Archives > News Update
Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
RSS
Share
Redistricting compromise struck down by federal court
By Bill Conrad, bconrad@acnpapers.com
Texas' latest attempt to settle its redistricting dispute with the civil rights groups that say the state's plan is discriminatory fell flat Monday when a federal court rejected the attempted compromise.
The state, as well as the plaintiffs, faced a Monday deadline to reach an agreement in order for the primaries to be held on April 3. With no agreement reached, the likelihood of the primaries being delayed again increases.
The San Antonio federal court said the agreement was struck down because the parities involved did not follow the court's directions.
The parties were again ordered to return to the negotiating table, even though the Feb. 6 deadline has passed.
Hope that an agreement had been reached sprang up on Monday, when Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott announced his office had reached an agreement with several plaintiffs in the lawsuit. These plaintiffs included the Texas Latino Redistricting Task Force, which includes groups such as Texas League of United Latin American Citizens and the Mexican Bar Association of Texas.
The agreement included new maps for the state House and Senate, as well as the U.S. House, but Collin and Denton counties were left largely untouched. One of the larger changes would have affected McKinney, which is currently split between U.S. Rep. Sam Johnson in District 3 and U.S. Rep. Ralph Hall in District 4. The new map would have placed all of McKinney in District 3.
In a statement released after announcing the compromise, Abbott defended the new maps.
"The proposed maps minimize changes to the redistricting plan passed by the Legislature and, as the U. S. Supreme Court required, makes changes only where necessary," Abbott said. "The Texas Attorney General's Office has worked with a wide range of interest groups to incorporate reasonable requests from all parties to the extent possible without compromising the will of the Texas Legislature. Even though these proposed interim maps aren't fully supported by all interest groups, modifications have been incorporated based on requests made by all parties."
Joey Cardenas III, Texas LULAC's executive director, said his organization supported the compromise, even if they still had reservations about part of the overall plan.
"Texas LULAC echoes the sentiments of our sister organizations in that plans H303 and C226 are not perfect, but provide additional representation to Texas Latinos and are far better than the state's adopted plan," he said. "Furthermore, Texas LULAC affirms its commitment to the African American community in that this plan protects all African American opportunity districts."
Plaintiffs who didn't agree to Abbott's plan included the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the Black Legislative Caucus. In a statement prior to the court's ruling, Trey Martinez Fischer, a Democratic state representative from San Antonio and the chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, said his group couldn't support Abbott's compromise.
"MALC worked in good faith with General Abbott in hopes of arriving at a compromise that reflected the changing diversity of our state in a manner acceptable to all parties," he posted on the group's Facebook page. "Unfortunately, negotiations stalled when it became apparent some parties in these discussions had a narrow, and at times unrealistic, view of the evidence presented at trial. The maps proposed by the attorney general today are a beginning point, not an end. ... As we have said before, MALC and the redistricting plaintiffs have presented a compelling case at trial in both San Antonio and in Washington, D.C. We will not compromise our principles for the sake of expediency, and will not be forced into a resolution that fails to recognize the fundamental fact that Texas' growth is minority growth."
No future negotiation deadlines have been set after the Monday deadline was not met. Further delays could push the primary back into May or June, which could result in it coinciding with municipal elections and their runoffs, which are scheduled for May 12 and June 16.
The following are comments from the readers.
In no way do they represent the view of Starlocalnews.com
In no way do they represent the view of Starlocalnews.com
You must register with a valid email to post comments.
Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here:
Become a Registered User
- Return to: News Update «
- Home «
- Top of Page ^
