Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KinkaidAlum

Redistricting or Gerrymandering?

Recommended Posts

Culberson wins because the 7th District of Congress is absurd. Districts are now drawn to protect incumbents (both parties do it but Republicans have perfected it) rather than serve communities. Culberson is my Congressman. However, my Mom, who lives less than 1 mile away, has another representative. However, someone in Jersey Village, over 18 miles away from me, also is represented by Culberson. Yeah, that makes sense...

 

Redistricting and gerrymandering has gotten so out of control, that despite getting nearly 1.4 million less votes, Republicans held a 33 seat margin in Congress after the 2012 elections. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gerrymandering is out of control, but it affects both parties, and no politician is going to want to re-draw their district to give power to another political party.

If you think it's a Republican-only thing or a Democrat-only thing you're kidding yourself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll agree that gerrymandering is the fine art of goring the other guy's ox.  Still, the Politburo had more turnover than Congress does now.  It takes something really wild for a representative to get booted - see Ralph Hall at 91, or Eric Cantor ignoring his district.

 

Perhaps something along the lines of California's commission system might be worth looking into.  Awwww, who am I kidding - it would take a minor miracle to get such a thing through the Texas Lege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has helped the republicans more they are doing every little thing they can to alienate minorities, this plus voting right laws among other things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes there are unintended consequences when a district is deliberately gerrymandered. Case in point: Texas District 29 in Houston.

 

The 1990 Census gave Texas one new district in the Houston area, which ignited a drive to make it a Hispanic district with a Hispanic representing it. So, in 1991, the legislature carefully - oh so carefully - carved out a new district on Houston's north and east side, and stayed up nights drawing the lines to include a very large Hispanic majority. That was the plan, but something funny happened to that plan on the way to the 1992 election.

 

Every big name Latino in Houston ran for that seat in the Democratic primary, including some heavy hitters like Ben Reyes. Everybody assumed one of them would win it, but guess what. Then State Rep Gene Green beat them all and won it without a runoff, and sailed to an easy victory in November against Republican Clark Kent Irvin. Green has held this seat ever since, winning re-election over perennial Latino candidates 11 times, and there's no reason to think he'll lose this year either.

 

Houston Hispanics are still trying to figure out why they haven't been able to win in a district that was created especially for them.

 

 

 

 

Edited by FilioScotia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has helped the republicans more they are doing every little thing they can to alienate minorities, this plus voting right laws among other things.

 

You sure are a naive fool. Both parties do it. Both discriminate against the other. Democrats do it to get all the minorities (not because they care by the way which has always been the biggest lie of all time! They just know that minorities don't like Republicans for some stupid reason and will always vote for them. because... f them right?). Republicans get all the whites or more affluent citizens (just because?? Republicans don't really care about their demographic either. It's just so they can get elected as well).

 

Next time you play the race card please at least make it an ironic or even sarcastic post so it's at least funny lol. Playing the race card these days (whether GOP or Dem.) is just silly and the person that's doing it is simply race baiting because they have no argument.

 

*drops mic*

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You all are making it sound like this is a new thing or a Texas only thing.  Congressional districts have been manipulated during redistricting by both parties all over the country for over 200 years. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the ethnic/racial component of drawing districts is mandated by the Voting Rights Act (and has been for decades).

 

Regardless of the metric used (and grossly oversimplifying here), redistricting/gerrymandering as commonly practiced usually results in the party in power trying to cram the opposite party into as few districts as possible while carving enough of them off here and there to maximize the number of their own "safe" districts, and bumping off the occasional senior member of the opposition.  That's why Austin is carved into a half a dozen districts, one of which reaches to the Houston burbs, and only one of which happens to have a D as its rep if my count is accurate.

 

Edit:  And yes, it's an old practice - the term itself refers to a Massachusetts governor's district drawing in 1812.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

Edited by mollusk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sure are a naive fool. Both parties do it. Both discriminate against the other. Democrats do it to get all the minorities (not because they care by the way which has always been the biggest lie of all time! They just know that minorities don't like Republicans for some stupid reason and will always vote for them. because... f them right?). Republicans get all the whites or more affluent citizens (just because?? Republicans don't really care about their demographic either. It's just so they can get elected as well).

Next time you play the race card please at least make it an ironic or even sarcastic post so it's at least funny lol. Playing the race card these days (whether GOP or Dem.) is just silly and the person that's doing it is simply race baiting because they have no argument.

*drops mic*

Obviously you are utterly clueless on the effects of republicans towards minorities, women, lgbt, basically anyone who isn't an elderly white affluent male. It's easy to accuse of race baiting when you don't even know what racism feels like. If you don't understand why republicans can't get minorities to vote for them, time to do some homework.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vik, that may be true, but it has nothing to do with gerrymandering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I truly hate to do this, but Vik isn't totally wrong. 

 

Google the Southern Strategy. 

 

As for why minorities don't support the Republican Party? 

 

277 out of the 278 Republican members of Congress are white. With Cantor's loss the other night, all of them will be Christian. So, yeah, not surprising you don't find a lot of support by "others." By the way, this phenomenon goes hand-in-hand with the Southern strategy.

 

Lastly, my original post shouldn't have been moved from the rail discussion. Far less than a quarter of Culberson's district lives near the rail or proposed U-Line or Post Oak Line so nobody should be surprised he doesn't support METRO. This is especially true when you consider a huge swath of District 7 sprawls out along 290.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously you are utterly clueless on the effects of republicans towards minorities, women, lgbt, basically anyone who isn't an elderly white affluent male. It's easy to accuse of race baiting when you don't even know what racism feels like. If you don't understand why republicans can't get minorities to vote for them, time to do some homework.

 

"You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity. Farewell." -Buzz Lightyear

 

 

yes I know about all the reasons for blah blah blah.....

 

Look people I think we can all agree that both parties are both very racist in their own regard. They are virtually the same at this point -.- Is it really that hard to look at the bigger picture?? Our are some of y'all to darn busy arguing about each others differences to come together to actually solve problems......or is that another issue that mine and future generations are going to have to solve just like everything else you toss at as. ffs...

 

And since most of you are just going to keep on throwing landmines everywhere, I think I'm just going to toss this video in here (probably the best explanation about gerrymandering) and take my leave of this pathetic excuse of a thread.

 

 

sheesh.....

(btw I have nothing against the OP for posting this thread but sadly it's just going to devolve from here :/ )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

277 out of the 278 Republican members of Congress are white. With Cantor's loss the other night, all of them will be Christian. So, yeah, not surprising you don't find a lot of support by "others." By the way, this phenomenon goes hand-in-hand with the Southern strategy.

 

Race - or geography?

It may be the racial composition of the Republican party you want to change, for idealistic reasons, but if instead you're simply looking to achieve certain racial quotas in Congress itself, or like most progressives, to get to a Democratic majority more quickly than will happen organically, then you pretty much have no choice but to make an end run around the rural voters who continue to choose Republicans (what the hell, Kansas?). The wikipedia article on apportionment offers a kind of solution in "weighted" voting strength, whereby the vote of a member of Houston's congressional delegation, say, would be worth a good deal more than that of a representative of a distant, rural Texas county.

There is a slightly problematic, queasiness-inducing, Hunger Games aspect to it, but it evidently does not require a Constitutional amendment. I candidly have no idea how it would be pursued, but I'm guessing the path would lay through the 9 most powerful people in the country (you've gotta love unintended consequences!).

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Race - or geography?

It may be the racial composition of the Republican party you want to change, for idealistic reasons, but if instead you're simply looking to achieve certain racial quotas in Congress itself, or like most progressives, to get to a Democratic majority more quickly than will happen organically, then you pretty much have no choice but to make an end run around the rural voters who continue to choose Republicans (what the hell, Kansas?). The wikipedia article on apportionment offers a kind of solution in "weighted" voting strength, whereby the vote of a member of Houston's congressional delegation, say, would be worth a good deal more than that of a representative of a distant, rural Texas county.

There is a slightly problematic, queasiness-inducing, Hunger Games aspect to it, but it evidently does not require a Constitutional amendment. I candidly have no idea how it would be pursued, but I'm guessing the path would lay through the 9 most powerful people in the country (you've gotta love unintended consequences!).

 

There tends to be a huge focus on the red state/blue state "divide", but, to your point, it's really an urban - suburban/rural divide.  Urban areas, regardless of the state they are located in, are generally more progressive and suburban/rural areas are generally more conservative.  Gerrymandering frequently takes advantage of that by weighting districts with the desired proportions of such voters.  In the last decade, the suburbs have become considerably more diverse than they have been historically which raises the question of what the political impact will be.  My guess is that the suburbs will continue to trend more conservative regardless of ethnicity and the Republican party will diversify as a result. One could argue the opposite will occur, but historically the country tends to self-correct when one party gains too much power.  I expect that pattern will continue to hold, despite the best efforts of the Republicans to self-destruct.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There tends to be a huge focus on the red state/blue state "divide", but, to your point, it's really an urban - suburban/rural divide. Urban areas, regardless of the state they are located in, are generally more progressive and suburban/rural areas are generally more conservative. Gerrymandering frequently takes advantage of that by weighting districts with the desired proportions of such voters. In the last decade, the suburbs have become considerably more diverse than they have been historically which raises the question of what the political impact will be. My guess is that the suburbs will continue to trend more conservative regardless of ethnicity and the Republican party will diversify as a result. One could argue the opposite will occur, but historically the country tends to self-correct when one party gains too much power. I expect that pattern will continue to hold, despite the best efforts of the Republicans to self-destruct.

I have my doubts about ethnic groups voting for republicans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have my doubts about ethnic groups voting for republicans.

 

That's awfully close to being an amazingly racist comment, but I'll withhold judgement and allow you to elaborate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ted Cruz got elected to being a Senator, and he's Latino. Or does that not "count" since he's a Republican? Or what about Bobby Jindal? Or does he not count since it's Louisiana?

Edited by IronTiger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ted Cruz got elected to being a Senator, and he's Latino. Or does that not "count" since he's a Republican? Or what about Bobby Jindal? Or does he not count since it's Louisiana?

 

This the second time you've tried to call me out in this thread. I ignored the first one about you claiming both parties do it as if that almost exact same point wasn't made in my original post.

 

However, this one has me a whee bit annoyed. This is a thread about redistricting. Since when is there redistricting for Senators or Governors? Why would you even bring those two up other than to act like I have some secret agenda? Fox News might be hiring...

 

Again, all but ONE of the Republican members of the House is white. The vast majority of them are males. All of them, following Cantor's loss, are Christian. So, it isn't too surprising why people of color or different faiths support the other party. What is surprising is how many white people think people of color are racist because they don't vote for the White Elephant in the room.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This the second time you've tried to call me out in this thread. I ignored the first one about you claiming both parties do it as if that almost exact same point wasn't made in my original post.

 

However, this one has me a whee bit annoyed. This is a thread about redistricting. Since when is there redistricting for Senators or Governors? Why would you even bring those two up other than to act like I have some secret agenda? Fox News might be hiring...

 

Again, all but ONE of the Republican members of the House is white. The vast majority of them are males. All of them, following Cantor's loss, are Christian. So, it isn't too surprising why people of color or different faiths support the other party. What is surprising is how many white people think people of color are racist because they don't vote for the White Elephant in the room.

 

I was referring to Slick's accusation that Republicans were racist, not anything you said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like a moderator to close this thread please. Clearly this is now way off topic and is getting into territory I don't think anyone wants to get into. I don't care who does it, but this thread should be locked. If any of the babies in this thread want to talk school yard trash about either party or whatever then go expel your hot air in your own private conversations. I'm honestly laughing my butt off trying to imagine that behind some of these comments are actual fully functioning, intelligent, mature adults, and not some silly punk 12 year olds!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's awfully close to being an amazingly racist comment, but I'll withhold judgement and allow you to elaborate.

Look at the statistics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Ted Cruz got elected to being a Senator, and he's Latino. Or does that not "count" since he's a Republican? Or what about Bobby Jindal? Or does he not count since it's Louisiana?

Ted Cruz has zero interest in Latino immigrants or the Latino electorate, never ever talks about being Cuban, and doesn't know spanish.

Bobby jindal cut all links with India and Hinduism. His name isn't even bobby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like a moderator to close this thread please. Clearly this is now way off topic and is getting into territory I don't think anyone wants to get into. I don't care who does it, but this thread should be locked. If any of the babies in this thread want to talk school yard trash about either party or whatever then go expel your hot air in your own private conversations. I'm honestly laughing my butt off trying to imagine that behind some of these comments are actual fully functioning, intelligent, mature adults, and not some silly punk 12 year olds!

Pot, meet kettle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...