Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Looked at the re-districting plan in this region - Fort Worth area:
North of Ft. Worth there is a township of Decatur. It's future growth is dynamically linked to the north and west quadrants area-wise,
in the adjacent counties that comprise the outer edge of our urban sprawl. Fort Worth is only 40 miles away.
Redrawing of their district attaches them to the Texas side of the Red River at Wichita Falls, accross from Oklahoma 50 miles northward.
From there it runs westardly into the Texas Panhandle and then north to Amarillo - nearly 320 miles away.
No change in voting population, but the shift overwhelms the constituancy of the area that is being absorbed.
Area with very little Pro-Republican support, being dealt into a dilution of representation - for the gain of a seat.
Present boundries are those as drawn by a 3 Judge Federal panel in 2001 - year and 1/2 ago.
They actually are outnumbered on this by 17 - 15, but instead of settling for a 16 - 16 compromise,
they are manipulating legislation to strip 6 of these fabricated re-zonings of the elected Democrat representative,
and appoint a Republican replacement - without an election.
That would give them 21 - 11 domination without the benifit of an election being held to choose the delegate.
And then they get to write just about any law they want - without opposition.
The Texas Goober - Perry has said he will call another session again and again until DeLay says "Stop".
DeLay - isn't that a French name ? (or a tactic)
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
A Link
So what if it is over 65% Republican NOW what was it when the last election went down ?
What was it when the Census changed the didtricts, and that change implemented only 2 years ago ?
Those who just got in after the last election in certain districts are manipulating the legislature to their Political Agenda,
reguardless of what laws are in effect. These are not responsible people acting like adults or leaders.
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Looked at the re-districting plan in this region - Fort Worth area:
North of Ft. Worth there is a township of Decatur. It's future growth is dynamically linked to the north and west quadrants area-wise,
in the adjacent counties that comprise the outer edge of our urban sprawl. Fort Worth is only 40 miles away.
Redrawing of their district attaches them to the Texas side of the Red River at Wichita Falls, accross from Oklahoma 50 miles northward.
From there it runs westardly into the Texas Panhandle and then north to Amarillo - nearly 320 miles away.
No change in voting population, but the shift overwhelms the constituancy of the area that is being absorbed.
Area with very little Pro-Republican support, being dealt into a dilution of representation - for the gain of a seat.
Present boundries are those as drawn by a 3 Judge Federal panel in 2001 - year and 1/2 ago.
They actually are outnumbered on this by 17 - 15, but instead of settling for a 16 - 16 compromise,
they are manipulating legislation to strip 6 of these fabricated re-zonings of the elected Democrat representative,
and appoint a Republican replacement - without an election.
That would give them 21 - 11 domination without the benifit of an election being held to choose the delegate.
And then they get to write just about any law they want - without opposition.
The Texas Goober - Perry has said he will call another session again and again until DeLay says "Stop".
DeLay - isn't that a French name ? (or a tactic)
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
That's a question not for you or for I ourselves, nor for the Legislature.
It's the choice of the voters in the NEXT election, not appointment by decree.
I will vote at that time, will you ?
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
That's a question not for you or for I ourselves, nor for the Legislature.
It's the choice of the voters in the NEXT election, not appointment by decree.
I will vote at that time, will you ?
Originally posted by: ViRGE
I just read the article, and it said that the Senate has 31 members, 12 Ds and unless there are any I's, 19 R's, making it ~62% Republican. If Charrison's estimate is correct, then the representation is correct, no?
Originally posted by: ViRGE
I just read the article, and it said that the Senate has 31 members, 12 Ds and unless there are any I's, 19 R's, making it ~62% Republican. If Charrison's estimate is correct, then the representation is correct, no?
Republicans are pressing for more seats in the state's 32-member delegation in the U.S. House; the Democrats currently hold a 17-15 advantage.
Originally posted by: ViRGE
I just read the article, and it said that the Senate has 31 members, 12 Ds and unless there are any I's, 19 R's, making it ~62% Republican. If Charrison's estimate is correct, then the representation is correct, no?
The current district lines are something to behold as well. However it needs to be done to better represent the state. The state is mostly republican(60-70%) but yet Texas republicans only make up about 40% of our congressman.
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The current district lines are something to behold as well. However it needs to be done to better represent the state. The state is mostly republican(60-70%) but yet Texas republicans only make up about 40% of our congressman.
There are quite a few demographics that are not reflected in state legislatures. What's special about BS political affiliations?
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The current district lines are something to behold as well. However it needs to be done to better represent the state. The state is mostly republican(60-70%) but yet Texas republicans only make up about 40% of our congressman.
There are quite a few demographics that are not reflected in state legislatures. What's special about BS political affiliations?
If nothing is special about the affiliations, why are they running to AZ?
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The current district lines are something to behold as well. However it needs to be done to better represent the state. The state is mostly republican(60-70%) but yet Texas republicans only make up about 40% of our congressman.
There are quite a few demographics that are not reflected in state legislatures. What's special about BS political affiliations?
If nothing is special about the affiliations, why are they running to AZ?
The whole system sounds borked. Electoral boundaries should not be based on Political Affiliation, unless the system has established a 2-Party system and outlawed other parties. There are better methods based on Demographics(real).
Why would conservatives want to f up a 130 year tradition.Originally posted by: digitalsm
Okay alot of people dont know whats going on this sums it up.
In 1992 the democrats pulled of the gerrymander of all gerrymanders. Talk about creative redistricting. The republicans took them to court, in 1996 the Supreme Court came up with a redistricting plan based off the 1992 gerrymander preformed by the democrats. IE it was unfair and partisan. In 1997 it stuck after a year of not coming up with a better solution had past. In 2002 the courts again had to draw district lines because Texas couldnt get a bill passed for redistricting. While it was somewhat more fair it is still heavily biased towards democrats, as it is still based heavily off the 1992 democrat gerrymader.
What the republicans are doing is using the same tactis the democrats did for the past 130 years. The democrats cant handle it and act in childish ways shirking their responsibility. If they have a problem with redistricting take it to court.
So to some it up, the republicans want to redraw district lines that are already really whacking, one district near houston has parts of five different counties in.
Anyone bashing the republicans, google "Texas Redistricting 1992" and "Texas Redistricting 2002".