come to strike down that provision of the Voting Rights Act, since it addresses an activity that is no longer a serious issue.
That's why civil rights activists don't want it addressed by the Supreme Court - they are afraid they will lose one of their key 'leverage' issues.
It would also negate Holder's Justice Department challenge of voter ID laws for several southern states - The Supreme Court has already upheld voter ID laws for non-southern states.
One of the unfortunate results of the Civil Rights laws from the 1960s is that they perpetuates discrimination on the basis of race - against Whites.
chilled "This smells of 2006 (mid-decade redistricting) when the TX Legislature pulled the same dirty trick and then were forced to change."
The Democrats in California have been doing this (gerrymandering) for a long time, which allows them to have political control far in excess of their relative numbers.
by any other name...
------------------------------------------------
The word gerrymander (originally written Gerry-mander) was used for the first time in the Boston Gazette on March 26, 1812. The word was created in reaction to a redrawing of Massachusetts state senate election districts under the then-governor Elbridge Gerry (pronounced /ˈɡɛri/; 1744–1814). In 1812, Governor Gerry signed a bill that redistricted Massachusetts to benefit his Democratic-Republican Party. When mapped, one of the contorted districts in the Boston area was said to resemble the shape of a salamander. The exact author of the term gerrymander may never be definitively established. It is widely believed by historians that Federalist newspaper editors Nathan Hale, Benjamin and John Russell were the instigators, but the historical record gives no definitive evidence as to who created or uttered the word for the first time.[1] The term was a portmanteau of the governor's last name and the word salamander.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
-------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.google.com/search?q=gerrymander+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Thanks for the history lesson dangerfield! Also for taking the time to look it up. We all learn something new every day.
If you didn't learn that in junior high school civics then it's an indication that you're a victim of recent public education.
No Child Left Behind is working as intended.
You mean the Public Disinformation, Reorientation and Keep the People Stupid System. The politicians and the Military Industrial Complex and yes the Unions rely on keeping the people in the dark as much as possible and this starts with the "education" system which has gone in a very bad direction since the Viet Nam War when the politicians and the MIC got caught red handed because the folks out there in the streets were educated and smart enough to look past the BS.....and they are not going to let that happen again. Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Katrina debacle, the Sub Prime fiasco etc etc etc all because the younger generation and the youth of today are more interested in MTV, non-reality TV, the Kardashians, you tube antics, the new generation I Phone etc etc etc than they are about the world around them and their place in it.
This raping of education continues with the new Right Wing efforts to instill Christian Relegious Fantasy in to the criculum.....if things keep going the way they are we won't have to worry about unemployment ..... the work force will be to dumb to hold a job.
ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!! I've had enough with gerrymandering. We HAVE to stop it NOW. I say we let neither the states NOR the SCOTUS redraw district lines. Let an independent commission of demographers do that. Texas, for God's sake, be fair. That goes for any other state that does that, AND every party. We have to stop this, or else the last shred of democracy will be ripped out of our hands and handed over to the political class and their benefactors while the 99% toil in a despotic oligarchy.
Freshieee....Well Said! you are obviously not from Texas because you are using big words like "demographers" and either older or raised well.
Yank, that was just rude and totally uncalled for. Next time you feel the need to hate on someone please go to the nearest mirror and let your hatred spew there. Your opinions are just nasty and in no way shape or form add to the intelligence of these discussions.
Freshieee, very well put my dear~ But I am afraid those changes will never come and we will forever be in that era of unrest and uninformed due to our civil differences which are put on display at only our worst moments! At times I feel less aggression on these comment sections than I do from our politicians and their blatantly obvious favoritism to the sectors of money and power. I am very disenchanted with all but two of our candidates, Ron Paul bc he does represent my opinion that the federal govt has overstepped its bounds and he believes we as a people can decide for ourselves and then Obama bc I still have some faith that he has some grand plan to get us out of debt and deal with our border/drug cartel issues. But everyday I lose faith in him as he bashes my state and other states for wishing to protect ourselves from illegal felons. I live too close to the border not to see on a daily basis what effect the immigration problem is having on our state and her federally received welfare funds as well as the education system which is overburdened with more children than parents paying taxes to said schools. I am all for the Dream of America but that dream was based on equal treatment with equal responsibility. And we have one in excess and a massive shortage of the other. Too many takers and not enough givers! How do we re-draw that line so that all can be happy and we can truly be a United nation? Your suggestion would be a good start to equalizing the lines for all!
Gerry was wrong to mander in 1812, and political hacks are still wrong in their mandering and pandering 200 years later.
And shame on the Supreme Court, which thus far has failed to uphold the equal protection clause of the US Constitution on this matter.
TexasFighterGal.....chill out, there were a lot worse "kidding" towards Texas and Texans earlier in this thread.....it was a mild poke in comparison.
Stand up and defend the honor of your State if you must....but in my opinion, and I have been there on a couple of occasions recently, there are a lot of things in Texas that could use some cleaning out and straightening out....like the governor that you Texans elected. There is a lot of good in Texas but a lot of blinders being worn as well.....so just settle don't take a few words so seriously but do take the issues in your State seriously those you can do something about.
Technically, Obama offered a debt-reduction plan in the summer of 2011, but it got blown to bits by the Tea Party.
Sorry Yank, But it irks me to have my state bashed by those who do not see their own states problems. We are a good people and to be honest The worst racism I see in my state does not come from the good ole Texan boys and girls. We generally speaking like all folks and welcome them from anywhere, nobody sees that the are reasons we are seen as different from the rest of the states and we are seen as more fun loving, protect anyone, get'er done type by every foreigner I have ever met. I do not blame other states for their idiot politicians and people should not blame all Texans for ours. We are honestly not doing bad in this horrid economy and we simply try to help each other and remind anyone not helping that the American dream is difficult to achieve alone. For the most part we enjoy our Tex-Mex brothers and sisters but we know everybody needs to contribute and receive in equal share. A hard ass Texan does not like hanger-on'ers who do not wish to work and better themselves and contribute to the American dream. These Texans can sometimes become a little jaded about helping anyone bc they are sick of doing only that and being asked more, more, more. I have an undocumented buddy who has actually said " I would rather pledge allegiance to Texas than America." Course that turned into a 2 hour argument for which I was still unable to explain why that was a bad way to view things.
Take a look at the Illinois fourth district borders and tell me that it makes sense. Gerrymandering in the extreme. The entire process need to be taken away from the politicians and the courts.
Shocking! Now let me guess which other southern states can't be trusted with voter's rights...
Q: Why are rectal thermometers banned at the University of Texas?
A: Because they cause too much brain damage!
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida are three. L,A,M possible.
Tennessee is definately on that list!
The entire list of states can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Georgia (except the city of Sandy Springs)
Louisiana
Mississippi
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia (except for 14 counties)
Also, specific counties and townships in several other states, including California, Florida, New York, North Carolina, South Dakota, Michigan and New Hampshire.
Let's see... we again have a moronic Texan trying to run for President. Heaven help us - please keep Texas out of the voting - they just don't have a clue!
I hope you find your sanity soon.
And I hope you find yours, Brianb.
It's a shame that the votes and will of our citizens are ignored by the people in power. Didn't we learn a lesson from 2000.
Apparently not.
No surprise here. Republicans control the legislature so they want to use the opportunity to strengthen their party and weaken the opponent. Basic human tendency. The notion of redistricting so that every segment of society has a fair chance to make a difference is not even considered in the equation.
This really exposes the basic tendency of politicians to grasp and expand political power. Representing their constituent is only important when it may effect an election.
California is so balkanized by redistricting that there are very few competitive elections. The Republicans agreed to allow the Democrats to consolidate their majority as long as they had enough safe districts to maintain one-third of the seats and thus block any tax increases.
The result that only extremists, both right and left, survive the local primaries. The legislature is non-functional so the public relies on referendums to establish state policy.
I would hate to see that happen in Texas.
perhaps Texas should finally secede and be done with it..get them and their dispicable ways out of our National Hair ..
@Daryl
I thought they said "You broke it, you bought it".
We didn't steal Texas. We stole New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, half of Colorado, and a squidge of Wyoming. Texas seceded all on its own.
Well, at least we're discriminating based on political party instead of race. I guess that's progress.
In Texas it is the same thing. They divide up the areas around the cities to divide the minorities and then group the rural farm areas together. It isn't hard to know which area votes for which party.
By God I think Marlen has it in a nutshell. Or I guess its just nuts in Texas?
terry Florida is no prize when it comes to such idiocy as well. Actually Florida at worst deserves runner up to Texas if not a win by a few points.
Don't blame Texas. There's plenty of hateful sentiment to go around all over the country, which is why the Republican Party decided to build its successful electoral strategy on co-opting Dixicrats and bigots and abandoning fiscal responsibility.
Party of Lincoln?
Not anymore!
"Due to its history of discriminating against minority groups, Texas is among the states required to get permission for any change in its election process." - Texas has been a one party state for too long and it came about by re-districting measures in the past. "Redistricting is an inherently political process." Redistricting is raising it's head again. Republican will do everything to keep their districts red. Democrats will try to get some change. The courts will come in after suit is filled and re-draw to suit the population totals. The federal courts will rehash things but the economically disadvantaged will suffer as will the under counted Hispanic population. MALDEF and the American G.I.Forum may get involved. If one does not vote and have their say, then they will not be part of the community and will have no say in what happens to them. If you don't vote - you have no say!
Rudy - which one is it...
Texas has to get permission or texas republicans make the decisions.
Iowa had it easy, they lost a seat so the redistricing literaly looks like the state was divided into 4 equal parts. the only physical anomaly was polk county.
Isn't that one of the reasons that the Republicans told everyone not to fill out their census forms? And the intimidated idiots who listened to them will now be counted out!
Don't forget Texas was Democratic (remember LBJ) until the civil rights act of 1964 signed by LBJ. The South, including Texas, started drifting toward Republican theology after that landmark event.
Well said, Rudy.
The stategy is to make it so that people's votes do NOT count, which discourages them from showing up at the polls altogether.
The tragic thing is that hte strategy works so well.
squidgod2000,
Only a Texan would think that one form of discrimination can be better or worse than another form. Discrimination hurts both those being discriminated against and those doing the discriminating. All are hurt in every case.
LL
ACORN's got nothing on the TX GOP.
So the same people upset with ACORN should be upset with the Texas GOP.
Whow Mark, I had no idea that Acorn has anything to do with the redistricting process, does not say anything about them in my copy of the constitution, where did you order your version from? RNC, right?
@daryl
lol, don't even begin to blame fox and drudge about acorn. Acorn got themselves in the mess, broke the law and got caught.
Not that I agree with whats going on in TX, but yeesh man, don't excuse something just because you belong to their party.
You are using Texas two-step speech Alex M. If you don't agree with it say so. If you agree with their attempt at segregationist redistricting just say so. I fyou agree with the Constitution that all men are created equal, the segregation of Southern Legilsatures (Republicans specifically) is unconstitutional.
I think we could paraphrase Obama on this one. "We won". Republicans are well within their rights to re-district. Get over it.
You miss the point. TX GOP is illegally preventing a representative election.
Republicans are well within their rights to redistrict, but not in order to dilute representation by race. There are plenty of legal rulings against that. If all the voters were white, they could legally redraw districts to favor their party. Not a great practice, but one that happens in every state.
mark -- you are welcome to your opinion but i do not believe you have a court ruling saying it is illegal. maybe you should clarify your comment by saying it is just your opinion.
Aparrently Texas couldn't follow directions, repeatly, so the Federal Government had to impose restrictions on their voting process.
James, what they are trying to do is obviously illegal, that is preventing a fair representation of voters.
You may be interested to know that TX was on a federal "watch" list because their history in this area has been so abysmal.
If you redistrict to include all races -- rather than one majority -- wouldn't that benefit all the residents of that district? Then the elected representative has to represent all interests instead of one special interest. Makes sense to me to have the demographics spread to benefit all. As to illegal, unless you are sitting on the SCOTUS, then your verdict is mute and foolish.
P.S. -- back up your claims and accusations with non-biased links or whatever you say is invalidated.
Mark thomas - if so, why the hoopla here on posters shaking their fingers at texas republicans if final approval is required by the courts?
per the voting rights act of 1965...
also...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#United_States
Left or right both sides do it.
Both sides do the same thing, just not to the extent that TX does it.
They may be well within their rights (at one time it was well within one's rights to own another human being too, but it was not right to do so, now was it?) but that does not make it the right thing to do. and quite often over doing things can come back to haunt you, backfire right in your own face - and I hope this is the case, especially where I live.
Ah, and, yet, there are those who would support states' rights to skew the districts in any way that benefits the party in charge, with no federal interference. This is exactly why we have to have a strong federal government, because too many states can't legislate or educate fairly, without racial, ethnic, socio-economic status, or party affiliation bias.
A practical example. Democrat Congressman Lloyd Doggett represents much of Austin and San Antonio Texas. He is targeted in the redistricting. Rather than have a circle (like a pizza) comprised of more educated liberal leaning city dwelling voters, the redistricting makes him the center of a pizza sliced into eight pieces. So he ends up with a sliver of city dwellers (spell liberal) at the tip and a wide swath of rural (spell evangelical) voters.
As effective as a poison dart to get rid of him.
Legally, Constitutionally, that is not true.
Then again, they have a partisan SCOTUS in their back pocket.
to my lefty friends -- a post above takes the history of redistricting back two hundred years, another describes the same thing being done in illinois by democrats in 2010.
to quote our president -- "elections have consequences". The election of 2010 put many state houses into the hands of the republicans and with the redistricting coming after the census they get this extra benefit.
no need to whine, it is what it is -- an inherently political process.
Political, yes...illegal, no.
james--you miss the point. You can redistrict to favor your party but not to dilute representation by race. Of course, no majority party ever admits that it is redrawing lines for its own benefit. They always cite other reasons although everyone knows different.
windy -- i disagree. the districts are drawn to improve one party's advantage. this is not a race thing.
Yes they do have consequences. This right-wing do-nothing tea bagger congress for one. More filibusters then in the last 100 years? That is a serious attempt to destroy this government by a fascist group.
james--Of course it's not a race thing. It's a power thing and race is secondary. Republicans look at blacks and Latinos and see Democrats, and there is not one racist in the Texas Republican Party. (Just ask them.) But you just can't dilute the voting power of blocs of blacks and Latinos through redistricting in this country, whether you can prove motive or not.
You don't have to be a "Lefty" to see the problem. As an Independent, I see problems on both sides of Politics. Texas has had problems before as a "JIM CROW" State -- AKA, Racist State. That is why they still must get Federal Permission to re-district -- both Parties, as they should because Texas, South Carolina, and many other States (not all Southern) are still carrying on as before.
This has been going on for decades and decades. Nobody did it better than the democrats. Why all the fuss now? Every state does it and has done it. The reason for the fuss now is that the democrats are out numbered and they are fighting back. Sour grapes I say. I just want a good government just like most of you out there. I look at the best and worst run states and cities aand guess what, most of them are run by democratic state houses and city councils. Now that really scares me. Physical conservative government is what I want, don't care if democratic or republican.
That doesn't make it okay. It's wrong no matter which party does it.
Citizens – ALL citizens – deserve a say in their government. Gerrymandering limits the voice of the minority and inexorably leads to abuse.
It's still wrong. Slavery went on for thousands of years, and it was wrong the whole time. Injustice must be opposed, no matter how firmly entrenched it is.
Just another political issue to take your attention away from Citizens United, The Patriot Act, and the Profits of Empire for the Financial Manipulators.
Besides, this is Texas. The earth is parched and the trees are dying. This is a state that has more Steeples than brush cedar trees.
The effects of Bush/Cheney will be felt in this country for many decades thanks to the absolute gutting and right-wing slant of SCOTUS. Let the impeachment trials begin yesterday. My god, Thomas alone has done ridiculous things that disqualify him outright.
In Texas they make all Chinese students sit on one side of the classroom. What, you've never heard of the Yellow Rows of Texas?
windy -- now this is blatant racism and should be condemned by all readers!!!!!
I'll start and condemn myself for making a bad joke that I probably wouldn't tell my Chinese friends. If it were a better joke, I might try it on them, though.
thanks windy.
OK You got a chuckle out of me. Hope the Asians don't take offense.
The next time I hear a Republican complaining about "legislating from the bench", (an oft repeated accusatory mantra previously directed at progressive judges), I'm going to toss my cookies on their Florsheim wingtips! Have you noted how strangely silent they've become lately in this matter?
Lary- hypocrisy, (along with ignorance and racism), is one of the cornerstones of conservative "thought."
The GOP rigging elections? REALLY? No way.
The Republicans gerrymander in Texas and the Democrats do it in Florida. (sigh) Rather than wail about the federal government keeping America down, or protest the greed of Wall Street, maybe citizens should look closely at the institutions that are the Democratic and Republican Parties. I am starting to think that perhaps they are the problem.
TX apparently is pretty bad in this respect, but you're right in that probably most other states are right on their heels. I know that in my state, MA, the districts look like a bowl of spaghetti.
If your position completely lacks merit, it makes sense to stoop to name calling and appealsto bigotry, right micheal?
Perhaps some people are such miserable losers the only way they can feel good about themselves is to vilify entire groups of people.
It is called gerrymandering and it has been going on as long as there have been electoral politics. Any politician will take any advantage they can and if that means skirting the law to provide a statistical advantage by breaking up voter in order to disenfranchise them, well then it will be so. Even in states where they have "independent committees" that draw boundaries (ie. Arizona), we see politics get in the way as elected members of government actively work to subvert the work of these committees to ensure they electoral success. frustrating!!!!!
Redistricting is done after every census and BOTH parties redraw them to help their own party keep and/or gain new seats. It's not about race it's simply about power and both parties wanting to increase their own.
Both parties do this and it's flat out wrong. This is precisely why redistricting should be done by an independent panel.
Gerrymandering is nothing new. If the districts are drawn by a Democrat controlled legislature the Republicans whine and if the Republicans are in control the Democrats whine. The solution is one tried successuflly in California with a non-partisan commission to draw the new lines for Congressional districts. Some districts have a slight Republican edge while others have a slightly Democratic edge. People are so mobile these days that a district that is slightly one or the other may switch in a few years. In California the Republicans seemed to think that the neutral committee's lines favored Democratic candidates, well if the state is made up that way too bad for them. They whined, I believe not so much because of the final outcome but, because they didn't get it all their way or the highway as they love so much.
Have you ever looked at a district map? It looks like something drawn from Mapquest when you select "the scenic route". Districts should be done based on geography and not demographics because someone who represents you should live in your area.
Redistricting should represent the makeup and political and economic interests of a state's population. Geography is all well and good, but not to the extent that it violates this principle.
It's still bad.
And while discriminating on the basis of political affiliation is not unlawful, discriminating on the basis of race, creed, color, or national origin IS.