Redistricting symposium

Sorry I missed this event on Friday.

The University of Texas School of Law will host a symposium on Friday, March 2, about the 2003 Congressional redistricting in Texas, which is also the focus of a new book by adjunct law professor Steve Bickerstaff.

Published this month by The University of Texas Press, Lines in the Sand: Congressional Redistricting in Texas and the Downfall of Tom DeLay is a comprehensive look at the efforts by Republican lawmakers in 2003--led by former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay--to gerrymander Texas's 32 Congressional districts. The book also provides insights into the 2002 campaign activities that made the redistricting possible, and the civil and criminal court proceedings that followed.

The day-long symposium at the Law School's Eidman Courtroom--which is free and open to the public--features the book and the issues it raises, bringing together Bickerstaff with key players and observers in the Texas redistricting case, as well as a number of election law experts from across the nation.

I'll have to put a copy of the book (reviewed here) on my reading list. Based on these two reports from the Observer blog, it sounds like the event was worthwhile. One interesting point:

What was a tad surprising was the lawyers' agreement that Texas should reform the current system by putting a "low cap" on campaign contributions. The cap should be accompanied by a removal of the state's ban on corporate cash, they added. "It's not intuitively clear to me why it's okay for certain homebuilders and other individuals who are immensely wealthy to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to single candidates, but a corporation can't give a thousand dollars," said J.D. Pauerstein, referring to Bob Perry, election ATM of the rightwing. Pauerstein, who says that he's tired of being hit up for contributions, hopes that the limits would be small across the board.

The other lawyer referenced was Dick De Guerin, DeLay's defense attorney. Of course, corporations can give money to campaigns, but only for limited purposes, as we all know. I'd be perfectly happy with Pauerstein's proposed alternative, not that it'll ever happen. But it's still nice to see more people on board with the idea.

03/04/07 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Judges draw their own map

Why do these big rulings always happen while I'm on vacation?

A three-judge federal panel on Friday placed Webb County into one congressional district, solidifying Hispanic voting strength in South Texas.

The U.S. Supreme Court remanded the map to the panel to redraw the sprawling 23rd congressional district, which it ruled in June unconstitutionally diluted Hispanic voting strength.

The district, which is now represented by San Antonio Republican Rep. Henry Bonilla, stretches from Laredo to El Paso County and north to San Antonio.

The high court ruled that the district boundaries engineered former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay and drawn by Republican state legislators in 2003 diminish Hispanic voting power because a large cluster of Webb County Hispanics were divided into two different congressional districts.

"These changes restore Latino voting strength to District 23 without dividing communities of interest," the judges said.

The judges emphasized that they made the minimal changes possible to fix the violations ordered by the Supreme Court.

[...]

Bonilla will have a tougher time seeking re-election. The new 23rd District has 61 percent Hispanic voting-age population, compared to the 51 percent Hispanic voting-age population in the district in which he was elected.

The bulk of his support has come from non-Hispanic Republicans and elections returns have shown he has diminishing support among the largely Democratic Hispanic voters in his district.

The new 23rd District also will be more evenly divided between Democratic and Republican voters.

Under the new plan, all incumbents remain in their current districts.

U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, will get a slightly more Democratic population in his 25th congressional district because the court moved a largely liberal section of south Austin into his territory. Travis County remains split among three congressional districts, as it was under the redistricting map passed by the GOP-controlled Legislature in 2003.

The new map also makes Doggett's south Austin district more compact. Previously the boundaries snaked down to the Rio Grande Valley in an oddly shaped district that was nicknamed the bacon strip district.

District reconfigurations also slightly changed the 15th congressional district, represented by Rep. Ruben Hinojosa, D-Mercedes. His district remains heavily Democratic.

All of this is basically as I predicted in terms of affecting incumbents. I didn't expect CD15 to be touched, but it's not unreasonable that it was. The Lone Star Project has a much more thorough breakdown of the affected districts.

Also as I expected, this was done in time for November. I understand there's a lot of speculation going on about whether or not Ciro Rodriguez will gear up for one more run (presumably not in CD28, which now has all of Webb County in it), and whether anyone else will take a shot at Henry Bonilla, but there's nothing solid yet that I'm aware of.

Anyway. BOR has some pictures of the new districts, plus a diary from John Courage, whose odds against Lamar Smith sadly got a lot longer now that some heavily Republican turf west of Austin got moved back into CD21. That was pretty much expected in just about any permutation of the districts, but it's still unfortunate for him. There will be much more to be said about all of this soon.

UPDATE: And so the speculation begins as to who may jump into a newly opened primary for CD23 version 3:

Julian Castro (former City Councilman and Mayoral candidate), State Rep. David Leibowitz, former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez (for sure), SA City Councilman Art Hall (Dem who gave the opening invocation at the state convention in June, and who represents the North/Northwest portion of CD-23 in Bexar County), SA City Councilman Richard Perez, current candidate Rick Bolanos, and attorney Rene Barrientos.

Names are being thrown around like crazy right now. I can tell you for sure that SA City Councilman Roland Gutierrez is out (he's gonna be our next mayor... you heard it here first) and some crazy bastard just told me that Madla is thinking about running. My major question is, where is West Texas and border Rep. Pete Gallegos gonna stand?

I have a slight preference for Castro, but only if he's learned how to run a better race than he did for San Antonio Mayor in 2005. Any of these folks would be fun to watch. Stay tuned.

08/04/06 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

As we dance to the redistricting map tango

There's a certain karma in having the DeLay ballot replacement ruling be handed down by one federal appeals court on the same day that another such court was hearing about proposed remedies to the state's unconstitutional Congressional map. One theme seems to have stood out from yesterday's arguments: The court appears to be reluctant to screw any incumbents more than they absolutely have to.

The state's congressional map could be fixed without pairing incumbents or eliminating U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett's Travis County base, a federal judge suggested today.

U.S. District Judge Patrick Higginbotham, the presiding judge on a three-judge panel, made the suggestion as he grilled the state's attorney at a redistricting hearing this morning in a packed Austin courtroom.

[...]

Higginbotham seemed to suggest his thinking - if not the panel's - on the matter.

He suggested redrawing Doggett's existing district, which runs from Austin to the Mexico border, to contain more of Travis County. He then suggested making Webb County the political base for a South Texas district represented by U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo.

"Why should a Latino community have to come to Austin?" Higginbotham asked.

He said Bonilla's district could pick up more voters - both Republican and Democratic - from San Antonio.

Higginbotham pointedly asked [Solicitor General Ted] Cruz about the state's plan to eliminate Doggett's political base in Travis County.

"Why is that necessary?" he asked.

Cruz defended it, saying the state was trying to make the districts more compact.

Cruz, of course, had argued against eviscerating Bonilla's district on the grounds that the Court should "cure a violation in (District) 23 and, other than that, like a physician, do no harm." That he wouldn't extend that logic to Lloyd Doggett in the not-violating-the-Constitution District 25 is not a surprise, but it's still nice to see him get called on this little paradox.

I've said all along that I believe the Court will take a minimalist view of their task, and that the one principle that I believe they will strive to adhere to is incumbent protection. It's one thing to rail against legislatures for engaging in all kinds of backscratching for the purposes of protecting their own, but I think it's a lot to ask three judges, with a gun to their heads, to sanction the elimination or at least the jeopardizing of a duly elected representative, even if that election occurred in a district that shouldn't have been. I believe that they will see any such maneuvers as the Lege's job and not theirs, and as such I believe they will hand back a map that does not pair up any incumbents. What may happen in 2008 and beyond, with or without further tinkering in Austin, is another story, but for 2006 I will be very surprised if Bonilla, Cuellar, and Doggett are not all heavy favorites to go back to Washington. We shall see.

And for what it's worth, Paul Burka reads Judge Higginbotham's comments in the same way as I do, and follows it to the conclusion that the panel already has a complete, incumbent-protecting plan in mind. The best part is we ought not to be kept in suspense for long.

UPDATE: Rep. Pena adds his thoughts.

08/04/06 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Three times for Ciro?

Will Ciro Rodriguez run again for Congress? Depending on what map is ultimately adopted by the court, the answer is Yes, according to Aaron Pena.

Returned a call from former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez who wanted to inform me of his interest in the redistricting process. He wanted it to be known that he was actively preparing for a run for Congress if a certain district developed between the San Antonio and Deep South Texas regions. This campaign would happen if a particular map was selected by the federal three judge panel. I asked if he wanted this kept confidential. He responded that he wanted as many people to know of his interest. So there it is ...

Vince has more. Let's just say that as much as I like Ciro, I'll be a little gunshy a third time around, at least until I see who his opposition is and what his fundraising looks like. And who knows what may happen in the event of another round of appeals.

07/26/06 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Comments on redistricting maps filed

Friday was the deadline for parties in the redistricting lawsuit to files their comments on everyone else's plans, and the state-drawn Eviscerate Lloyd Doggett plan was heavily criticized by expected and unexpected sources.

"The state plan changes two or three districts by partisan makeup. It's a partisan get-even plan," said lawyer Rolando Rios, who represents the League of United Latin American Citizens.

"State Republican leaders chose to put a partisan agenda ahead of the interests of Hispanic voters, whose voting rights have been violated," said Ed Martin, a Democrat consultant and redistricting expert.

GOP Attorney General Greg Abbott and his assistants submitted the state map.

Abbott declined to respond beyond his solicitor general's prepared statement that defended the state's map as one that maintains partisan balance and reunites Webb County.

"It leaves 28 congressional districts completely untouched, and alters only District 23 and three adjoining districts," Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz said.

However, a prominent Texas Republican consultant also blasted the state's proposal.

"I'm disappointed that the Republicans are using this as a cocktail party joke opportunity rather than to submit real evidence before real judges who are going to determine the future of our state," GOP consultant Royal Masset said. "The Republican plan makes no sense. It's not responsive to anything. It's like a political statement."

[...]

Trying to remove Doggett from Austin undermines the Republican argument for drawing fair districts, Masset said.

"All we did is draw a goofy map laughing at Lloyd Doggett," the Republican consultant said. "I don't know what they are accomplishing by this idiocy. There's no way in God's creation that the judges are going to approve a Republican map that doesn't have any Democratic congressmen in Travis County."

I've said this in a different context, but I'll repeat it here: No one can say for sure what the judges will do. I appreciate Masset's sentiments, and Lord knows I hope he's right, but I've been following this saga for too damn long to hang my hopes on anything as ephemeral as that.

One more point:

In addition to rejecting the state plan, LULAC also dismissed Bonilla's proposal as an "incumbent protection plan."

"Incumbency is something that should not even be considered by the court in fashioning a remedy," said Rios, LULAC's lawyer.

In an ideal world, perhaps that's how it should be, but if there's one thing the courts have consistently accepted as a valid purpose of redistricting, it's incumbent protection. That in and of itself is as good a reason as any to hope that the panel will reject the state's map. With all due respect to Attorney Rios, that argument isn't going to fly.

For more on this, BOR has the Lone Star Project response, which includes the briefs filed by the Jackson plaintiffs, and over at Kuff's World, I've got some comments by A.J. Pate, one of the private citizens who has filed a new map for the court to consider. The court will meet on August 3, and AG Greg Abbott has asked for a ruling by the 7th, which would be almost exactly identical to the lead time of the 1996 Vela v. Bush ruling. Stay tuned.

07/22/06 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Analysis of all current redistricting plans

Local political consultant Mustafa Tameez has gone over all of the redistricting map proposals that have been submitted to the three-judge panel, plus their briefs where available, and put together a concise analysis of them all, complete with illustrations. I have a copy of his report here (PDF) for your perusal. Oral arguments will be heard on August 3, and as noted before, the new map should be in place in time for the November election. Take a look and see what the judges will have to work with.

07/17/06 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Many more maps

I'm counting a total of twelve new maps available for viewing at the Texas Redistricting site. My eyes are a little crossed from looking at all of this - the RedViewer is a great resource, but an annoying one as well, since it doesn't work with Firefox.

The latest news is another attempt by the state to cut Lloyd Doggett off at the knees (more from the Chron). I don't think that'll fly with the three-judge panel, while PerryVsWorld thinks that map is a slight favorite. The court may give deference to the state in recognition of the Lege's role in drawing maps, or it may give more weight to the plaintiffs for winning the lawsuit in the first place. And they may go another direction, or draw their own map - as Paul Burka says, they have lifetime tenure for a reason.

I don't quite have the energy to give all these maps a full going-over. If you want more analysis, follow those links above plus these to the Lone Star Project, more from Burka, Rep. Pena, BOR, and in what may be the most exhaustive blog post I've ever seen, Vince.

Whatever happens, I'm sure the judges are hoping this will be the last they see of Texas Congressional maps for a long time. After three goes at it in five years, I'll bet they're sick of the whole process, and I can't say I blame them.

UPDATE: More from Burka and CQ Politics (via Political Wire).

07/15/06 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

First look at the new maps

Proposals for new Congressional maps are starting to come in for examination by the three-judge panel. LULAC is first out of the blocks, with two maps that make changes to five districts. I've got a look at them over at Kuff's World.

07/14/06 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Are two reps better than one?

With the prospect of Webb County being reunited in a single Congressional district, the citizens of Laredo are pondering whether they're better off bifurcated, where at least there'd two Congressfolk nominally representing their interests.

Laredo Mayor Raul Salinas believes it is good for the vibrant border city to have the help of two congressmen on issues such as border security and international trade.

"We just want to have a voice in Washington. We have so many problems here," Salinas said. "We have two very able congressmen that are doing a good job for the border."

Because "two are better than one," Salinas said the "ideal" solution would be for Laredo to retain two congressmen, presuming one remains based here.

"I just want a loud and proud voice of Laredo to represent us," Salinas said.

Then what he wants is Henry Cuellar. Given the political landscape, however, that may mean keeping Cuellar away from a rematch with Bonilla.

Republican political consultant Royal Masset said Bonilla should not have to worry if he is paired with Cuellar. Masset said Cuellar came close in 2002 only because Laredo resident Tony Sanchez was on the ballot in the governor's race.

Masset said he believes the federal court will try to avoid pitting any incumbents against one another.

He noted the federal panel includes 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Patrick Higginbotham and U.S. District Judge John T. Ward, who were on the panel that drew congressional districts in 2001. In that instance, the judges tried to protect the incumbents.

I hate to say it, but I largely agree with Masset in his assessment of Cuellar-Bonilla, both for 2002 and potentially beyond. It's not that I think Cuellar can't take him out, it's that I think he starts out as an underdog, and he'll need to make up ground in the vast West Texas part of the district, without having much time for it if a new map is in place for November. If this were deferred till 2008, which would be wrong in my opinion, I'd feel more optimistic about Cuellar's chances in a rematch.

On the other matter, while I agree the judges will lean towards protecting the incumbents, it's not clear to me that the Democrats will be so considerate in the maps that they submit. They may very well be happy to stick all of Webb in CD23, thus handing CD28 back to someone who's likely to be better received by the caucus, and take what's probably their best shot at ousting Bonilla. I expect them to submit one such map. What'll be interesting is if more than one is like that. It'll say a lot about Cuellar's standing and clout among his colleagues.

Democratic consultant Matt Angle analyzed the redistricting possibilities for his Lone Star Project.

Angle said he believes the court will change as few districts as possible.

"It is assumed that options rippling across the entire state, or far outside South Texas, will not be seriously considered by the court," Angle said.

I've touched on this before, and I still think this way. You can see the LSP's scenarios here.

07/11/06 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Some CD28 speculation

Via Dos Centavos, an Express News article fro last Friday on how the CD23/CD28 conundrum may get resolved.

Some local Democrats hope to see Laredo dropped from District 28 in the remapping process, which starts with parties in the case filing their proposed remedies in federal court by July 14.

"I think what's inevitable is that Laredo will be reunited in one district," said state Rep. Richard Raymond, D-Laredo, a plaintiff in one of the lawsuits challenging the Republican-drawn map. "But I don't know if it's going to be in District 23."

For his part, [Rep. Henry] Cuellar doubts Laredo would be stripped from the 28th district.

"It's a possibility - but not likely," he said. "There could be a situation where I'm not even affected. ... There's nothing magical about Laredo Hispanics."

Whoever creates the new boundaries, he noted, could pull in Hispanics from the Odessa area.

State Rep. Robert Puente, D-San Antonio, likewise believes Laredo will stay put.

"I think at the end of the day you're going to have a Cuellar district and you're going to have a [Rep. Henry] Bonilla district," Puente said. "I don't think the Legislature or the courts would do a scenario where two incumbents would have to run against one another."

As it happens, the newly-minted blogger Paul Burka explains why West Texas is unlikely to help out Rep. Bonilla in making CD23 a Hispanic opportunity district again.

Why was Speaker Craddick telling folks that the Legislature should draw the lines? To make Bonilla's seat safely Republican, the Legislature split Webb County, exporting nearly 100,000 Latinos in Laredo to an adjacent district and importing a like number of Anglos from the Hill Country into Bonilla's. The Supremes ruled -- duh -- that the swap violated the Voting Rights Act. To replace the Latinos he lost, Bonilla has cast his eye on District 11, which, unfortunately for him, just happens to centered around Craddick's hometown of Midland. Craddick and incumbent congressman Mike Conaway are perfectly happy with the district the way it is.

Why not just restore District 23 to its former boundaries by returning the 100,000 Latinos Bonilla needs? Er, this is a little touchy, but Bonilla doesn't want these Latinos. He won reelection in 2002 with just 51.5 percent of the vote, losing 92 percent of the Latinos in the district. The difference between Laredo Latinos and the ones in District 11 is that the latter have a history of low voter turnout.

Wouldn't Craddick and Conaway be willing to help out a fellow Republican? Not a chance. This is redistricting, remember -- the hardest hardball politics there is. The problem isn't losing the Latinos, it's taking in the 100,000 Hill Country Anglos whom Bonilla would have to give up. The last thing Craddick wants is for the balance of power in the district he worked so hard to create to shift eastward to the fast-growing San Antonio exurbs, causing Midland to lose control.

Of course, if the court ultimately redraws CD23 for this cycle, then CD11 could play a role in it. And despite Governor Perry's implied threat to redo it again in the Lege, there's no guarantee of any one particular outcome if it goes back into the sausage grinder, especially if Craddick is weakened by further depletion of his troops after November. So never say never.

07/05/06 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

The 1996 timeline

06/30/06 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

After the ruling - Now what?

06/29/06 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

SCOTUS throws out CD23, upholds the rest

06/28/06 | permalink | comments [8] | trackbacks [0]

No news is no news

06/26/06 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Ardmore, three years later

05/11/06 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Oral arguments on redistricting next week

02/24/06 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

Re-redistricting re-review reactions

12/12/05 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

SCOTUS to re-review Texas redistricting

12/12/05 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Justice Department voted against DeLay redistricting map

12/02/05 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [0]

SCOTUS to review Texas redistricting

10/28/05 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Analysis of the latest re-redistricting ruling

06/10/05 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Re-redistricting re-upheld

06/09/05 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Onward from Ardmore

05/13/05 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Georgia to follow Texas' lead

03/02/05 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Still dreaming the impossible dream

01/31/05 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Gaddie on the re-redistricting review

01/26/05 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Round Two with Three Judges

01/23/05 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

Jackson v. Perry, Take Two

01/20/05 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [2]

DeLay subpoenaed in DPS lawsuit

10/21/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [1]

Supremes order redistricting review

10/18/04 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting revisited

09/21/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Colorado re-redistricting officially dead

06/08/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Berman piece hits Texas papers

06/02/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Jackson v. Perry

05/28/04 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Look back at Ardmore

05/16/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Quorum ruling

05/14/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Vieth decided

04/28/04 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Let's all play nice now

04/21/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Supremes deny Senate case on redistricting

04/19/04 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Satire death watch update

04/07/04 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Stopping reredistricting before it begins

02/09/04 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Nice work if you can get it

01/28/04 | permalink | comments [14] | trackbacks [0]

No Justice memos

01/22/04 | permalink | comments [10] | trackbacks [0]

Filing wrapup

01/17/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [1]

Lampson to run in CD 2

01/16/04 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Frost, Lampson, and Sandlin

01/15/04 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Brief filing notes

01/14/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Who's afraid of Sandra Day?

01/13/04 | permalink | comments [14] | trackbacks [1]

Filing news

01/13/04 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Sunday redistricting stories

01/12/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Congressional roundup

01/09/04 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Watch them scramble

01/08/04 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Ruling roundup

01/07/04 | permalink | comments [16] | trackbacks [1]

Redistricting upheld

01/06/04 | permalink | comments [19] | trackbacks [1]

Map problems?

01/05/04 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [1]

A couple of redistricting links

12/31/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Driving the Districts

12/30/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Life in the new CD 10

12/29/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Final arguments

12/23/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Justice Department OKs remap

12/20/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Did too! Did not!

12/19/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Over to the defense

12/18/03 | permalink | comments [7] | trackbacks [0]

Today's redistricting lawsuit update

12/17/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Switching sides

12/16/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting lawsuit update

12/13/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Democrats fire salvo in redistricting case

12/11/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting lawsuit may be delayed

12/10/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Let the court battles begin

12/09/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

They've got boundary issues

12/04/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

DeLay/Barton subpoena quashed

12/02/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Dems win one in Colorado

12/01/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Splitting Sutton County

11/29/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting subpoena contested

11/26/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [1]

Out from the woodwork

11/24/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

DeLay subpoenaed

11/22/03 | permalink | comments [7] | trackbacks [1]

As God is my witness, I'll never redistrict again!

11/13/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting trial date set

11/04/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting lawsuit update

11/03/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Dems send some money home

10/23/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Van de Putte retracts remark, accepts apology

10/21/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

So are you gonna talk about redistricting again or what?

10/20/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Senators press Van de Putte

10/09/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [1]

Agreement is now official

10/09/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Agreement in principle, but...

10/09/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Dewhurst gives Van de Putte a way out

10/08/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Deal reportedly reached

10/08/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

When you have The Hammer, every problem looks like a nail

10/08/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Van de Putte followup

10/08/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

"If you're going to act like Mexicans, you will be treated like Mexicans"

10/07/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [0]

Look, honey! It's the Hammer!

10/07/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [1]

Guess what? Still no map!

10/06/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Still no map

10/05/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

I'm all confused

10/04/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Dewhurst calls Craddick an "Iranian cabdriver"

10/03/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Sniping and griping

10/02/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [1]

Compromise in the Senate?

10/01/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Perry's deadline approaches with no resolution in sight

10/01/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

GOP wheels and deals in West Texas

09/30/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

The home stretch

09/27/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Off to committee

09/26/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Senate approves Staples map

09/24/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Perry's proposal falls flat

09/23/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Perry attempts involvement

09/22/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [1]

Texas Monthly rethinks Dewhurst

09/20/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

The Staples map

09/20/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Senate committee approves map

09/19/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Senate imposes double-secret probation on Democrats

09/19/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

It's getting (more) confusing

09/18/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [1]

Lasso this!

09/17/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Duncan v. Craddick

09/17/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Back to business

09/16/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Senate meets and adjourns

09/15/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Perry's Mulligan

09/15/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Ruling roundup

09/13/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Federal panel rejects Dem lawsuit

09/12/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

Panel hears arguments, may rule today

09/12/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Texas Ten return

09/11/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [1]

Governor calls third session

09/09/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [0]

Democrats will return

09/09/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Whitmire will attend the next session

09/07/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Texas Ten update

09/05/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [1]

Whitmire fallout

09/04/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [2]

Whitmire to return to Houston

09/02/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [3]

Whitmire calls for an end

09/02/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Approaching the end?

09/02/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [1]

They dumped Thom Marshall for this?

08/31/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [1]

Three Day Weekend Roundup

08/29/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [2]

Will Kay Bailey come home?

08/28/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Federal judge punts lawsuit to three-judge panel

08/27/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [3]

Senators cancel trip to Laredo

08/27/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [1]

No pre-clearance needed

08/26/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

Two down, who knows how many more to go

08/26/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [1]

Weekend update

08/24/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

I must be slipping

08/22/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

I've run out of clever title ideas

08/21/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Ratliff to resign?

08/20/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Must...keep...straight...face...

08/18/03 | permalink | comments [16] | trackbacks [2]

GOP radio ad attacks Sen. Hinojosa

08/17/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Time is on whose side?

08/17/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [1]

Sanctions

08/16/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Beckwith apologizes

08/13/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Fine!

08/13/03 | permalink | comments [10] | trackbacks [1]

David Beckwith

08/12/03 | permalink | comments [14] | trackbacks [1]

Ruling roundup

08/12/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [1]

Dems win one in court

08/11/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Rally!

08/10/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Weekend update

08/09/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Lawsuitapalooza

08/08/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Everybody sues

08/07/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Republican Senators visit Albuquerque

08/07/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

The Crawford Iconoclast

08/06/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Dewhurst hints at legal action

08/05/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting, segregation, and identity politics

08/05/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

The long and winding road

08/05/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Sunday news roundup

08/03/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

Who's really affected by all this?

08/02/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Texas 11 miscellania

08/01/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Whole lotta nothin' going on

08/01/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Beats all you never saw

07/31/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [0]

New Mexican Standoff, day 2

07/30/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [1]

Just an observation

07/29/03 | permalink | comments [7] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting passes House

07/29/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Morning roundup

07/29/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Early coverage

07/28/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Going, going...

07/28/03 | permalink | comments [16] | trackbacks [1]

Sunday editorials

07/27/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Lines in the balance

07/26/03 | permalink | comments [7] | trackbacks [0]

Will they stay or will they go?

07/25/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [0]

Poll numbers for Perry

07/24/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Crossroads time

07/24/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Support waning?

07/23/03 | permalink | comments [10] | trackbacks [0]

Grinding to a close...for now

07/22/03 | permalink | comments [10] | trackbacks [1]

Back to the cities

07/18/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

New maps, get yer new maps

07/17/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Theater of the absurd

07/17/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Byron's on the beat

07/16/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

The session that never ends?

07/15/03 | permalink | comments [8] | trackbacks [0]

Official DOT investigation of FAA

07/15/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Ratliff reaction

07/15/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

A brief history of redistricting

07/14/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

RIP, redistricting?

07/14/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Sine die?

07/13/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [1]

Focus on the Senate

07/13/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Craddick overstepped, court rules

07/12/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Sock puppets

07/11/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [2]

No action on redistricting until next week

07/11/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

All's quiet on the redistricting front

07/10/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Editorial roundup

07/09/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [1]

Senate poops on House map

07/09/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

And on we go

07/08/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Madla and Ratliff

07/07/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

How we got here

07/07/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Weekend's over, time for redistricting again

07/06/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting is hard

07/03/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [3]

Today's redistricting report

07/02/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

And they're off

07/01/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Reports from elsewhere

06/30/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Open for business

06/30/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Special session starts

06/30/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

More redistricting coverage

06/30/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

A trio of redistricting editorials

06/29/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Report from Houston's House redistricting hearing

06/28/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [5]

Redistricting hearings

06/27/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

The ghost of Gus Mutscher

06/25/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting, then and now

06/22/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

Special session: It's semi-official

06/18/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

Pessimism and optimism

06/17/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

DHS clears itself

06/17/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

Nephew on the Killer Ds

06/15/03 | permalink | comments [7] | trackbacks [0]

The "R" word again...you know the drill

06/11/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting roundup and other news

06/10/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

The search for Laney's plane

06/07/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting...drip...drip...drip...

06/05/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

What's so special about a special session?

06/04/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

DPS documents released

06/04/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

In other subpoena and deposition news

06/03/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Perry sent DPS to neonatal unit

06/02/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [2]

Governor utters the "S" word

05/29/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Out of the House

05/29/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

As the investigation turns

05/28/03 | permalink | comments [4] | trackbacks [0]

Joe versus Tom

05/27/03 | permalink | comments [2] | trackbacks [0]

DPS continues its Keystone Kops routine

05/27/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

DOT investigating DeLay

05/26/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

DeLay admits involvement, and other news

05/23/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

It's a Catch-22 for DPS

05/22/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [2]

Coverups and criminality

05/22/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

DPS covers its tracks

05/21/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Killer D's: The Movie

05/16/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Dems return, life is back to what passes for normal

05/16/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [0]

Near the end

05/15/03 | permalink | comments [9] | trackbacks [0]

There's missing and then there's missing

05/14/03 | permalink | comments [1] | trackbacks [1]

Clarification

05/14/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Bipartisanship and history

05/14/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

Report from the scene

05/13/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Dems still hiding and enjoying life in Oklahoma

05/13/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [0]

So how does this thing get resolved?

05/13/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [0]

Editorial roundup

05/13/03 | permalink | comments [17] | trackbacks [3]

A few questions and answers about the walkout

05/12/03 | permalink | comments [5] | trackbacks [2]

State House Dems go for a walk

05/12/03 | permalink | comments [31] | trackbacks [7]

Will state Dems hold the line?

05/07/03 | permalink | comments [3] | trackbacks [0]

OK, guys, joke's over

05/06/03 | permalink | comments [6] | trackbacks [0]

Still more on redistricting

05/04/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Never give up, never surrender

04/25/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting is optional

04/24/03 | permalink | comments [0] | trackbacks [0]

Redistricting on hold

02/10/03 | permalink | comments [9] | trackbacks [0]