|
Post by JP5 on Jul 28, 2013 4:59:20 GMT
Eric Holder and Barack Obama better understand one thing. Texans will NOT stand by and let them come in to our state and push us around. "Hours after U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Department of Justice will seek to restrict Texas voter integrity laws, some Texas elected officials responded. Texas Governor Rick Perry (pictured) said, “Once again, the Obama Administration is demonstrating utter contempt for our country’s system of checks and balances, not to mention the U.S. Constitution. This end-run around the Supreme Court undermines the will of the people of Texas, and casts unfair aspersions on our state’s common-sense efforts to preserve the integrity of our elections process.”Meanwhile, U.S. Senator John Cornyn said it is more of the same from the Obama administration, “By first going around the voters and now the Supreme Court, Attorney General Holder and President Obama’s intentions are readily transparent. This decision has nothing to do with protecting voting rights and everything to do with advancing a partisan political agenda.
“Texans should not – and will not – stand for the continued bullying of our state by the Obama Administration.”Congressman Randy Neugebauer of Texas 19 voiced his disdain of Holder’s announcement, “The Attorney General’s announcement is outrageous. It disregards the Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act and demeans states’ rights. I’m surprised that so soon after political targeting came to light at the IRS, the Obama Administration would resort to the same tactic to minimize opposition in Texas. My constituents have been very clear about their response to this power grab: Don’t mess with Texas.”Congressman Mac Thornberry also weighed in, “The Supreme Court recently ruled that Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which gives the federal government power to micromanage voting decisions in certain states, was unconstitutional. Today, Attorney General Holder announced he is going to do that to Texas anyway. It is utterly wrong and may be related to political efforts to change the way Texas votes. We are going to be looking at every option to stop Holder and to protect the right of Texas to make its own decisions just like any other state.”
jcorreu27.wordpress.com/2013/07/27/texas-elected-officials-respond-to-eric-holders-call-to-go-after-texas-voting-laws/
|
|
|
Post by 12th on Jul 28, 2013 5:11:29 GMT
Seriously, don't you just wanna say *love* you *fairy dust*head?
I do think pbama and others truly believe that the feds are the boss of the states.
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Jul 28, 2013 17:11:48 GMT
Seriously, don't you just wanna say *love* you *fairy dust*head? I do think pbama and others truly believe that the feds are the boss of the states. Certainly the red states! If he wants to do something really important why doesn't he go into his own homestate of Illiniois and focus on cleaning up that mess called Chicago? He won't touch that one with a ten-foot pole!!
|
|
|
Post by 12th on Jul 28, 2013 18:27:40 GMT
Sucks to be disenfranchised. My daughter-in- law was told she had already voted when she showed up to vote in the presidential election. They allowed her a provisional ballot though we don't know if it was counted.
|
|
|
Post by Daisy on Jul 28, 2013 20:07:15 GMT
It is all about control. If they can't control it they have no power. Move over state's rights, hello federal Big Brother.
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Aug 2, 2013 19:31:50 GMT
I read the Republican side but the actual laws in question are not presented. I will simply look at another fact. www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/us/a-wrench-in-the-works-on-voting-laws.html?_r=0So the question of whether Texas still discriminates in it's voting laws, which is key to the entire issue, was answered a year ago unanimously by three federal judges based upon the evidence presented to them. How about when Texas can demonstrate that its stopped discriminating in its voting laws then the US government's authority to oversee Texas election laws, granted by statutory law by the US Congress, will end. When a state establishes that it has been discriminatory in denying the right to vote then the burden of proof to show that this discrimination no longer exists is with the State and not the Federal government. So far Texas appears to be a long ways from showing it's stopped its discrimination against minorities.
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Aug 3, 2013 22:09:25 GMT
And we both know that 3 judges.....especially 3 in the Washington D.C. area have been wrong before. there is absolutely no proof that Texas discriminates. "For a judge to put Texas or another jurisdiction back on a leash, there must be proof of intentional discrimination, in violation of the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments. In the Texas case, the Justice Department is hooking its argument on a ruling last year by the D.C. Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which rejected the new political maps that Texas drafted as part of redistricting. A three-judge panel found a “troubling” pattern of cases where boundaries were arranged in a way that handicapped minority lawmakers. Though it found “no direct evidence” that Texas sought to undermine minority voters, the court said the maps “show discriminatory purpose.” For its part, Texas argues that the D.C. Circuit never found any specific constitutional violations, and that the maps under dispute have since been redrawn. Even if a court sides with Mr. Holder, the oversight prescribed may be limited in scope and time. For instance, a judge could decide that only redistricting changes should face extra scrutiny, but not voter registration rules. Mr. Hasen also says there are “jurisdictional questions” about which federal court should settle the matter that also must be untangled. “Texas bail-in may not look like a great tool compared to the old preclearance regime. But it is not as if DOJ has a lot of other tools to protect minority voters in its toolbox,” writes Mr. Hasen. “Holder is going for bail-in because it is better than nothing, and with Congressional inaction, he’s got nothing left to lose.” blogs.wsj.com/law/2013/07/31/a-critical-look-at-holders-texas-gambitHere's what the Democrats seek in Texas. They expect maps to be drawn that GUARANTEES a Democrat gets elected. And they use "race" to accomplish that goal. If any side gerrymanders, it's the Democrats.....that would be the same Democrats who once fled the state and hid out to prevent a vote on a map drawn by Republicans, once Democrats were no longer in majority control. You see, the Dems want to control those maps.....always drawn to THEIR advantage when they are in control......whether they are in majority control...or NOT. Dems had majority control of decades for decades! And during that time they never sent one Republican to the House of Representatives to represent us. It's about politics, NOT race. But they USE race to accomplish their control of power. Well, too bad....the USSC just said they can no longer do that. Holding states to what was happening back 60 or 70 years ago was wrong. And it's been corrected. There are more minorities voting here than EVER.
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Aug 4, 2013 11:36:47 GMT
I would believe that the People of Texas would expect congressional districts to be fair without gerrymandering but obviously Texas isn't close to that. Based upon the 2012 US Congressional vote the Democrats received almost 39% of the vote should have held at least 13 House seats (closer to 14 House seats) as opposed to the 12 that they ended up with.
The US House of Representatives is supposed to reflect the popular vote of the People of the State and Texas still reflects gerrymandering of Congressional districts by Republicans so to say that the problem has been corrected is false.
Of course Texas Republicans tend to say, "What's one or two House seats more or less" but when this gerrymander is spread across the entire United States it's huge. The Democrats received more votes nationally for House seats but because of the gerrymandering of congressional districts they are the minority in the House. That isn't right and no one can argue that it's right.
I'm no fan of either Democrats or Republicans but I am an American and when I see our political process being corrupted by partisan politics I'm going to point it out. The problem of gerrymandering for nefarious political purposes is not limited to Texas but the problem is very evident in Texas. There is no excuse for corrupting the intent of the US Constitution and the Constitution is clear in it's intent when it comes to the election of House of Representatives as they are supposed to represent the popular vote of the State. If that isn't happening then the State has a serious problem.
|
|
|
Post by Daisy on Aug 4, 2013 15:36:40 GMT
I applaud Texas for their strong stance on redistricting. If not they could end up with a district like the one in our state. There is no way anyone can explain this district, not with an explanation that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Aug 4, 2013 16:52:28 GMT
I would believe that the People of Texas would expect congressional districts to be fair without gerrymandering but obviously Texas isn't close to that. Based upon the 2012 US Congressional vote the Democrats received almost 39% of the vote should have held at least 13 House seats (closer to 14 House seats) as opposed to the 12 that they ended up with. The US House of Representatives is supposed to reflect the popular vote of the People of the State and Texas still reflects gerrymandering of Congressional districts by Republicans so to say that the problem has been corrected is false. Of course Texas Republicans tend to say, "What's one or two House seats more or less" but when this gerrymander is spread across the entire United States it's huge. The Democrats received more votes nationally for House seats but because of the gerrymandering of congressional districts they are the minority in the House. That isn't right and no one can argue that it's right. I'm no fan of either Democrats or Republicans but I am an American and when I see our political process being corrupted by partisan politics I'm going to point it out. The problem of gerrymandering for nefarious political purposes is not limited to Texas but the problem is very evident in Texas. There is no excuse for corrupting the intent of the US Constitution and the Constitution is clear in it's intent when it comes to the election of House of Representatives as they are supposed to represent the popular vote of the State. If that isn't happening then the State has a serious problem. So, where were you when the Democrats in Texas were gerrymandering the district maps to favor Democrat for decades? I find it odd that Democrats and supporters of Democrats have no problem with them drawing the maps to reflect THEIR majority, but it's supposed to be a "no-no" for Republicans. When one thinks about it fairly.....it needs to be drawn in this manner. Why? Because if your own state was a majority for Democrats, you would not expect the maps drawn up to end up sending more Republicans to represent you in the House and Senate, right? At least the Republicans draw the district lines to represent an area more fairly. Democrats are known for snaking the lines out to capture more of their voters in an effort to be ASSURED they'll take that district. That's wrong; that's gerrymandering. There is legislation here for consideration that would turn over the drawing of maps to citizens.....leaving out lobbyists, party representatives, etc. But I have my doubt they could do a better job.
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Aug 4, 2013 17:20:13 GMT
I stated in no uncertain terms that gerrymandering of congressional districts is wrong regardless of who's doing it. Just because the Democrats might have done this in the past does not provide justification for Republicans doing it today. All we need to do is look at the vote and the results to know that the congressional districts have been gerrymandered in Texas and it doesn't matter who did it. It is the responsibility of those in power to ensure that it doesn't happen in the next election. In short if it requires redistricting to ensure that in 2014 the house seats represent the popular vote then that must be done. With Republicans "in charge" they need to be looking at how to ensure that Democrats end up with more seats in the House if the vote goes the same way it did in 2012.
As documented the Democrats should have had two more House Seats from Texas in 2012. That is a FACT.
Now, try to convince me that the Republicans in control of the State legislature are trying to do that.
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Aug 4, 2013 20:37:38 GMT
This fight is about politics; not race. When the Democrats and the judges that support them CHANGE maps booting out at least 4 or 5 Hispanic Republicans from OFFICE....and drew the lines to help Democrats, that's gerrymandering to favor their political party....and that is wrong. This is what the judge did for the Democrats....and of course, the Democrats always go to the judge they KNOW are in their pockets. “It is racial discrimination against Hispanic Republicans because there were at least four or five Hispanic Republicans that were tossed from office because of the way they drew the lines in order to help Democrats,” Abbott said of the interim maps. The courts restored some South Texas districts that had been held briefly by Hispanic Republicans. In the 2012 election, voters replaced them with Hispanic Democrats. “The Republicans showed they are embracing Hispanic candidates by electing so many of them. It was fear by the Democrats of losing ground to the Republicans in the Hispanic community that made them fight so hard to change those maps,” Abbott said." trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2013/07/greg-abbott-argues-its-the-dems-who-discriminate-against-hispanic-republicans.html/This BS needs to STOP!!
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Aug 5, 2013 10:34:05 GMT
I'm no expert on the Texas elections but I do know that there is political gerrymandering there because of the vote and how many Republicans and Democrats ended up in the House. Are the Republicans controlling the State government doing something to fix this for 2014? I seriously doubt that they are and that is a problem.
I haven't seen one news story from Texas where the leading Republicans were saying, "We need to redraw the congressional districts so that more Democrats are elected to represent the popular vote."
In fact, nationwide I haven't seen one Republican proposal to increase the number of people voting during a national election. Every proposal I've seen has been directed at restricting the vote by those the generally vote for Democrats such as the Voter ID laws and limiting early voting that Democrats do more often than Republicans.
|
|
|
Post by 12th on Aug 5, 2013 13:30:08 GMT
I call BS, shiva. It's utterly illogical to say that because democrats got 39% of the vote, they should have 39% of the seats. Think about what you are saying. No Trent yet.
|
|
cubed
Scribbler
Consumate Snowball Artist
Posts: 9
Politics: Center/Left of Center.
|
Post by cubed on Aug 5, 2013 14:10:40 GMT
I call BS, shiva. It's utterly illogical to say that because democrats got 39% of the vote, they should have 39% of the seats. Think about what you are saying. No Trent yet. I think to much political debating has left my sarcasm meter broken.... As it stands, Gerrymandering is wrong no matter who does it. Left or Right. Oh and Race and Politics are intertwined.
|
|