More like a question, as to what level of force is contemplated or authorized by the term “escort”, which usually implies protection, but in this case, according to you, seems little diiferent from “arrest”.
Dewey, I’m simply stating what I suspect based on the little factual information that has been released. The unlikelihood of our ever getting more facts only adds to that suspicion, which I’m not alone in feeling, obviously. You don’t need to appoint yourself defense counsel for Craddick or Crais for purposes of this discussion, ya know - this isn’t a legal brief. manhattan, same for you, since you bring it up.
I saw several cited in the pit thread. One particular article broke down a certain district as being currently 33% minority and after the plan it would be 24% minority. Homebrew and edwino gave other excellent examples of what would happen to other districts. I linked to the state legislature’s application they use when working on districting plans. It is possible to load the current plan and the proprosed plan in that application and compare the two(I gave instructions in the previous thread). One interesting change would have been the current district 30(my district, comprised of minority-heavy South Dallas(Black) and Irving(Hispanic)). Under the proposed plan Irving and South Dallas would have been chopped into three different districts and some of the poorest sections of the city would have had their voters voices mixed with the voices of the typically more affluent North Dallas(Yep, lower Irving(below 183-Airport Freeway) combined with Lake Highlands, University Park, pretty much all of North Dallas within the 635 loop and a good chunk of Plano and Garland. Should be a good laugh for pretty much anyone familiar with local geography/demographics).
It is hard to argue that the redistricting proposal was fair and honest. I’ve no doubt there are inequities in the current plan(District 6 under the current plan looks really bizarre to me and districts 13 and 19(which divide the city of Lubbock) raise an eyebrow as well). I’d guess that if the Republicans could prove inequity they could get the Texas Attorney General to order re-districting. They tried and he turned it down saying they could re-district if they wanted, but he didn’t see evidence of violations of the voter’s rights or gerrymandering and as such he wouldn’t order re-districting. I’ve never said redistricting was inappropriate per se, but the proposed re-districting was pretty clearly inappropriate. Throw in the late entry into the process, the out-of-the-norm timeframe(two years past the last census-driven re-districting) and the lack of communication with the population at large that re-districting was even on the plate(yes, Texas voters DO want to know about re-districting, it is a BIG issue here) and the failure to show the new proposal to the public to get feedback(which is a normal part of the process in Texas) and I’m afraid the whole thing looks like an illegitimate power grab. Waddles, quacks, and all that stuff.
Enjoy,
Steven
…except for the pesky difference that the end result of such custody is not a jail cell or trial.
Texas law allows the DPS to compel the attendance of lawmakers in order to make a quorum. That necessarily includes the power to use a reasonable amount of force if a lawmaker resists the DPS officer. Otherwise, the law would be toothless.
ElvisL1ves: Your suspicion and two bucks will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. You haven’t posted anything that supports the conspiracy theory you are espousing. If you’re going to make an argument, you should be ready to back it up.
Do you mean the redistricting plan handed down by the federal court? If so, what was unfair about it?
(Not being smarmy, I just hadn’t seen the federal redistricting plan and am curious.)
The re-districting plan handed down by the 3-judge panel of a federal court is the plan which was used for the 2002 elections. This plan is currently in the “in force” status as opposed to the “proposed” status. The proposed plan is 01180C attached to house bill 3398. It is this proposed plan which my criticisms were aimed.
As for the federally-drawn plan, it is the plan currently in force and I haven’t seen any criticisms of it which held up under scrutiny. The Republicans claim it is biased in favor of the Democrats and as their major talking point cite the difference between the Republicans holding a strong majority in the state government bodies but the Democrats holding a majority(17-15) in the Federal congressional delegation. I did cock an eyebrow at the current plan in my previous post after looking at district 6(which is a real eye-strainer geographically, but the demographics may make sense because it pretty much circles Ft. Worth and encapsulates mainly suburbanites while the more urban areas are in a seperate district). I’m willing to listen to claims of unfairness, but I’m wanting them supported with evidence. “Tom DeLay says so” isn’t good enough for me.
Other analyses of the current district layout(handed down by the courts in October '01 after the Texas congress failed to agree on one among themselves) have not found evidence of clear bias as the Republican, specifically Mr DeLay, allege must exist in order for the apparent discrepancy between parties represented in the state versus federal legislature. The case for mandated re-districting on grounds of bias in the current plan failed to sway the Texas Attorney General and he declared that he found no grounds on which to order a re-districting. He also noted that re-districting was a perrogative of the legislature and could be re-done if the requisite majorities(and quorom of course) could be achieved.
Enjoy,
Steven
Adding fuel to the conspiracy theory:
Texas Agents Destroy Rebellion Records
So the search was Federal rather than State ?
To add to Mtgman, and rephrase what I said in the Pit.
The plan, from my admittedly biased eyes, stinks to high heaven. Right now there are 4 districts covering the Houston area (I was wrong about Delay’s district, he is in Fort Bend, not Harris county – before 1990 IIRC he covered us in SW Harris County and I was worried it would go back, so no self-immolation. See the Pit thread for more info). The 4 districts are from west to east 7 (R: Culberson), 25 (D: Chris Bell, that’s us), 18 (D: Sheila Jackson Lee), and 29 (D: Gene Green). Like most urban areas, the center of the city is pretty liberal – we have had two consecutive Democrat mayors, as incompetent as our current one is. The north, south, and west of the city is Republican. The near southwest is quite Hispanic, the far southwest starts to get into righty Delay land and east is filled with oil-related business.
The propsed redistricting looks to me to split off the Republican areas in the east side with a stripe right down the center of the city into the Dem 29th district. It reshapes uber-Dem Jackson Lee’s 18 (which represented virtually the entire inner city) into a nubbin of the AfAm south of Houston plus the conservatives to the south and far southwest. Dem Chris Bell’s 25th is displaced out of the Hispanic southwest into a half ring encompasing the Republican north plus a chunk of the inner city. The Republican 7th steps in to absorb the Hispanic southwest.
In short, I really couldn’t see how you could divide up the city worse for Democrats. I think that some criticism can be made of the current plan – Bell’s 25th is the Hispanic southwest plus a chunk of the far east. But splitting the inner city into 3 districts while parceling them with Republican suburbs smacks of partymandering. (like my new term?) The idea of Sheila Jackson Lee being forced to run for reelection in a district which includes Sugar Land and Pearland is quite funny, though.