Skip to main content

View Diary: a traditional map of Texas (20 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Legality (0+ / 0-)

    None of this is legal. In fact, there are about ten instances of retrogression strictly applied and perhaps up to 2 or 4 more depending on your the argument made.

    A nonpartisan legal map would actually be something more favorable to the Democrats than what the legislature passed by about 3 or 4 seats.

    The implication of this diary and your language introducing it is that the VRA needs to be overturned and the trampling of minority voting rights is "traditional" and "fair", which is simply not the case.

    Also, I completely disagree with this intro statement:

    This is a district that should be fair and one where neither republican nor democrats are an all out winner.
    Republicans are an all winner in this district winning outright in 23 districts with a huge edge in another 2. But that isn't the whole equation is it? Minorities would be favored in only 8... EIGHT... ONLY EIGHT districts. Yeah, there are a few more where white Democrats will certainly win, and that's great for diversity in a single party, but that's absolutely disastrous for diversity in the overall delegation.

    Start from scratch with this map.

    22 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); Intern w/ Gallego for Congress; Office Personnel at CCA.

    by wwmiv on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 11:08:27 PM PDT

    •  Well (0+ / 0-)

      Obviously I was so incensed that I couldn't write worth a damn.

      22 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); Intern w/ Gallego for Congress; Office Personnel at CCA.

      by wwmiv on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 11:09:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Think of it this way (0+ / 0-)

        There are only 11 districts here that Democrats would win, and there are only 10 districts in the map that the legislature drew that Democrats would win. But the picture is slightly more complex. There are 8 districts you drew that minorities would win, but the legislature drew 10 districts that minorities would win.

        Do you, or does anyone except crazy fanatics, believe that the map that the legislature drew which has been the focus of so many legal challenges that you can't throw a dart at the wall and not hit a sticky note with a complaint on it is "fair" and "traditional"? If you don't, then you really shouldn't describe your map that way, because it is vastly worse and would set minority power in a minority-majority state back by two decades. The state has ended up in court about its maps every decade for the last three decades, and none of their maps were ever as bad as this for minorities.

        22 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); Intern w/ Gallego for Congress; Office Personnel at CCA.

        by wwmiv on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 11:17:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  The purpose of the vra is not to (0+ / 0-)

      draw incoherent districts such as the proposed I-30 district but rather to protect legislators from tearing up areas where there is a compact minority presence. In Houston and Dallas, they are dispersed throughout the area. It's not like in San Antonio where you can draw a compact 77% hispanic seat.

      RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

      by demographicarmageddon on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 11:19:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh... Give me a break and (0+ / 0-)

        You have got to be kidding me.

        The purpose of the VRA is to protect minority voting rights. The purpose of the VRA section 2 as interpreted by the courts is to compel states to draw districts in which minority candidates can elect their candidate of choice provided that the minority is sufficiently compact. And you cannot seriously argue that the court drawn interim map's, which was unanimous with respect to the DFW area on a court with Republican appointees, additional Latino district in the DFW area is not sufficiently compact.

        The problem is not that you aren't able to draw a 77% Hispanics seat in DFW, the problem is that you aren't allowed to draw a 77% Hispanic seat ANYWHERE if you can reasonably draw multiple 65% Hispanic seats by dismantling that 77% seat. Which you can do in San Antonio, but you've completely retrogressed in the 23rd and totally removed it from the San Antonio area, instead choosing to pack Hispanics into 90% Hispanic seats like the one in the Valley and the one in Laredo.

        You can EASILY and REASONABLY make multiple Hispanic fajita strips that DON'T LOOK BAD visually, since this is so clearly what you are after, by breaking those districts up. Plus, you can easily create two total districts which would elect an African American representative in DFW - but no... to you that wouldn't be "fair" - in addition to that new Latino district. REASONABLY.

        The problem isn't that these groups aren't compact, they damn well certainly so very much are, the problem is that racist southerners pack them so damn much into as few districts as possible as to completely remove their ability to have any ability to effect change and affect the governmental system at a level commensurate with their size. In more simpler terms: what Republicans are doing is suppressing minority power in a state which is minority majority. I.E. They're being racist. And your maps are actually worse for minorities than the official maps.

        22 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); Intern w/ Gallego for Congress; Office Personnel at CCA.

        by wwmiv on Fri Sep 14, 2012 at 11:56:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I will give you one credit (0+ / 0-)

          The maps are pretty.

          22 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); Intern w/ Gallego for Congress; Office Personnel at CCA.

          by wwmiv on Sat Sep 15, 2012 at 12:04:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  not to argue too much but (0+ / 0-)

          my map is based off of this map:
          http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/...

          This was a map drawn by the democrats.

          RRH expat (known as AquarianLeft). Also known as freepcrusher on leip atlas forum

          by demographicarmageddon on Sat Sep 15, 2012 at 01:02:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Um... (0+ / 0-)

            Yeah, a map which was taken to court because it was discriminatory. Also, the demographics of Texas have changed dramatically since that time and the same districts would be incoherent in today's world.

            22 Burkean Post Modern Gay Democrat; NM-2 (Raised), TX-20 (B.A. & M.A. in Political Science), TX-17 (Home); Intern w/ Gallego for Congress; Office Personnel at CCA.

            by wwmiv on Sat Sep 15, 2012 at 03:35:37 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site