Comments on: What Primary Turnout Means for Redistricting http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829 Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:57:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: marco http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-122164 marco Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:36:37 +0000 http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-122164 Thank you this is an excellent list. I’m new to all this but want to setup my first blog soon so I intend on printing this out and adding it to my boxfile Thank you this is an excellent list. I’m new to all this but want to setup my first blog soon so I intend on printing this out and adding it to my boxfile

]]> By: austinite http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69864 austinite Mon, 03 Mar 2008 13:21:07 +0000 http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69864 The law of congressional redistricting is interesting to think about but, as always, uncomfortable to talk about because of its bizarre (pre-Obama, one can hope) assumption that people vote based on their own race. That said, Matt Angle is right that the very low historical turnout of Hispanic voters has hindered the Voting Rights Act claims that would have required a Hispanic-majority district to be drawn in north Texas. That's because those claims require statistical proof that the proposed district would actually be controlled by the protected group. So, bigger Hispanic turnout in urban areas in 2008 would help --- but if all groups in those urban areas are equally energized, it may not help that much. Indeed, if resurgent Hispanic voters strongly align anti-Obama, as all the media suggests, then their higher turnouts may further hinder the creation of coalition districts like the one that Congressman Frost represented for so many years (and like the one that Congressman Doggett argued should be required in Austin). keenobserver has a point about future state legislative maps but is not quite correct about congressional districting, which in Texas never goes to LRB. Instead, if there is a deadlock (such as if two different parties hold power and cannot agree to divide the pie in a suitably incumbent-protecting way), the first map will be drawn in court, as it was in 2001. There are circumstances in which a purely court-drawn map could also bypass DOJ scrutiny (as it did in 2001), leaving only the courts as a check. The law of congressional redistricting is interesting to think about but, as always, uncomfortable to talk about because of its bizarre (pre-Obama, one can hope) assumption that people vote based on their own race. That said, Matt Angle is right that the very low historical turnout of Hispanic voters has hindered the Voting Rights Act claims that would have required a Hispanic-majority district to be drawn in north Texas. That’s because those claims require statistical proof that the proposed district would actually be controlled by the protected group. So, bigger Hispanic turnout in urban areas in 2008 would help — but if all groups in those urban areas are equally energized, it may not help that much. Indeed, if resurgent Hispanic voters strongly align anti-Obama, as all the media suggests, then their higher turnouts may further hinder the creation of coalition districts like the one that Congressman Frost represented for so many years (and like the one that Congressman Doggett argued should be required in Austin).

keenobserver has a point about future state legislative maps but is not quite correct about congressional districting, which in Texas never goes to LRB. Instead, if there is a deadlock (such as if two different parties hold power and cannot agree to divide the pie in a suitably incumbent-protecting way), the first map will be drawn in court, as it was in 2001. There are circumstances in which a purely court-drawn map could also bypass DOJ scrutiny (as it did in 2001), leaving only the courts as a check.

]]> By: keenobserver http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69757 keenobserver Sun, 02 Mar 2008 17:04:05 +0000 http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69757 The redistricting article makes an interesting point but misses a crucial fact. Even if Democrats take back the Texas House this year or in 2010, they will not have enough votes in the Texas Senate to pass a redistricting bill that favors them. It only takes 11 votes to block a bill in the Senate and under any scenario the Rs will have that many Senators. Failing to pass a legislative redistricting bill in 2011 will once again bring the Legislative Redistricting Board into existence. Even if Texas Democrats elect a House Speaker, they would have to also take two of the statewide seats on that Board to work their will. More likely, that Board will be constituted by a strong majority of Republicans, who will again draw the lines to the disadvantage of Democrats. At that point, Democrats' best hope is to control the Justice Department in hopes of making progress through the Voting Rights Act. Litigation will end up in federal courts shaped by recent administrations. Let the gnashing of teeth begin. The redistricting article makes an interesting point but misses a crucial fact. Even if Democrats take back the Texas House this year or in 2010, they will not have enough votes in the Texas Senate to pass a redistricting bill that favors them. It only takes 11 votes to block a bill in the Senate and under any scenario the Rs will have that many Senators. Failing to pass a legislative redistricting bill in 2011 will once again bring the Legislative Redistricting Board into existence. Even if Texas Democrats elect a House Speaker, they would have to also take two of the statewide seats on that Board to work their will. More likely, that Board will be constituted by a strong majority of Republicans, who will again draw the lines to the disadvantage of Democrats. At that point, Democrats’ best hope is to control the Justice Department in hopes of making progress through the Voting Rights Act. Litigation will end up in federal courts shaped by recent administrations. Let the gnashing of teeth begin.

]]> By: Scott http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69562 Scott Fri, 29 Feb 2008 19:58:20 +0000 http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69562 Check out current.com for the Democratic Messiah video. Check out current.com for the Democratic Messiah video.

]]> By: stephenhsmith http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69546 stephenhsmith Fri, 29 Feb 2008 17:31:21 +0000 http://www.texasobserver.org/blog/?p=829#comment-69546 fyi... AUSTIN — The Texas Democratic Party warned Thursday that election night caucuses scheduled for next Tuesday could be delayed or disrupted after aides to Hillary Clinton threatened to sue over the party's complicated delegate selection process. In a letter sent out late Thursday to both the Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns, Texas Democratic Party lawyer Chad Dunn warned a lawsuit could ruin the Democrats' effort to re-energize voters just as they are turning out in record numbers. Spokesmen for both campaigns said there were no plans to sue ahead of the March 4 election. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/29019.html fyi…

AUSTIN — The Texas Democratic Party warned Thursday that election night caucuses scheduled for next Tuesday could be delayed or disrupted after aides to Hillary Clinton threatened to sue over the party’s complicated delegate selection process.

In a letter sent out late Thursday to both the Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns, Texas Democratic Party lawyer Chad Dunn warned a lawsuit could ruin the Democrats’ effort to re-energize voters just as they are turning out in record numbers.

Spokesmen for both campaigns said there were no plans to sue ahead of the March 4 election.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/29019.html

]]>