Texas Senate Approves Redistricting Plan

[goobergunch]

AUSTIN (AP) -- A six-month battle in the Texas Legislature ended Sunday when the Senate passed a congressional redistricting plan in a third special legislative session.

The bill now goes to Republican Gov. Rick Perry, who is expected to sign it into law.

The new map, approved 17-14 in the Senate, likely will give Republicans the majority in the Texas congressional delegation that is now ruled 17-15 by Democrats.

Democrats have opposed every attempt by Republicans to pass a new plan, saying the current congressional boundaries drawn by a court in 2001 should remain in place. Republicans say current voting trends show Texas should have more GOP representation in Washington.

more...http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/TEXAS_REDISTRICTING?SITE=PAPHQ&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Frodo]

1. Well. A circus comes to an end.

Entertaining while it lasted, I guess. But now we have to live with the results.

[pinkpops]

2. I think now we go to court

So the entertainment may not be over yet.

[Frodo]

3. Court was our least attractive option...

or else it wouldn't have happened the way it did. Is it possible some friendly judge could rule our way at a low level? Sure.

But the precedent for this type of action was set some time ago and doesn't favor us.

[bahrbearian]

4. The voter's can change it ..careful what you wish for !!!

[Frodo]

5. ??? What can the voters change?

And what did I wish for?

[pinkpops]

6. The right Candidates

I suppose the right candidates might bring out enough independents or even moderate Republicans, where such exist.

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. There were two new districts in GA that were supposed to elect Democrats

last year. The voters there has other ideas.

Also in Pennsylvania, the Republican controlled legislature combined the districts of a Republican and a Democrat. This district had more GOP-leaning voters, but elected the Democrat anyway.

[AndyTiedye]

24. Someone or something

> There were two new districts in GA that were supposed to elect Democrats l
> last year. The voters there has other ideas.

Or at least the Diebold DRE voting machinez did.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

9. and well it should

this is bullshit of the highest order. No. It is criminal.

[bluestateguy]

7. Hi Ho to Court we go...

[Ilsa]

8. Dammit. One of my friends in DeLay's

district was looking forward to working to defeat him. Now he'll be in someone else's district. Of course, that shouldn't stop him from working to get DeLay defeated...

[pinkpops]

12. How to donate

To his opponent?

[machiventa]

23. Like a Rock

I live in DeLay's district and trust me when I say this, he is undefeatable. Here in Texas, Conservatives are like rocks when you try to get them to move. Literally

[mndemocrat_29]

10. I've been trying and trying to find this out

Where can I find a list of which districts are going where? I've been trying to find a list of the representatives that this affects, but I can't anywhere.

[goobergunch]

20. Here's a map of the new districts:

http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/research/redist/pdf/map_plan01374c.pdf

The currenty map is here: http://gis1.tlc.state.tx.us/static/pdf/planc01151m.pdf

[NewJerseyDem]

11. Who's most at risk?

I know that basically every white democrat has been put at risk by the redistricting plan. As I understand it Gene Green can probably move to another district and will probably win barring a Latino primary defeat. But, does anyone know who is in the most trouble and who might have a shot at survival? I heard Fred Barnes say on the Beltway Boys that he thinks that Lloyd Doggett might survive who is the most liberal white democrat from Texas so he's the one I would choose to stay first.

Are there any statistics like the Bush v. Gore results in these new districts available yet or will that take a little while to figure out?

Has anyone from Texas heard any analysis about who is at risk from local television?

[Hawkeye-X]

13. It's not over people.

Expect it to be challenged and the redistricting map that Goodhair approved thrown out and ordered null and void - enabling the Dem map to remain intact until 2010 AS prescribed by law. Also expect heavy sanctions against the Repukkklicans for wasting the judge's AND the legislature's time when there are FAR more important issues such as school funding, etc.

Colorado Supreme Court will be throwing the GOP redistricting map out as well, to show that they are following the law as prescribed.

Hawkeye-X

[mbperrin]

15. Absolutely right! The whole intent-

to increase Republican representation is prima facie evidence of gerrymandering to begin. And the relevant court is the one which wrote the current districts before, so the Repubs are asking these judges to find their own work bad!

Doesn't sound like a great recipe for success!

Now can we please get something going on school finance? It WOULD be nice if schools had money to open next year!

[NewJerseyDem]

17. Gerrymandering is allowed

The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that gerrymandering is perfectly acceptable to increase the number of congressmen from one party.

We have two potential arguments. First of all, the democrats can argue that you can't do redistricting in the middle of the decade. But, it seems like that won't work because most courts are saying that the legislature can do redistricting when they are changing a court ordered plan. Our second argument is the best one and that is the Voting Rights Act. I don't really know all the details but the democrats argue that the redistricting hurts minortiy representation in congress and is therefore a violation of the Voting Rights Act. I don't know if that is really true but I guess the Dept. of Justice and the courts will have to figure that out.

[tlb]

18. I understand two new minority districts will be created.

Rather difficult to argue minorities are hurt when the House Black or Hispanic Causus is increased by two.

I'm skeptical the courts will get involved in this one. Political gerrymandering has been occurring since circa 1810 and it hasn't been stopped yet.

[goobergunch]

19. Subject to a Supreme Court ruling later this year

The Court has agreed to hear a case challenging the Pennsylvania redistricting plan on the grounds that it is a rediculous gerrymander...so that precedent may be overturned.

[NewJerseyDem]

22. I doubt it

They established that precedent only a couple years ago in Easley v. Cromartie where they upheld the right to gerrymander. So, I don't think we have much hope.

http://www.naacpldf.org/legalprogram/easley-v-cromartie.html



http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A33666-2001Apr18?language=printer

Perhaps chastened by years of wrestling with redistricting plans, the court implied in its majority opinion yesterday that it would like to lead the federal judiciary out of the redistricting thicket. It repeated, adding italics, language from an earlier opinion noting that courts must "exercise extraordinary caution in adjudicating claims that a State has drawn district lines on the basis of race."

[NewYorkerfromMass]

21. Interesting- who was governor when the court ordered a plan?

hmmmmmmm........

[The Zanti Regent]

16. Hopefully a Federalist Society member won't hear the case

If one of them does hear it, it's over...