Tag Archives: redistricting

2013 predictions for the Texas political scene

Posted on by
Reply

Well, the new year is here. 2012 was an exciting year for me, personally and politically, and I can’t wait to see what lucky ’13 has to offer.

Here are a few things I predict will transpire this year:

  • Speaker Straus stays speaker. I’m a fan of Representative David Simpson’s principled, pull-no-punches style and sympathetic to the changes he wants to make to the speaker’s role, but I don’t think the frustration many hardcore conservatives feel is reflected in the Legislature. Though I certainly don’t foresee Simpson dropping out at the last minute like Straus’ challengers did last year, I doubt he will gain a majority of votes. I’ll be following the Texas Tribune’s interactive to see if the winds change.
  • A continually sucky economy. That fiscal cliff “compromise”? Yeah, that didn’t work out so well. With higher taxes coming for over 75% of Americans, not to mention the havoc Obamacare will undoubtedly wreak on businesses small and large, our nationwide economic downturn isn’t likely to right itself any time soon. Texas, of course, will be pretty much fine.
  • Re-redistricting. I’m cautiously optimistic about the upcoming Supreme Court cases on voter ID and the Voting Rights Act, but I have an inkling Texas’ current districts won’t be allowed to stand. Hold on to your hats, y’all.
  • Social issues win. Despite some high-profile Republicans losing their elections, the Texas Legislature is still very conservative. The “fetal pain” bill, which I assume is waiting on Senator-elect Donna Campbell’s swearing in to be filed, will pass with flying colors. There’s some dissension among conservative on school choice legislation, but I doubt it will face too much real opposition. I’m hoping campus carry will finally pass his time around as well.
  • At least one special session. Because what fun would life be if we got everything done on time?

In other news, I’m excited for two upcoming events I’ll be blogging about this month: the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s 11th Annual Policy Orientation and a RightOnline Social Media Bootcamp sponsored by Americans for Prosperity and Attorney General Greg Abbott.

Alas, the Policy Orientation is full (get on the waiting list here), but early bird registration for the Social Media Bootcamp just opened. Get on it!

PO-banner-filmscreenings_1 A_tJcd_CEAApfyz

Liberal logic

Posted on by
2

Liberals have some serious logic issues. I present to the jury three examples:

Exhibit A: Birth Control

Liberal logic:

  1. Birth control is nice to have.
  2. Therefore, birth control is a “fundamental right.”
  3. Therefore, employers should be required to provide it in their healthcare packages, and taxpayers should fund supplies for low-income individuals.

What’s next: Replace “birth control” with “chapstick,” “spinach,” or other unnecessary health item of your choice.

Exhibit B: Texas Redistricting

Liberal logic:

  1. Most Hispanics are Democrats.
  2. Therefore, all Hispanics are Democrats.
  3. Therefore, Hispanics need their own special districts and Republicans are racists.
What’s next: What if it was Republicans supposedly being disenfranchised instead of Democrats? Would the media still care?

Exhibit C: Abortion

Liberal logic:

  1. I don’t want to offend anybody.
  2. Therefore, whatever they believe is just fine and probably a fundamental right.
  3. Therefore, abortion isn’t for me, but I respect your decision.
What’s next: Replace “abortion” with “wife beating.” Does that still work?

The verdict? You know where I stand.

A Modest Proposal for Texas Politics

Posted on by
Reply

It is a melancholy object to those who drive through this great state to see signs on every roadside emblazoned with names and slogans of candidates for this, that, and the other office. It is not the signs that are troublesome, but the multitude of fine men and women so qualified and eager to serve their fellow citizens being forced into a small volume of elected positions.

I think it is agreed by all parties that this prodigious number of candidates is, particularly due to the growing population of the state of Texas, a very great detriment to the political system.Quite simply, we possess too many admirable politicians and too few districts in which to elect them.

But my intention is very far from being confined to provide only for these politicians who struggle so to gain elected positions; it is of a much greater extent, and shall extend to all Texans and, indeed, all Americans. The plan proposed herein will give Texans a much greater power and satisfaction in their government.

As to my own part, having turned my thoughts for months upon this important subject, and maturely weighed the several schemes of other projectors, I have found the current congressional maps grossly insufficient. Take, for example, congressional district 25. How is one to choose between Michael Williams, Wesley Riddle, Dianne Costa, Brian Matthews, and the many other fine patriots battling tooth and nail for this singular position? On the Democratic side of the aisle, what of Lloyd Doggett and Joaquin Castro? In some races, such as Senator Hutchison’s open seat, some candidates have even been forced to cease their candidacy and seek lower offices in order to secure a political future. It is a distressing predicament.

I shall now therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be liable to the least objection, to public consideration.

The state of Texas must expand, returning at the very least to its original 1836 borders, so that more congressional and senatorial districts may be formed to accommodate our cornucopia of admirable and accomplished political candidates. Texas could easily gain tens of seats in both the state and national legislatures, as well as electoral college votes, bolstering its influence in American politics.

But extending our borders would provide numerous benefits in addition to ensuring worthy candidates may acquire the positions they deserve.

Firstly, it would allow more room for an already booming population to continue growth.

Secondly, it would allow Texas to extend its empire of job-creation. With over one million jobs created between 2001 and 2011 alone – more than any other state in the nation – with our current borders, one can hardly imagine the possibilities when land and businesses from adjoining states are acquired. With this added job-creating capacity, Texas could continue expanding its economy and dominance in the global job market.

Thirdly, it would greatly increase the state’s taxpayer base, providing more funds for worthy projects that will help create a more comfortable and civilized society.

Fourthly, it would give the state additional military bases, increased forces, and dominance during wartime.

Fifthly, it would give the state more power in the education industry, allowing Texas to further its ultra-conservative brainwashing agenda, which includes, to name a few of my favorite components, militant Christianization, Reaganomical indoctrination, and complete denial of both science and the existence of Thomas Jefferson.

Sixthly, it would provide the state a plethora of additional natural resources, growing both power in the energy industry and, again, job-creating potential.

All of these most agreeable advantages would ensure Texas can continue to accumulate wealth, resources, and political power, leading, of course, to eventual secession and takeover of the American – nay, the entire Western – realm.

I can think of no one objection that will possibly be raised against this proposal.

Therefore, I propose that Governor Perry immediately marshal the Texas National Guard, call on our allies, and begin an immediate full-scale invasion of Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, and New Mexico, and claim the land that originally and rightfully belongs to the state of Texas. After this is achieved, the legislature should begin drawing new districts and allowing politicians to move north and west to claim these new districts in time for the April primaries. (Of course, an additional filing deadline would need to be put in place in order to accommodate said interested parties.)

I profess, in the sincerity of my heart, that I have not the least personal interest in endeavoring to promote this necessary work, having no other motive than the public good of my country and fellow Texans.

The End

P.S. For those of you who have never read Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal,” have trouble detecting sarcasm, or live in Oklahoma Occupied North Texas and can’t take a joke, this is satire.

Mostly. ;)

Redistricting, guns on campus, and Lloyd Doggett, oh my!

Posted on by
Reply

It’s been something of an eventful week in politics. Three issues have been foremost in my mind for the past few days:

Redistricting

One word: YES! Thank God the Supreme Court has seen sense and given the original maps a chance. Not only does this give some great conservative candidates a better shot, it’s the first step to getting the Voting Rights Act off Texas’ back.

Key dates:

  • Jan. 9: Oral arguments on the maps
  • March 6: Primary for president, Senate, State Board of Education, Railroad Commission, and other races not affected by redistricting
  • May 22: Primary for state House, state Senate, and the House of Representatives
  • ???: Nobody seems to know what the filing deadline situation is yet.

Having two primaries will probably minimize already low turnout for state elections, but I’m optimistic and more raring to go than ever.

If your head is still spinning, this post explains what comes next. Texas Redistricting is a great blog to follow to keep up with what’s happening.

Virginia Tech

It’s heartbreaking to see Virginia Tech University going through a second tragedy only four years after the infamous shooting of 2007. Gun control advocates will tell you that this strengthens their argument: Guns are bad. But in reality, it does exactly the opposite.

Guns can be used to kill people. But they can also save lives when in the hands of law-abiding, licensed adults. What if a student or professor at Virginia Tech, in 2007 or 2011, had their concealed weapon? How much carnage could have been prevented or stopped?

Signs, stickers, and social norms mean nothing to criminals and murderers. Expecting them to abide by so-called “gun-free zones” is like asking a barn cat to stop eating mice because it’s just not very nice. There is no logical reason to prohibit the lawful right to bear arms by CHL holders on college campuses. Restrictions against guns on campus are not only pointless, they actually endanger lives.

Having a handgun is not a guarantee of safety. But I, for one, would like the chance to prevent a tragedy like Virginia Tech or UT or, even on a smaller scale, tragedies like the rape of Amanda Collins. That chance is all we ask for.

I’ve been an advocate for concealed carry on campus for about a year now, and I can safely say there are few issues I feel more strongly about. To learn more and join the movement, visit Students for Concealed Carry on Facebook and Twitter.

Lloyd Doggett

This morning I attended Congressman Lloyd Doggett’s neighborhood office hours. It was quite fun lurking on the sidelines in my Donna Campbell shirt, perplexing everybody in line to talk to him. I didn’t get the chance to talk to Mr. Doggett, but I did get to meet this fine patriot outside.


It was almost hilarious to hear someone thank a policeman for being there to guard Doggett “after what happened last time.” Because, you know, my mom and I standing there with our Republican getup and Starbucks cups were so intimidating.

We’re totally the mob. Don’t tread on us, libs.

The redistricting debacle

Posted on by
Reply

News that a federal court has rejected Texas’ redistricting map has just surfaced. The AP reports:

In a brief ruling, the court agreed with the U.S. Department of Justice that the GOP-led Legislature used an improper standard for determining whether the new districts discriminate against minorities. The order clears the way for a trial.

The legal fight centers around a requirement in the 1965 Voting Rights Act that certain states with a history of discrimination, including Texas, be granted “preclearance” before changes in voting practices can be enacted.

(Note how the “unbiased” AP conveniently neglected to provide any quotes or substantial arguments in the article either from Republicans or in defense of the districts.)

First, I don’t believe for a minute that the districts discriminate against minorities. Yes, some political moves were made, such as breaking up blue Travis County into several districts. But it would be counter-productive for Republican legislators to purposefully discriminate against minorities, especially Hispanics, the fastest-growing minority population in the state.

Contrary to popular belief, Hispanics aren’t all Democrats. Nearly 40% voted Republican in the 2010 election. (For more on this, check out my post on Rick Perry and Hispanic Republicans over at Legal Insurrection.) The Hispanic Republican community thrives in Texas – including in the Texas legislature.

Second, Hispanics make up over a third of the voting-age population in Texas, according to the 2010 census. It would be pretty difficult to completely exclude them, even if legislators wanted to.

Third, and most importantly, how is it the federal government’s business what state districts look like? This is a state issue. Not first and foremost, but entirely.

If anything, it is the Voting Rights Act that discriminates – against states the federal government doesn’t want to trust. The act currently covers seven states: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia. (Funny how most of these are traditionally red states.)

The Voting Rights Act may have once been necessary, but now it’s just another case of liberal identity politics marginalizing minority identities and interfering with state business.