the john lewis voting rights act had a national commission to do redistricting instead of a state by state commission with a set of rules to avoid it being used to disenfranchise voters
Hot Wheels knows the Democrats are full of shit. Texans know the Democrats are full of shit. The DNC is complete trash.
They abandoned my state decades ago and have no intention of doing anything for us now. A lot of Texans are saying they will never vote for another Democrat. Why should we?
2nd HEARING, HOUSTON, Sat., July 26 at 11 am at the Univ of Houston's campus, Student Center, Houston Room (Room 220). 4455 University Drive, Houston, TX 77004.
Each Speaker gets 2 minutes. Must register to speak before hearing starts. Cuts off after five hours.
DISTRICTS. Map of the state's current districts is called PlanC2193, a large copy here:
The focus Saturday is on districts 2, 7, 8, 9, 14, 18, 22, 29, 36, 38, though others can be discussed .
SYLVESTER TURNER'S DISTRICT. Downtown's Houston's District (18) was left vacant in March by the death of Sylvester Turner, so will be targeted. It has an election date set for November:
It is fantastically gerrymandered, almost a doughnut in shape. It may be excessively "packed"(the set-up already manipulated to benefit Republicans, so only one Black Rep would be elected, whereas two might be justified by the size of the Black voting age population).
My geographer loving spouse says, if a region is to be easily described/drawn by a computer (or human), then its shape should be "compact, connected and convex". 18 is not anything close to that, due to its doughnut hole, with a jaggedy C-shape bending around the doughnut hole.
REVIEW OF 1st HEARING THURSDAY IN AUSTIN. Was personally encouraged and hopeful after listening to the Austin hearing. People were pretty clearly opposed to gerrymanders and redistricting for politicians' gain. Examples-- One does NOT want politicians picking their voters, think voters should pick their politicians. Some were disgusted the flood fixes were set aside in order to "rush through" three re-districting hearings on short notice.
I just listened to the Newsom press conference (7/25) and he acknowledged the reluctance to go against what voters and the party have been fighting for for years, but then he explained why it Has to be done. He was so blunt and plain spoken that I'm a bit shaken. I am grateful that he sees the existential threat and is rising to the occasion. He won me over. He has my trust on redistricting now, and ya know what? I'm seeing a compelling leader emerging with the smarts and guts (I would have said "cahones" but that is probably sexist) to take on Donald Trump. He knows what it is going to take and he is willing to go there.
I read this column with trepidation. It is unrelentingly negative because the circumstances we as Democrats face. For a number of election cycles, even a few preceding Trumpie, Democrats have played the game like it’s 1952. Now more than ever, need leaders across the board who shoot first and ask questions later. I think this means out with Schumer and Jeffries. In with those who won’t take any shit off the Barbarians who are wreaking out nation
The partisan atmosphere has become a rock fight. Gerrymandering is but one tool, but in no legally defensible area should Dems be on the run from the GOP, a party decomposing into a vast criminal conspiracy.
REPORT ON AUSTIN HEARING (just finished, Thurs. July 24)-- Best line came from a teacher-type: Does not want politicians picking their voters, wants instead to see voters picking their politicians.
One Committee member (Rep Moody) questioned "Why re-district mid-decade?" Since there is no bill, no map, no legislation, it appeared the members called in were not legally obligated to hold a hearing, he said.
Chair Vasut replied that committee members will listen to things and THEN decide what to do.
Another committee member (Garcia??) said her voters did not understand why lines mattered, why changing lines mattered. Greg Casar, also on the Committee, said the best answer is that changing lines meant that the person serving them last year would not be the person serving them next year. Named two situations, right now, where that could be bad.
(1) FOR VETS. Veterans want the same Rep. as the last time they had a question, so will not have to explain their situation or disability all over again.
(2) FOR FLOODPLAINS. Reps grow familiar with their assigned region, know what parts flood, how bad (which roads wash out, etc.) A new person knows none of that history, can't react as fast in an emergency, if talking to FEMA, the sheriff or fire depts. etc..
CONCLUSION. Those asking to speak were opposed (to new redistricting, now).
REASONS-- Highly varied:
White House leader not Texan, no business interfering with votes in Texas.
Some disgusted redistricting was bumped ahead of dealing with flood issues
Many tired of changes for political gain.
People want to be in the same district as neighbors when voting.
A young man brought a hand-drawn map showing Casar's Congressional District 35 as an example. Said saw no good reason to take corners of two big urban areas, ones so far apart, and then put them in the same district (Austin and San Antonio)
Some said want to see maps FIRST, before commenting.
Chair replied that committee members will listen to things and THEN decide what to do.
VIEWERS. Of the 60ish watching at Fox, two sounded tipsy, The rest were well-behaved. One great viewer did a poll, asking each new viewer coming in to comment whether they were Type One (wanted another round of redistricting) or Type Two (opposed to new redistricting and gerrymanders). He said all answered Type Two.
SOURCES
KXAN TV (Austin) listed the "focus" districts for the Austin hearing. Noticed much of West TX put with Central TX.
Went to KXXV (Waco-Temple) for a bit, then Youtube when that ended.
Thus, watched most of Austin redistricting hearing at Fox
Gerrymandering is one of those topics that the media love to talk and write about and the activists -- and ignoramuses like Trump -- love to get into a swivet over, but working pols seem to get a lot less hot about. There's a reason for this: they know that gerrymandering doesn't make that much of a difference.
Maybe it does a little at the margins, but unless there have been drastic intrastate population shifts since the last Census, it's not going to be that much. With the way that people have spontaneously self-sorted to live closer to people that think like them and farther away from people who don't, in most states there aren't enough loose voters available on one side to use to dilute the numbers of the other that aren't already needed in their existing districts, especially if, like Illinois and Texas, the state has already been gerrymandered by experts anyway.
With all the real and proximate disasters coming our way, I don't have the bandwidth to worry much about this largely bogus one. Hats off to those who are more versatile, I suppose.
Al, If you have to live in it, it makes a HUGE difference. Once your vote no longer counts, then NOBODY knocks at your door to ask what worries you and what changes you'd like to see.
Our swing area was chopped up around 2010, pieces assigned and then re-assigned to somebody rigid, the particular rigid people changing every two to four years.
We were combined once with Katy, Texas, over by Houston, next time with Highland Park up by Dallas, another time with a not quite as distant College Station. That rep at least apologized, said it was impossible to serve us well as he did not know us, too far away.
Jerry, I lived in Massachusetts (City of Boston) from 1983 until 1995, and in Illinois (close-in Chicago suburbs) from 1995 until I left the US for good in 2017, and my vote NEVER "counted" in all those federal elections for 34 years unless I voted for the Democrat, if that's all that "counting" means. Sometimes my vote may have made a difference in a state or local election. That never kept me from calling or writing my rep's office if I needed something from them, though, and I hope that it doesn't stop you, either. That's just the way the US does democracy, and there's no way around it through the courts, as long as "one person, one vote" is mathematically respected, and racial discrimination can't be proven.
I always signed every petition that came my way to establish non-partisan districting, to no effect. I think that the fairest way to do it, though, would be by computer, and to give the computer two instructions: 1. Draw the required number of districts so that the difference in population between the most and least populous districts is less than 1% (or the small number of your choice); 2. Of the possible maps that meet Condition #1, show the map with the most compact districts.
Even maps like that, though, would still probably leave a lot of votes that don't "count".
Think the problem was blue states being satisfied doing things properly for themselves only. There was ZERO EFFORT to have a federal law saying every state should have a fair elections committee.
Excellent point. Hubris had something to do with it, but I think that inertia has been an even bigger culprit. More and more I think that's our biggest problem, one that crosses every important issue. If the Voting Rights Act had been amended to let preclearance states "graduate" if they improved and states that backslid to be put on preclearance instead of just being extended again and again, I think that it could have withstood judicial scrutiny much better.
Inertia struck in a particularly destructive way in 2021 and 2022. Congress reformed the Electoral Count Act, which was necessary and good, but it did nothing to address the "emergency" acts that Trump had abused during his first term, maybe because they thought that we were done with him, and they wanted to keep things loose for future "law-abiding" Presidents. Imagine how much better off we'd be right now, for example, if Congress had amended the Economic Emergencies Act so that every "emergency" tariff that a President declared would expire automatically after 30 days unless approved by Congress, rather than remaining in effect until Congress repealed it, in an act that the President could veto? Imagine if the President couldn't federalize the National Guard in a state without a request from that state's Governor, an Act of Congress, or a court order. Imagine a law that gave individual citizens the standing to sue to compel the enforcement of laws -- like the sale of TikTok, or the laws establishing USAID, for example -- when the Executive refused to do so. Imagine a law enforcing the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses, and the Birthright Citizenship and Election Ineligibility Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
We had been warned, and while Congress did some things, it didn't do nearly enough. I hope that we get another chance, and if we do, that we don't waste it again.
Some good ideas, Al, thanks!. Yes, policies on electoral districts need fine-tuning. I especially want fair districts for all and not just the blue states. NEW INFO: Learned from the Houston hearing Sat., that due to a death in March (Rep Sylvester Turner), Houston lacked one of its votes likely to be against the big bad budget bill. That was due to strategic foot-dragging by certain people, not scheduling an immediate replacement election. (Too many think it's fine, by denying representation, that's their cheat for winning.) Further, he won't be replaced until Nov. so the replacement can't vote that the coming election be properly done.
Pres T's big bad bill passed the house by only a few votes? Last vote, in early July, to confirm the Senate, was 218 Aye to 214 Nay , so only had 432 reps present.
IMPORTANT- In 2024 the House had more, 435 authorized, vs 432 this time, so 3 missing, Turner just one. Voting record said 0 were absent. The missing three were dead? Why not replaced?
Could have had 218 Aye to 217 Nay, tooclose for Pres. T to be happy, explaining why Pres. T wants our compliant Gov. Abbott to drum up more Rigid Repubs (right now!)
I think women need to help us out here. Dem Gentlemen: I would personally drive a screwdriver through some man's eye socket it I thought he was going to brutally rape , beat me, and leave me for dead. Would I normally drive a screwdriver into someone's eyeball? Oh HELL NO.
So here is the way to look at this:
Republicans are looking to rape and beat down democracy, and toss it aside, and leave it for DEAD.
It's time, people, to fight with any tool we have, no matter how squeamish it makes us feel. Pick up the (gerrymandering)screwdriver.
The Texas GOP was destroying critics early, before Reagan converted their "slaver-descendeds", from being "Yellow Dog" Dems, to Rigid Repubs. There was gerrymandering before Nixon and Reagan's "southern strategy" converted them. They've continued it ever since, advanced computers making it possible for district shapes to be far more wicked than before.
I very much wish the southern GOP could change itself, but have lived in TX and watched for decades. (1) They repeatedly punish swing districts by chopping them up and combining them with rigid Repubs. FAR WORSE, (2) they repeatedly refuse to let the future generation change.
WON'T LET FUTURE GENERATION CHANGE
A Simple Example--Refusing to teach to elementary school kids the simplest things about the American Revolution (freedom from Britain) and the Civil War (freedom for slaves).
After years of teachers saying "don't worry, it's taught eventually", we asked eldest child after 5th grade graduation, which came first, Revolutionary War or Civil War. Child looked puzzled, could not answer.
Figuring maybe Wars were taught, but not their timing, we next asked if child knew what either was about. Expected a simple answer, freedom from the British King, freedom for slaves. Child had NO CLUE. When we explained the difference between the wars, this pending sixth grader was curious, wanted to know more. The problem was, thus, not a lack of interest. Later sent child to college up north and child reported taking a year to catch up, despite ur effort to teach, "big holes in what was taught back in TX". The northern kids were miles ahead on some things.
This child had not been taught a thing about democracy. No Washington. No Jefferson. No Franklin. Very definitely, no Lincoln, no to both Roosevelts. Texas rivers, yes. Texas native tribes, yes. Texas this, Texas that, the Alamo, the Alamo, and the Alamo.
Other kids in her 5th grade TX class would not have been taught until too late. I think that's why so many can not "get their heads around" Pres T being so bad for democracy and rights.
"And former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke went so far as to call on Newsom and others to move before Texas. 'This is for the very future and fate of the Republic. We lose it, you will never, ever get it back,' he said. 'Why the fuck are we responding and reacting to the other side instead of taking the offense on these things?"
This is why I detest our current two parties. Gerrymandering is unethical and immoral - it is cheating, pure and simple. The independent non-partisan redistricting commissions are a logical and necessary attempt to save our democratic republic.
We the People need to start believing again in our founding principles, in our constitutional republic, and in our rule of law. As citizens of this country, we are compelled to do so. Stop falling into the DNC and RNC power traps. Stop taking "sides." Put your country over any party identity. Stand up, speak out and vote as citizens who love this country and who continue to choose the form of government we chose 249 years ago!
My first reaction is "damn straight we're skittish". We passed a law in California - I donno, 20 years ago or so - that required a bi-partisan redistricting committee. It makes me ill that we would be cheering on for Newsom to break the law and go against the will of the people. Ohio also passed a referendum, maybe almost 10 years back but then their conservative majority supreme court blocked implementation & we've been fighting to get a dem majority on the supreme court ever since. idk. It sucks.
Bottom line: it's a different playing field. We already saw what happened when Dems tried to play by the old rules during Biden's administration, in which he failed to pursue and implement safeguards for democracy
In California an independent redistricting commission for district line drawing is mandated by the state's constitution. Political affiliation of residents is expressly not be considered in the line drawing operation. This has been the case since 2008 with state legislative districts and since 2010 for Congressional districts. This was decided by the voters in California via the initiative process. Redrawing lines now by the governor or state legislature would violate the law.
What is the argument to be made to the people in the state? That politicians should redraw the lines now so that a political party can prevail? That the law is suspended or repealed by act of the state legislature as Missouri has purported to do? What is the future? That we'll rig elections by violating the law until we win enough seats to dominate the House and then we'll go back to obeying the law? Is this how democracy works? Break the law because the others do that but we are still a democracy once we get what we want?
How about finding candidates that appeal to the current districts and spending all that campaign money on shoe leather door knocking campaigning in the districts? Seems like the purpose of the political parties is to do that, not to rig elections with gerrymandering.
What's right and what's reality can be two different things. The other way out--You'd tell your reps and senators to support letting West Texas and Central Texas be their own states? YAY! That gets started when?
COMMENT. Yes, door-knocking needs to be done, but it won't/can't fix anything much. (We are SO gerrymandered in my part of TX, the doorknockers don't come by anymore. Haven't had one knock in FIFTEEN YEARS, as they know our votes do not count.)
My vote does not count. I'm glad yours does.
ANOTHER CHOICE? California could vote for a special case, let yourselves be gerrymandered for just two elections, then at date X, go back to the way it should be?
In CA where I live there are 9 out of 52 congressional districts that are represented by Republicans. Yeah door knocking could work here as several of them of are purple.
Given the politics of today, would you believe a promise to break the law for just two elections? I don't. They'll always find a reason to not return to the way it should be. Back when the new redistricting laws were created the Democratic Party opposed them. The Republicans silently hoped they would pass.
the john lewis voting rights act had a national commission to do redistricting instead of a state by state commission with a set of rules to avoid it being used to disenfranchise voters
Hot Wheels knows the Democrats are full of shit. Texans know the Democrats are full of shit. The DNC is complete trash.
They abandoned my state decades ago and have no intention of doing anything for us now. A lot of Texans are saying they will never vote for another Democrat. Why should we?
2nd HEARING, HOUSTON, Sat., July 26 at 11 am at the Univ of Houston's campus, Student Center, Houston Room (Room 220). 4455 University Drive, Houston, TX 77004.
Each Speaker gets 2 minutes. Must register to speak before hearing starts. Cuts off after five hours.
DISTRICTS. Map of the state's current districts is called PlanC2193, a large copy here:
https://redistricting.capitol.texas.gov/docs/20RXXXX_118th_Congressional_Tabloid.pdf
The focus Saturday is on districts 2, 7, 8, 9, 14, 18, 22, 29, 36, 38, though others can be discussed .
SYLVESTER TURNER'S DISTRICT. Downtown's Houston's District (18) was left vacant in March by the death of Sylvester Turner, so will be targeted. It has an election date set for November:
It is fantastically gerrymandered, almost a doughnut in shape. It may be excessively "packed"(the set-up already manipulated to benefit Republicans, so only one Black Rep would be elected, whereas two might be justified by the size of the Black voting age population).
Wiki has good articles on Congressional Districts, with its for 18 here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%27s_18th_congressional_district
My geographer loving spouse says, if a region is to be easily described/drawn by a computer (or human), then its shape should be "compact, connected and convex". 18 is not anything close to that, due to its doughnut hole, with a jaggedy C-shape bending around the doughnut hole.
THE OTHER CURRENT REPS: A list of reps and the focus districts were given by Andrew Crenshaw at (HoustonPublicMedia.org):
"...focus on 10 congressional districts that sit wholly or partly in Houston and its surrounding counties. Among them are
Districts 2 (Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R), 7 (Rep. Lizzie Fletcher, D), 8 (Rep. Morgan Luttrell, R),
9 (Rep. Al Green, D), 14 (Rep. Randy Weber, R), 18 (vacant),
22 (Rep. Troy Nehls, R), 29 (Rep. Sylvia Garcia, D),
36 (Rep. Brian Babin, R), and 38 (Rep. Wesley Hunt, R).
However, the House Select Committee on Congressional Redistricting will hear testimony on all areas of the state."
PRIOR YEARS. The University of Houston has also archived redistricting articles from prior years:
https://www.uh.edu/search/?q=redistricting#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=redistricting&gsc.page=1
MISCELLANEOUS:
Electronic Submission for Houston Sat or Arlington Mon.
https://comments.house.texas.gov/home?c=c055
Must submit electronic comment before end of relevant hearing, Must be Texas citizen.
To contact the AFT, an active group mobilizing for the hearings: https://www.mobilize.us/texasAFT/event/818208/
REVIEW OF 1st HEARING THURSDAY IN AUSTIN. Was personally encouraged and hopeful after listening to the Austin hearing. People were pretty clearly opposed to gerrymanders and redistricting for politicians' gain. Examples-- One does NOT want politicians picking their voters, think voters should pick their politicians. Some were disgusted the flood fixes were set aside in order to "rush through" three re-districting hearings on short notice.
I just listened to the Newsom press conference (7/25) and he acknowledged the reluctance to go against what voters and the party have been fighting for for years, but then he explained why it Has to be done. He was so blunt and plain spoken that I'm a bit shaken. I am grateful that he sees the existential threat and is rising to the occasion. He won me over. He has my trust on redistricting now, and ya know what? I'm seeing a compelling leader emerging with the smarts and guts (I would have said "cahones" but that is probably sexist) to take on Donald Trump. He knows what it is going to take and he is willing to go there.
I read this column with trepidation. It is unrelentingly negative because the circumstances we as Democrats face. For a number of election cycles, even a few preceding Trumpie, Democrats have played the game like it’s 1952. Now more than ever, need leaders across the board who shoot first and ask questions later. I think this means out with Schumer and Jeffries. In with those who won’t take any shit off the Barbarians who are wreaking out nation
100%!
No, because we will straight up light them on fire.
Metaphorically.
The partisan atmosphere has become a rock fight. Gerrymandering is but one tool, but in no legally defensible area should Dems be on the run from the GOP, a party decomposing into a vast criminal conspiracy.
REPORT ON AUSTIN HEARING (just finished, Thurs. July 24)-- Best line came from a teacher-type: Does not want politicians picking their voters, wants instead to see voters picking their politicians.
One Committee member (Rep Moody) questioned "Why re-district mid-decade?" Since there is no bill, no map, no legislation, it appeared the members called in were not legally obligated to hold a hearing, he said.
Chair Vasut replied that committee members will listen to things and THEN decide what to do.
Another committee member (Garcia??) said her voters did not understand why lines mattered, why changing lines mattered. Greg Casar, also on the Committee, said the best answer is that changing lines meant that the person serving them last year would not be the person serving them next year. Named two situations, right now, where that could be bad.
(1) FOR VETS. Veterans want the same Rep. as the last time they had a question, so will not have to explain their situation or disability all over again.
(2) FOR FLOODPLAINS. Reps grow familiar with their assigned region, know what parts flood, how bad (which roads wash out, etc.) A new person knows none of that history, can't react as fast in an emergency, if talking to FEMA, the sheriff or fire depts. etc..
CONCLUSION. Those asking to speak were opposed (to new redistricting, now).
REASONS-- Highly varied:
White House leader not Texan, no business interfering with votes in Texas.
Some disgusted redistricting was bumped ahead of dealing with flood issues
Many tired of changes for political gain.
People want to be in the same district as neighbors when voting.
A young man brought a hand-drawn map showing Casar's Congressional District 35 as an example. Said saw no good reason to take corners of two big urban areas, ones so far apart, and then put them in the same district (Austin and San Antonio)
Some said want to see maps FIRST, before commenting.
Chair replied that committee members will listen to things and THEN decide what to do.
VIEWERS. Of the 60ish watching at Fox, two sounded tipsy, The rest were well-behaved. One great viewer did a poll, asking each new viewer coming in to comment whether they were Type One (wanted another round of redistricting) or Type Two (opposed to new redistricting and gerrymanders). He said all answered Type Two.
SOURCES
KXAN TV (Austin) listed the "focus" districts for the Austin hearing. Noticed much of West TX put with Central TX.
Went to KXXV (Waco-Temple) for a bit, then Youtube when that ended.
Thus, watched most of Austin redistricting hearing at Fox
Houston hearing Sat, Arlington Monday.
Gerrymandering is one of those topics that the media love to talk and write about and the activists -- and ignoramuses like Trump -- love to get into a swivet over, but working pols seem to get a lot less hot about. There's a reason for this: they know that gerrymandering doesn't make that much of a difference.
Maybe it does a little at the margins, but unless there have been drastic intrastate population shifts since the last Census, it's not going to be that much. With the way that people have spontaneously self-sorted to live closer to people that think like them and farther away from people who don't, in most states there aren't enough loose voters available on one side to use to dilute the numbers of the other that aren't already needed in their existing districts, especially if, like Illinois and Texas, the state has already been gerrymandered by experts anyway.
With all the real and proximate disasters coming our way, I don't have the bandwidth to worry much about this largely bogus one. Hats off to those who are more versatile, I suppose.
Al, If you have to live in it, it makes a HUGE difference. Once your vote no longer counts, then NOBODY knocks at your door to ask what worries you and what changes you'd like to see.
Our swing area was chopped up around 2010, pieces assigned and then re-assigned to somebody rigid, the particular rigid people changing every two to four years.
We were combined once with Katy, Texas, over by Houston, next time with Highland Park up by Dallas, another time with a not quite as distant College Station. That rep at least apologized, said it was impossible to serve us well as he did not know us, too far away.
Jerry, I lived in Massachusetts (City of Boston) from 1983 until 1995, and in Illinois (close-in Chicago suburbs) from 1995 until I left the US for good in 2017, and my vote NEVER "counted" in all those federal elections for 34 years unless I voted for the Democrat, if that's all that "counting" means. Sometimes my vote may have made a difference in a state or local election. That never kept me from calling or writing my rep's office if I needed something from them, though, and I hope that it doesn't stop you, either. That's just the way the US does democracy, and there's no way around it through the courts, as long as "one person, one vote" is mathematically respected, and racial discrimination can't be proven.
I always signed every petition that came my way to establish non-partisan districting, to no effect. I think that the fairest way to do it, though, would be by computer, and to give the computer two instructions: 1. Draw the required number of districts so that the difference in population between the most and least populous districts is less than 1% (or the small number of your choice); 2. Of the possible maps that meet Condition #1, show the map with the most compact districts.
Even maps like that, though, would still probably leave a lot of votes that don't "count".
Think the problem was blue states being satisfied doing things properly for themselves only. There was ZERO EFFORT to have a federal law saying every state should have a fair elections committee.
Excellent point. Hubris had something to do with it, but I think that inertia has been an even bigger culprit. More and more I think that's our biggest problem, one that crosses every important issue. If the Voting Rights Act had been amended to let preclearance states "graduate" if they improved and states that backslid to be put on preclearance instead of just being extended again and again, I think that it could have withstood judicial scrutiny much better.
Inertia struck in a particularly destructive way in 2021 and 2022. Congress reformed the Electoral Count Act, which was necessary and good, but it did nothing to address the "emergency" acts that Trump had abused during his first term, maybe because they thought that we were done with him, and they wanted to keep things loose for future "law-abiding" Presidents. Imagine how much better off we'd be right now, for example, if Congress had amended the Economic Emergencies Act so that every "emergency" tariff that a President declared would expire automatically after 30 days unless approved by Congress, rather than remaining in effect until Congress repealed it, in an act that the President could veto? Imagine if the President couldn't federalize the National Guard in a state without a request from that state's Governor, an Act of Congress, or a court order. Imagine a law that gave individual citizens the standing to sue to compel the enforcement of laws -- like the sale of TikTok, or the laws establishing USAID, for example -- when the Executive refused to do so. Imagine a law enforcing the Foreign and Domestic Emoluments Clauses, and the Birthright Citizenship and Election Ineligibility Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
We had been warned, and while Congress did some things, it didn't do nearly enough. I hope that we get another chance, and if we do, that we don't waste it again.
Some good ideas, Al, thanks!. Yes, policies on electoral districts need fine-tuning. I especially want fair districts for all and not just the blue states. NEW INFO: Learned from the Houston hearing Sat., that due to a death in March (Rep Sylvester Turner), Houston lacked one of its votes likely to be against the big bad budget bill. That was due to strategic foot-dragging by certain people, not scheduling an immediate replacement election. (Too many think it's fine, by denying representation, that's their cheat for winning.) Further, he won't be replaced until Nov. so the replacement can't vote that the coming election be properly done.
Pres T's big bad bill passed the house by only a few votes? Last vote, in early July, to confirm the Senate, was 218 Aye to 214 Nay , so only had 432 reps present.
IMPORTANT- In 2024 the House had more, 435 authorized, vs 432 this time, so 3 missing, Turner just one. Voting record said 0 were absent. The missing three were dead? Why not replaced?
Could have had 218 Aye to 217 Nay, tooclose for Pres. T to be happy, explaining why Pres. T wants our compliant Gov. Abbott to drum up more Rigid Repubs (right now!)
"Fixing the flooding can wait".
I think women need to help us out here. Dem Gentlemen: I would personally drive a screwdriver through some man's eye socket it I thought he was going to brutally rape , beat me, and leave me for dead. Would I normally drive a screwdriver into someone's eyeball? Oh HELL NO.
So here is the way to look at this:
Republicans are looking to rape and beat down democracy, and toss it aside, and leave it for DEAD.
It's time, people, to fight with any tool we have, no matter how squeamish it makes us feel. Pick up the (gerrymandering)screwdriver.
The Texas GOP was destroying critics early, before Reagan converted their "slaver-descendeds", from being "Yellow Dog" Dems, to Rigid Repubs. There was gerrymandering before Nixon and Reagan's "southern strategy" converted them. They've continued it ever since, advanced computers making it possible for district shapes to be far more wicked than before.
I very much wish the southern GOP could change itself, but have lived in TX and watched for decades. (1) They repeatedly punish swing districts by chopping them up and combining them with rigid Repubs. FAR WORSE, (2) they repeatedly refuse to let the future generation change.
WON'T LET FUTURE GENERATION CHANGE
A Simple Example--Refusing to teach to elementary school kids the simplest things about the American Revolution (freedom from Britain) and the Civil War (freedom for slaves).
After years of teachers saying "don't worry, it's taught eventually", we asked eldest child after 5th grade graduation, which came first, Revolutionary War or Civil War. Child looked puzzled, could not answer.
Figuring maybe Wars were taught, but not their timing, we next asked if child knew what either was about. Expected a simple answer, freedom from the British King, freedom for slaves. Child had NO CLUE. When we explained the difference between the wars, this pending sixth grader was curious, wanted to know more. The problem was, thus, not a lack of interest. Later sent child to college up north and child reported taking a year to catch up, despite ur effort to teach, "big holes in what was taught back in TX". The northern kids were miles ahead on some things.
This child had not been taught a thing about democracy. No Washington. No Jefferson. No Franklin. Very definitely, no Lincoln, no to both Roosevelts. Texas rivers, yes. Texas native tribes, yes. Texas this, Texas that, the Alamo, the Alamo, and the Alamo.
Other kids in her 5th grade TX class would not have been taught until too late. I think that's why so many can not "get their heads around" Pres T being so bad for democracy and rights.
A depressing yet accurate look at the shit show in front of us
"And former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke went so far as to call on Newsom and others to move before Texas. 'This is for the very future and fate of the Republic. We lose it, you will never, ever get it back,' he said. 'Why the fuck are we responding and reacting to the other side instead of taking the offense on these things?"
This is why I detest our current two parties. Gerrymandering is unethical and immoral - it is cheating, pure and simple. The independent non-partisan redistricting commissions are a logical and necessary attempt to save our democratic republic.
We the People need to start believing again in our founding principles, in our constitutional republic, and in our rule of law. As citizens of this country, we are compelled to do so. Stop falling into the DNC and RNC power traps. Stop taking "sides." Put your country over any party identity. Stand up, speak out and vote as citizens who love this country and who continue to choose the form of government we chose 249 years ago!
My first reaction is "damn straight we're skittish". We passed a law in California - I donno, 20 years ago or so - that required a bi-partisan redistricting committee. It makes me ill that we would be cheering on for Newsom to break the law and go against the will of the people. Ohio also passed a referendum, maybe almost 10 years back but then their conservative majority supreme court blocked implementation & we've been fighting to get a dem majority on the supreme court ever since. idk. It sucks.
Bottom line: it's a different playing field. We already saw what happened when Dems tried to play by the old rules during Biden's administration, in which he failed to pursue and implement safeguards for democracy
In California an independent redistricting commission for district line drawing is mandated by the state's constitution. Political affiliation of residents is expressly not be considered in the line drawing operation. This has been the case since 2008 with state legislative districts and since 2010 for Congressional districts. This was decided by the voters in California via the initiative process. Redrawing lines now by the governor or state legislature would violate the law.
What is the argument to be made to the people in the state? That politicians should redraw the lines now so that a political party can prevail? That the law is suspended or repealed by act of the state legislature as Missouri has purported to do? What is the future? That we'll rig elections by violating the law until we win enough seats to dominate the House and then we'll go back to obeying the law? Is this how democracy works? Break the law because the others do that but we are still a democracy once we get what we want?
How about finding candidates that appeal to the current districts and spending all that campaign money on shoe leather door knocking campaigning in the districts? Seems like the purpose of the political parties is to do that, not to rig elections with gerrymandering.
What's right and what's reality can be two different things. The other way out--You'd tell your reps and senators to support letting West Texas and Central Texas be their own states? YAY! That gets started when?
COMMENT. Yes, door-knocking needs to be done, but it won't/can't fix anything much. (We are SO gerrymandered in my part of TX, the doorknockers don't come by anymore. Haven't had one knock in FIFTEEN YEARS, as they know our votes do not count.)
My vote does not count. I'm glad yours does.
ANOTHER CHOICE? California could vote for a special case, let yourselves be gerrymandered for just two elections, then at date X, go back to the way it should be?
In CA where I live there are 9 out of 52 congressional districts that are represented by Republicans. Yeah door knocking could work here as several of them of are purple.
Given the politics of today, would you believe a promise to break the law for just two elections? I don't. They'll always find a reason to not return to the way it should be. Back when the new redistricting laws were created the Democratic Party opposed them. The Republicans silently hoped they would pass.