Federal Redistricting Courts in San Antonio and DC differ on “coalition districts” – may mean difference of 3 seats in Congress

A story entitled “Texas Redistricting Keeps Two Courts Busy” and blog highlights discuss how the two Texas redistricting cases are playing itself out in separate courts thousands of miles apart in both distance and interpretation of the Voting Rights Act. 

A three judge panel in San Antonio is looking at Section 2 issues while another three judge panel in the DC District Court is reviewing at Section 5 issues.  These are separate section of the Voting Rights Act.  The hearings involve many of the same issues but different standards and proof requirements.  Yes, a complicated mess. 

Based on questions and comments from the DC panel, that court is more sympathetic to Texas and skeptical of DOJ and their evolving retrogresion standard.  On the other hand, the San Antonio panel seems to be buying into the plaintiff’s overall claim of “fairness” in increasing Hispanic proportional representation and requiring the protection of coalition or influence districts as opposed to the prevailing legal standard on majority minority districts. 

So what to make of the headline “Texas redistricting map likely to be redrawn to benefit of Dems.”  Remarkably, this may turn out to be true.  The primary issue that divides these two courts is whether the law requires the protection of “coalition or influence districts.”  These are districts where minorities do not have enough voting population to elect a minority; however, together perhaps, a coalition of minorities groups or with white cross-over voters may be able to elect a minority white Democrat.  With the Bartlett and Ashcroft cases, there is deep skepticism at the Supreme Court concerning coalition or influence districts (as it quickly becomes the Democratic Party Protection Act). 

If the San Antonio court draws its own interim map (accepting plaintiff’s suggestions), this will unduly take the power of drawing maps from the overwhelming Republican legislature and provide a boon to Democrats, increasing their partisan representation in the Texas delegation by 3-4 seats.  While there may be an additional Hispanic seat in the mix, it is more likely that white Democrats would take the other seats and some Hispanic Republicans would lose.

Because of the high likelihood the Supreme Court will not endorse any mandate of coalitions districts, any interim map shouldn’t include these questionable coalition or influence districts.  To do so would dramatically alter any final map before the DC court and Supreme Court has the opportunity to weigh in on whether Texas had any duty to protect these type of seats.  The San Antonio panel has the real potential to become an activist court if they adopt controversial interim maps that may very well need to be corrected after the Supreme Court weighs in. 

Tennessee Election Offices clear up concerns over photo IDs in town halls across the state

At the links here and here.  Election administrators across the Volunteer State provided a preview to voters Tuesday night at special town hall meetings. The events, which took place in all 95 counties yesterday, provided answers about the new voting laws that will require voters to present identification before they cast a vote in all future elections.

NYT and Politico tag team to criticize FEC independence

NyTimes: Having the Watchdogs to Tea and Politico: Agency Nullification at the FEC.

The newspaper representing New York City is upset again and resorts to calling Federal Election Commission (FEC) Commissioners “party hacks” for their refusal to chill political speech.  Instead, they want the FEC to undermine the law by bureaucratic regulations and President Obama to unilaterally clean out the place and replace everyone of them with so-called reformists.

While the media and reform community have a right to voice their opinion, they are now pushing a federal agency to undermine the dictates of the Supreme Court by their rule-making power.  The role of an FEC commissioner is not to sit as a potted plant and rubber-stamp the recommendations by staff bureaucrats and other outside “reform” groups.  The FEC should not be about pushing reforms, rather the equal application of the law. 

Democratic Senators introduce constitutional amendment limiting campaign funds

At the link, Democrats propose an amendment to the U.S Constitution reversing the Citizens United case, in what would be the rare case of the Congress amending the Constitution to restrict free speech. 


The proposed amendment, which was co-sponsored by fellow Democratic Sens. Tom Harkin of Iowa, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Chuck Schumer of New York, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Jeff Merkley of Oregon, states that both Congress and individual states will have the power to regulate and limit the amount of campaign contributions to candidates running for elected office. It would also regulate and limit independent expenditures — such as those from Super PACs — made in support or opposition of candidates and would allow Congress to pass campaign finance reform legislation that withstands constitutional challenges.

Artur Davis on the road to excommunication

At the link.  Former U.S. Rep. Artur Davis, D-Birmingham, increasingly appears to be a man without a party. Davis recently roiled Democrats — and delighted Republicans — by declaring his support for the stricter voter identification laws passed this year by Alabama’s newly empowered GOP Legislature.

and this:

The barbs were even sharper back home. Davis was panned as a “fraud,” a “traitor” and a “closet Republican” on Alabama online message boards.

Davis’ response:

Davis told me he still considers himself a Democrat — but a disillusioned one. “My views are in the political center and don’t neatly fit either party,” he said. “So I count myself as a Democrat, who is disappointed by the forces and personalities who have run the party into the ground in Alabama.”



 

Appearing at Restoration Weekend 2011

I will be at David Horowitz’s Restoration Weekend in Florida which runs from November 17-20.  I will be speaking Saturday morning November 19.  There is quite a line up of announced speakers and I cannot be more excited that Apollo 17 moonwalker Harrison Schmitt is one. It is a great weekend with vibrant discussion of issues.  I will never forget last year watching Senator Jeff Session attend every panel and studiously take notes. A splendid time is guaranteed for all.

About Harrison Schmitt – only 9 moonwalkers are still alive.  They represent the pinnacle of human exploration.  Schmidt alone makes the Weekend a great event.  But also appearing are John Fund, Pat Caddell, Rep. Allen West, Ann Coulter, Dick Morris, Rep. Ed Royce and more to be announced later.