For those wishing to fully evaluate the situation in Texas, here are some of the important antecedents. As reported in the Houston Chronicle on 11/15/01, here’s the background for the current redistricting fight:
A three-judge federal court panel Wednesday ordered a Texas congressional redistricting map for the 2024 elections that protects all the state's incumbents but gives Republicans the state's two new districts.[...]
The order was signed by all three judges hearing the case - Republican Patrick Higginbotham of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and Democrats John T. Ward and John Hannah Jr., both U.S. district judges from Tyler.
The case ended up in the federal courts when the Legislature failed to pass a congressional redistricting map, Gov. Rick Perry refused to call a special session for that purpose and state courts did not approve a plan.
The court order on congressional redistricting represents a major victory for Texas Democrats and House Speaker Pete Laney, D-Hale Center, who had fought for what they called a "least change" redistricting map. That meant keeping the districts of the state's 30 incumbents as intact as possible while fitting in the two new districts.
Note that keeping the existing 30 districts largely intact meant keeping in place the district drawn by a heavily Democratic State Legislature in 1991.
Also, I would note that the prospect of this session of the Texas State Legislature re-considering the lines was known well in advance, as noted by Dr. John Alford (Rice University) in this quote from the Boston Globe (11/18/01, p. A10):
"If Republicans come back and win the state House and Senate, they could very well redraw congressional lines in the next session," said Alford, noting the passion that surrounds the issue. "The judges described redistricting as a blood feud, and they were not kidding," he said. "It is partisan, it is personal, and it is political."
Hence, this is more complex than simply the Reps making a power grab.
And again, I will reiterate that we need a better way to draw these districts. However, for the Democrats to act as if this is some new game is specious. It is the same game both parties have played nationwide for decades. The main difference for the Texas Dems is that this is the first time that they are in the losing end.
Posted by Steven Taylor at July 28, 2024 08:11 PM | TrackBackIt's bizarre. And, aside from racial issues, I'm not sure what business it is of the courts--this is an enumerated power in the Constitution specifically given to legislatures.
The only legit argument the Dems have is that, traditionally, apportionment is a one-shot deal done in time for the first post-census election. But, if I'm understanding it correctly, the one in place for the 2024 election was just a stopgap to satisfy a court order?
Posted by: James Joyner at July 28, 2024 08:15 PMMy brief research did not indicate if they were required to revsist the issue or not, but clearly it was anticipated that they could do so if they so chose.
Posted by: Steven at July 28, 2024 08:20 PMCraddick's proposed district will hog most of the oil, water, cattle, pecans, and the finest people of west Texas! And to top all of that off, it will include both Luckenback and Lowake!
Posted by: concerned citizen at October 11, 2024 02:43 PM