Gerrymandering: Texas and Indiana

 The Republican's blatant power grab to keep Trump from being impeached again is in the news, and I do not think I can do as much justice to the subject as these two:

Texas Democrats Are Subverting Democracy by Preventing Us from Subverting Democracy by Carlos Greaves.

President Trump has asked me to redraw the Texas congressional district map to secure five more House seats for Republicans. Texas has always been a state defined by our rugged independence. That’s why, as governor of Texas, it is my job to do whatever President Trump thinks will protect our liberties. I can’t think of anything more Texan than obeying a powerful man in Washington, DC, in the name of individual freedoms.

Is The GOP Outsmarting Itself? by Sheila Kennedy.

The challenge to Hoosier Democrats is clear: boost turnout. Put every resource you can muster into GOTV–getting out the vote. That means running a candidate in every district, so that people have someone to vote for, and focusing messaging on the fact that a large number of so-called “safe” districts are only safe when Democrats and disaffected Republicans stay home.

That Ms. Kennedy says the same thing as I have been saying for decades does much for my vanity.

sch 8/12 

Braun will wait to call special session on pro-GOP redistricting (Axios Indy) — Good. I do not see where Indiana, even Indiana Republicans, profit from this nonsense. 

sch 8/13

Indiana House Democrats assemble with Texas colleagues against partisan gerrymandering efforts (Indiana Capital Chronicle)

He noted that former House Speaker Brian Bosma, a Republican, has shared his opposition to redistricting, telling the Indiana Capital Chronicle earlier this week it was in “bad form.” DeLaney openly wondered if Indiana Republicans would simply revisit redistricting every time they lost a seat in Congress. 

A round of applause for Bosma, even if the present Republicans might not know what is “good form”.

Common Cause has laid out six ways to evaluate the fairness of mid-cycle redistricting: 

1. Whether the process is proportional, meaning the process “should be a targeted response proportional to the threat posed … in other states.”
2. Whether the process included “meaningful” public participation. 
3. Whether the maps were drawn in a way that is racially equitable and don’t “dilute the political voice” of communities of color.
4. Whether leaders “publicly endorse the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act and the Freedom to Vote Act.” The federal bills would ban mid-decade redistricting and partisan gerrymandering.
5. Whether leaders endorse independent redistricting, or citizen-led, independent redistricting commissions as a long-term solution.
6. Whether the maps are time-limited, meaning that “Any new redistricting maps must expire following the 2030 Census.”

The organization has vowed to oppose maps that don’t meet the criteria.

 State Rep. Lucas a ‘hard no’ on Indiana redistricting push —  video from 21Alive is one current Republican who's against the idea.

sch 8/14