Excerpt
RAY SUAREZ (Newshour): The Supreme Court today tossed out the Texas congressional map, creating chaos for the upcoming primary election and highlighting the difficulties of redrawing boundaries in states with diverse populations.
Four million new residents means Texas is adding four additional seats in Congress, and Democrats had high hopes of winning some of those seats as they attempt to reclaim the House.
A three-judge panel in San Antonio drew its own map, fearing the lines drawn by the Texas legislature wouldn't win speedy approval from the Department of Justice, as required under the Voting Rights Act. Today, the Supreme Court unanimously found the San Antonio judges used the wrong standards to draw the temporary maps.
So, now what?
For a look at the legal and political implications of the decision, we're joined by Richard Hasen, professor of law and political science at the University of California Irvine School Of Law, and Shira Toeplitz, a political reporter for Roll Call who has been closely following the Texas case.
NOTE: I highlighted (larger text) the phrase above to emphasize that the San Antonio judges were correct on what they attempted BUT found wrong on HOW they did it. That is an important point.
Another point. IMHO this is one of the things wrong with our electoral process, the drawing of districts by the political interests in any state. This allows the powers-that-be to always skew districts to keep themselves in power, rather than seeing that the all the people have the representation they desire. Having said that, political districting is a state function. I just wish the people in charge would put aside self-interest.
No comments:
Post a Comment