Looks like it’s the beginning of the end for Delays little “Lets force all the districts in Texas to be Pubbies” campaign.
Agree?
I think the Republicans’ lawsuit was preposterous. I cannot imagine how they ever hoped to win.
Still, the Democrats can only hope to delay past the 2004 election. Sooner or later the Senators will have to return to the Texas Senate, and the pubbies have the votes to prevail.
I believe the Dems have filed a suit asking the courts to require a 2/3 majority for the redistricting. I don’t know what the merits of that suit are.
I agree with december. The lawsuit was stupid. The courts gave it the only possible outcome, and all it could serve to do was to annoy the voters on both sides.
And, just as decmber said, sooner or later the Democrats have to come back, and if the Republicans are determined, it’ll still happen. So, in reality, all of this posturing hasn’t changed anything at all, since it’s just sitting on the back burner waiting for the Democrats to come back.
(bolding mine)
It helps to actually read the article, december. 
That doesn’t matter. He can special session them into oblivion, and barring that it can be brought up in the next session anyway if the status quo is maintained at the polls.
C’mon, you don’t really think you’ve seen the end of this, do you?
One can only hope, Airman. The fact that the All-Republican Texas Supreme Court has ruled on this matter sends a strong message to Republican legislators.
Sure, they can bring it up again. But after this ruling, it would seem preposterously wasteful to try these tactics once again.
Of course, they could try to appeal to an even higher court…but that never works, right?
Well, I suppose they could take it to the US Supreme Court, but that legal bodies reputation for non-partisan jurisprudence is, well, legendary.
On the contrary…what better way to get things done is there? If they make the Democrats run, sooner or later even they’ll figure out that they just have to change the agenda to something else, like the latest social program, and lo and behold, the Democrats aren’t doing their jobs. Or the budget. The perfect time to try again would be at budget time. The Democrats wouldn’t dare leave then.
There’s more than one way to skin a cat. It just takes Texans longer to figure it out.
Texans are well aware of the variety of possibility as regards skinning cats. It is simply that some methods are vastly more entertaining than others.
Airman, you may be right. Of course, others could view it as the Republicans wasting time, energy and money instead of “takin’ care of bizness…”
Nonetheless, it seems to be a bizarre impasse. It reminds me of a chess match – not a stalemate exactly, but when one player (in a weaker position) can simply move his piece back and forth, never submitting to his inevitable loss. Usually there’s a limit to how many times a player can do this. I hope the same stands true for Texas.
Stalemate.
And preferable to the alternative.
No, doesn’t work that way. This is purely a state matter. The federal Supreme Court isn’t going to meddle in an internal state issue unless it interferes with the U.S Constitution.
I don’t see why people would think that the Republicans don’t have a case. The Texas Constitution states "The Legislature shall meet every two years at such time as may be provided by law and at other times when convened by the Governor. " The Governor has convened the Legislature. The Legislature has refused to meet. Seems like a violation of the Constitution. What am I missing? And why are the Democrats “holed up” in another state? Are they afraid the state police would drag them to the Capitol if they stayed in Texas?
Grey: Stalemate isn’t quite the same as a forced draw.
The Ryan: it seems to me that the legislature did meet. The problem is that there isn’t a quorum. The quote you included doesn’t seem to say anything about a quorum.
I have to say that the Texas court is probably well and truly pissed over this thing. Moreso because the Republican govenor has pushed this to the extremes that he has. Its one thing for the Dems to run, its another for the govenor to ask the Supreme Court to bring them back. No court wants to mess with internal legislative operations. Not only is the separation of powers a serious problem, messing about in such a manner invites comment from the legislature at a later date. Bad juju if you are a judge.
This is a rather idiotic but fascinating chess game, wouldn’t you agree?
cj
Well, the legislature hasn’t refused to meet. Some legislators, though, have refused to attend, enough so that the legislature doesn’t have a quorum. The Court ruled that it can’t force legislators to show.
And yes, the Democrats are in another state because they’re afraid the state police WOULD drag them to the Capitol if they stayed in Texas.
http://www.statesman.com/legislature/content/coxnet/texas/legislature/0803/0812redistrict.html
At $1000 per day, and doubling each subsequent day, the fine on day n+1 will be (2[sup]n[/sup])*1000. E.g., the fine on the 21st day will be just over $1 billion per member. That ought to get their attention.
It seems to me that “attend” and “meet” are synonyms in this context.
december:
I would think that for the Legislature to impose fines, it would first have to achieve quorum, so there’s a catch-22 there.
Well, except “meet” refers to the entire legislature, while “attend” refers to individual legislators. The legislature can meet without every legislator being there, just like my office doesn’t close when I call in sick.
It’s just in this case, not enough legislators are showing up to make a quorum.