The most partisan issue on Saturday’s ballot was Prop. 12, which set caps for non-economic damages in lawsuits. The results were 50.95% for and 49.05% against. As the legislature sits down to draw new Congressional maps in this third special session, they should consider how evenly divided the state is today and set boundaries that reflect this most recent election.
Today, a fair map would have 16 Democrat safe districts, 16 Republican safe districts and 1 truly competitive district. Why should redistricting be based on the results that are 2 years old when much more current data is available? This could really effect the way the districts are redrawn after the 2004 elections and the 2006 elections and the 2008 elections. Because, as Texans, we seem to have decided that redistricting is a good idea every time the voting patterns shift.
"Today, a fair map would have 16 Democrat safe districts, 16 Republican safe districts and 1 truly competitive district."
Fascinating. I didn't know Texas had 33 congressional seats. All this time I thought it was 32. Also, you know you are being disengenous when you propose basing electoral boundaries on the results of an election in which on 12% of the population voted. And, as has been already pointed out, the fact that 12 was "The most partisan issue on Saturday’s ballot" didn't mean that the voting patterns followed partisan lines ... unless South Texas has become a GOP stronghold and I just missed it.
Minutes later the Democratic senators, led by Sen. Leticia Van de Putte, D-San Antonio, entered the chamber, greeted by cheers and screams of support.
The returning senators formed a circle and joined hands, holding them up in the air while the crowd wildly greeted them.
Now, let's get that new map passed. The presence of Leticia and the other celebrities is not necessary.
The invasion of this blog by right mouthbreathers is somewhat alarming. No reason to be so catty sherk- it doesn't matter the turnout, 12% or 100% we don't fucking decide our congressional delegation like that. This isn't some kind of Green Party utopia where we have proportional representation. Otherwise we'd have 16 men, 16 women, 4 African Americans, 10 Hispanics, and probably 1 Homosexual. Hell, why not make sure we have 5 left-handed representatives or 1 red headed rep? What about 1 Green and 1 Libertarian (okay, so we have Ron Paul). This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of guys- we draw fair boundaries, that preserve communities of interest and let those voters choose, period.
I'm pleased that people read our site and I don't care where they are on the political spectrum as long as their not communists (real ones, not Rush Limbaugh's definition) or fascists, and as long as their comments are respectful.
it doesn't matter the turnout, 12% or 100% we don't fucking decide our congressional delegation like that.
Sherk was quite correctly pointing out DallasDem's mistake in presuming to base Congressional apportionment not on a Congressional election, but on a Constitutional referendum (!).
I recommend you ask Byron or Jim to give you a primer on gerrymandering.
"Mouthbreathers"? Byron - thanks for the support.
I really enjoy hearing righty view points on this site. Keep it up guys.