Jump to content

SCOTUS votes for and against Texas redistricting


kapkomet

Recommended Posts

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 11:39 AM)
You people have to understand what the issue really was.

 

The COURTS drew the maps in 2000. That's why the LEGISLATURE, who are the ones that are supposed to redistrict, did it in 2004.

Hahahahahaha. You're trying to say that this wasn't done to wrest more seats to the GOP, that part was only coincidence? That's hilarious.

 

The real issue is pretty transparent here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever I see these conflicts over districting, and see that it is performed by the legislature(s), it always makes me cringe. It doesn't seem like legislative bodies should be handling that. But then I must admit, I cannot think of a better way. Some sort of independent commission would seem justified, but it would be hard to insulate them from partisan politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 11:54 AM)
Whenever I see these conflicts over districting, and see that it is performed by the legislature(s), it always makes me cringe. It doesn't seem like legislative bodies should be handling that. But then I must admit, I cannot think of a better way. Some sort of independent commission would seem justified, but it would be hard to insulate them from partisan politics.

It's essentially just a math problem (divy up a distribution). You could probably come up with an algorithm that does it impartially, but I don't think anyone would go for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 03:53 PM)
Hahahahahaha. You're trying to say that this wasn't done to wrest more seats to the GOP, that part was only coincidence? That's hilarious.

 

The real issue is pretty transparent here.

 

whoever is in control every ten years does the same thing the texas gop'ers did. I don't see the big deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 03:53 PM)
Hahahahahaha. You're trying to say that this wasn't done to wrest more seats to the GOP, that part was only coincidence? That's hilarious.

 

The real issue is pretty transparent here.

Hahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa... OF COURSE it was a power grab. But, the LEGISTLATIVE BODY had not drawn districts in this state since 1990, and the districts have shifted. So, the GOP went ahead and redrew them, basically saying that the districts had changed immensely since 1990. Of course they had. Nothing would have been said if this was done 2 years earlier by the same legislature, but it was tied up in the COURT system, which is where it doesn't belong.

 

I agree, though, NSS, that an independant body would be even better, but that's not how most states do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 04:06 PM)
Hahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa... OF COURSE it was a power grab. But, the LEGISTLATIVE BODY had not drawn districts in this state since 1990, and the districts have shifted. So, the GOP went ahead and redrew them, basically saying that the districts had changed immensely since 1990. Of course they had. Nothing would have been said if this was done 2 years earlier by the same legislature, but it was tied up in the COURT system, which is where it doesn't belong.

 

I agree, though, NSS, that an independant body would be even better, but that's not how most states do it.

I agree with some of this, I was just pointing out that it was in no way some principled stand.

 

Nothing in the law specifically forbids it, but then, nothing specifically forbids each and every new legislature from redistricting as it sees fit. You say it does not belong in the courts, but there's no justification for that. It's been acknowledged that the legislature has the responsibility of redrawing the districts, sure. But if it abdicates, the courts SHOULD be involved, which is exactly what happened in Texas.

 

It's also been acknowledged that the government has a duty to settle the districts in a reasonable amount of time. Having the legislature revisit the issue years after they were supposed to deal with it breaks at least the spirit of that directive.

 

Not to mention, Tom DeLay sure as hell wasn't part of the legislature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both parties agreed in 2000 to having the courts draw the map because they were deadlocked. Then when a shift in power made a grab possible one party changed their minds.

 

And my man the Hammer led the way :bang The new districts are so wrong. My congressman has a district 20 miles wide and 200 miles long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 28, 2006 -> 09:01 PM)
Personally I think that every state should be cut up into equally sized squares. This funny business that both sides are involved in regarding redistricting is just awful.

 

this just isn't a very good idea.

 

there'd be districts with like 500 people and ones with 5 million...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...