Supreme Court to review Texas political map

Supreme Court to review Texas political map

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/12/sco...s.ap/index.html

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court said Monday it would consider the constitutionality of a Texas congressional map engineered by Rep. Tom DeLay that helped Republicans gain seats in Congress.

The 2003 boundaries helped Republicans win 21 of the state's 32 seats in Congress in the last election-- up from 15. They were approved amid a nasty battle between Republican leaders and Democrats and minority groups in Texas.

The contentiousness also reached Washington, where the Justice Department approved the plan, although staff lawyers concluded that it diluted minority voting rights. Because of historic discrimination against minority voters, Texas is required to get Justice Department approval for any voting changes to ensure they don't undercut minority voting.****

Justices will consider a constitutional challenge to the boundaries filed by various opponents. The court will hear two hours of arguments, likely in April, in four separate appeals.

The legal battle at the Supreme Court was over the unusual timing of the Texas redistricting, among other things. Under the Constitution, states must adjust their congressional district lines every 10 years to account for population shifts.

But in Texas the boundaries were redrawn twice after the 2000 census, first by a court, then by state lawmakers in a second round promoted by DeLay.

DeLay had to step down as House Majority Leader earlier this year after he was indicted in Texas on state money laundering charges.

DeLay and two people who oversaw his fundraising activities are accused of funneling prohibited corporate political money through the national Republican Party to state GOP legislative candidates. Texas law prohibits spending corporate money on the election or defeat of a candidate.

The alleged scheme was part of a plan DeLay helped set in motion to help Republicans win control of the Texas House in 2002 elections. The Republican Legislature then adopted a DeLay-backed congressional voting district map.

The new map was used in 2004 elections, and Texas elected one additional black congressman besides the six additional GOP members. Of the 32 seats, six delegation members are Hispanic and three are black.

***What the hell is the point of a law to protect voting rights if those assigned to ensure they are upheld are like "well, it does violate this law which is the reason for our reviewing it in the first place - but I don't know George, lets just let it go..."

Oh, its because the man in charge of it is from Texas and a puppet of George Bush and the republican party as a whole...

So for the FORTY YEARS that the Democrat Party gerrymandered the shit out of Texas it was just fine, but now that the Republicans have turned the tables, suddenly it's "racist?" Bullshit.

The Democrats got their ass kicked fair and square. They're just sore losers.

You know as well as I do it was not the same republican and democratic parties forty years ago kabar...

Very true, the parties were somewhat different. My grandfather was a die-hard Republican all his life. His candidates never got elected when I was a kid. During WWII, he was instrumental in getting a library for the "colored" high school in his town. He lived in a small town (Luling, Texas) and the family story is that he ran for the local school board and got elected. There were two high schools (they only went through Grade 11 back then,) one white, and one black. The "colored" high school was called Central, and the white high school, Luling High. Luling High was in a brand-new building. Central was the "old" white high school, and had been "given" to the black community when Luling High was built. Luling High had a library, but the old Central school did not.

My grandfather thought that this was unfair. He asked the school board for money for a library for Central. They said that there was no money for a library for Central, and that "we'll just have to make do with the money we have." Granddad asked them if he could put a library in Central if he could figure out a way to do it without spending any money. They said "yes."

The following Monday, armed with the school board meeting minutes, Granddad hooked up an old beat-up wooden trailer (made from a Model-A axle) and drove to Luling High. He presented the librarian with the school board meeting minutes, and said "Luling High can have "A" through "L", and I'll take "M" through "Z" over to Central." He was loading books into his trailer when the other school board members arrived, all upset and out of breath.

"Bob, what the hell are you doing?"

"Well, you said if I could solve it without spending any money, I could put a library in at Central. This won't cost us a cent."

"You can't give those niggers our library!"

"It's not our library, Tom. It's everybody's library. The colored folks pay school taxes too."

That afternoon they had an emergency school board meeting and allotted money for a library at Central, and Granddad took the library books back to Luling High. When Central got their books, they had to stack them in boxes in the back of the classrooms, because there was no shelving and no "library room."

Granddad was crushingly defeated in the next school board election. He went on from there towork to have electric power lines run to Dark Town and later, city water, sewage and natural gas. Before that, they had wells, used outhouses, and cooked on either wood stoves, LP gas stoves or kerosene stoves.

My Granddad told me he had no use for the Klan, no use for the Nazi Party and no use for Communists. He was a very devout believer in God (as a Higher Power--he was a diligent AA member), but I heard him curse the church-going folks as "those god-damned Christians" and called the Christian faith "churchianity." He had many friends in the black community in Luling, all Democrats.

well mister, your grandpa was a goddamn nigger lover and a possibly a faggot jew commie if you ask me...

Nope. Die hard Republican. You gotta remember, the Klan voted Democratic back then. These days, I don't think they vote at all, unless it's for the State's Rights Party or the Southern National Party.

since political history is one of my favorite things to discuss, we also cant forget that the political parties of old, had more than one wing to them. basically cut along southern and northern lines. the democratic party, was essentially liberal from FDR onward, (actually back to Wilson) with the exception of the southern democrats. the yanks latched ahold of the party around the time of the depression. before FDR they were basically the states rights, limited government party. the republicans were the big business party, but had a much better record on civil rights at this time. in the 40's and 50's emerged a wing of conservative republicans. Robert Taft being the leader and most known. there were a few here and there before hand, mainly Coolidge and some 20's era republicans. they were laissez faire in general. the big shift came in the 60's when goldwater ran and split the republican party. goldwater's platform was essentially the traditional democrat platform from the civil war to the world war I. this campaign in 1964 won many southern votes. it made it ok to vote republican. but we all know, the liberal democrat LBJ came away ahead in the election. so once the democratic party basically kicked out the conservative members, many found home in the republicans conservative wing. then came reagan, and he essentially turned the solid democratic south, into the solid republican south. im sure the grandparents of today's southerners are rolling in their graves, with the south voting for lincolns party.

so it is somewhat true to say that some members of each party today resemble members of the "other" party back in the day, it isnt totally true. the parties werent as united as they are today.

on an odd note, there was actually quite handful of republicans in certain areas of the south. mainly in appalachian regions. southwestern VA, east TN, western NC, north georgia were all republican strong holds. there were many guerillas fighting as home guards during the civil war for the north in these areas. and these are the same people who get the shit for being those racist rednecks, when actually these hillbillies were on the side of the north during the war between the states.

Originally posted by KaBar2@Dec 16 2005, 03:37 AM

So for the FORTY YEARS that the Democrat Party gerrymandered the shit out of Texas it was just fine, but now that the Republicans have turned the tables, suddenly it's "racist?" Bullshit.

 

The Democrats got their ass kicked fair and square. They're just sore losers.

Quoted post

fuck you and your grandpappy.

while we're at it, fuck the democrats.

they're just as self serving as the republicans.

2 party system is bullshit.

no chance for anyone to get elected outside of those parties in this country.

not to mention the fact that bullshit teachers all thru elementary school will tell every kid they can be the president of the USA. this is very inspiring talk that makes kids think this country is merit based and not the buddy buddy keep the money and power where it's been for 200+ years frat boy bullshit that it is.

FUCK VOTING...last 2 elections proved it was useless.

FUCK BLUE AND RED STATES...it doesn't matter at all.

AND FUCK TEXAS...just because.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031208fa_fact

Some interesting quotes from the above:

“This was a fundamental change in the rules of the game,� Heather Gerken, a professor at Harvard Law School, said. “The rules were, Fight it out once a decade but then let it lie for ten years.

... so the leadership of the state government, now unified in Republican hands, tried during the summer of 2003 to push through a new plan.

___________________________________________________________

The off-cycle timing of the Texas redistricting fight, as well as the farcical drama of the fleeing Democratic legislators, made the saga look like a colorful aberration. But the results of that altercation merely replicated what happened, after the 2000 census, in several other states where Republicans controlled the governorship and the legislature.Even in states where voters were evenly divided, the Republicans used their advantage in the state capitals to transform their congressional delegations. In Florida, the paradigmatically deadlocked state, the new district lines sent eighteen Republicans and seven Democrats to the House. In the Gore state of Michigan, which lost a seat in redistricting, the delegation went from 9-7 in favor of the Democrats to 9-6 in favor of the Republicans—even though Democratic congressional candidates received thirty-five thousand more votes than their Republican opponents in 2002. (The Michigan plan was approved on September 11, 2001, so it received little publicity.) Pennsylvania, which also went to Gore, had one of the most ruthless Republican gerrymanders, and it is the one being challenged before the Supreme Court.

After 2000, Pennsylvania lost two seats in Congress, and its legislature had to establish new district lines. Republican legislative leaders there engaged in no subterfuge; they candidly admitted that they intended to draw the lines to favor their party as much as possible. In the midst of the battle over the Pennsylvania plan, DeLay and Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House, sent a letter to the Pennsylvania legislators, saying, “We wish to encourage you in these efforts, as they play a crucial role in maintaining a Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives.� The Republicans in Harrisburg used venerable techniques in redistricting, like “packing,� “cracking,� and “kidnapping.� Packing concentrates one group’s voters in the fewest possible districts, so they cannot influence the outcome of races in others; cracking divides a group’s voters into other districts, where they will be ineffective minorities; and kidnapping places two incumbents

_____________________________________________________________

DeLay’s mid-cycle reapportionment may be without precedent, but Democrats have their own inglorious history of gerrymandering. Before the Texas coup this year, the most notorious redistricting operation in recent years was the one run by Representative Philip Burton, following the 1980 census in California, which transformed the Democrats’ advantage in House seats there from 22-21 to 27-18.

_______________________________________________________________

One state that has gone its own way is Iowa, which turned redistricting over to a nonpartisan civil-service commission after the 2000 census. Consequently, four of Iowa’s five House races in 2002 were competitive, so a state with one per cent of the seats in the House produced ten per cent of the nation’s close elections. The rest of the country will follow only, it seems, if the Supreme Court requires it.

What I found particularly worrysome was the arangement with "minority-majority" areas.

READ THE DAMN ARTICLE - IT SHOULD WORRY YOU...