Senators have problems with House redistricting map - Texas redistricting

Associated Press ^ | July 8, 2003 | Associated Press Staff

[Impy]

I wonder we the rats compromised on the house map but refused to on the state leg. map.

[WOSG]

AuH2Orepublican:

Good ideas and proposal you have there.

Too bad the House and Senate are not that agressive ...
As a Travis county Republican, having a
Travis county based district that represents me is near and
dear to to my heart. But the House and Senate plans both leave
district 10 as a safe Democrat seat for Lloyd Doggett.

I believe this can and should be rearranged. I propose changing district 10 from a safe Democrat seat into a new western Travis county
based district 10, and adjust other central Texas districts 14, 21, and 31
so all four districts are safe Republican districts. I've enclosed a
specific proposal on exactly how to do this by adjusting plan
1268C accordingly, affecting only Travis county and nearby boundaries.

Here is what it looks like ...

---

Proposal for central Texas redistricting:

The proposal is an improvement on 1268C that results in 4
Republican seats in central Texas, including a Republican-oriented
(ORVS of 54%) Travis county district 10 (this Republican-favorable
district would have 70% of Travis county).

Our adjustment to plan 1268C is to make district 10 based in the
Western and Central 70% of Travis/Austin - basically all of Travis
west of I-35 plus selected other precincts; in addition, we add
several hill country counties (Blanco, Burnet, Llano, McCulloch,
part of Gillespie, Mason, San Saba) that previously were in district
31. The loss of population to District 31 is made up by extending
31 south from Williamson county to North-eastern precincts in Travis,
(in House district 50 and 46). District 21 makes up the loss of
western Travis by taking in southeastern Travis precincts,
(almost all of Tx House district 51 and parts of Tx House district 46).
We can also reduce several split rural counties between 14, 21
and 31; in exchange, district 14 also adds some precincts in
eastern part Travis county.

Benefits of the change:

The solution is compact, represents the communities as a whole well,
and reduces split counties as compared to the baseline (1268C).
It doesn't produce the awkward elongated gerrymandered districts
of previous attempts to split Travis county. I believe it passes muster
under voting rights act. The solution partitions Travis county in a
way that addresses legitimate concerns about Travis county's interests,
while being favorable to Republicans.

Political Analysis:

In plan 1268C, districts 14 and 31 occupy counties around travis.
District 21 borders Travis from the south and takes 20% of western
Travis county; district 10 consists of 80% of Travis, ie, Austin.
Districts 14, 31, and 21 have ORVS of over 60% - 3 safe GOP seats.
District 10 has ORVS of 40% or so - one safe Democrat seat.
In the 4 districts taken together, there are about 394,000
Republican voters and only 296,000 Democrat voters, much of
the Democrats strength located in Travis county. So it is technically
possible to have 4 central Texas districts with ORVS averaging 57%,
ie, safe Republican seats.

Travis county runs about 44% Republican (~95,000) to 56% Democrat (~125,000),
based on 223,891 voters in Travis in 2002. Democrat voting
strength is in the Eastern Travis/Austin precincts.
The Democrat Travis county political strength has 3 legs:
(mostly white) Liberals in central Austin; hispanic voters in south
and southeast Austin/Travis; black voters in East Austin/Travis.
This can be seen most clearly looking at the Texas state house maps,
where each 'leg' has its own district (46,49,51) and representative.
The essense of the proposal puts each community and 'leg' of the
Democrat alliance into a different Congressional district, permitting
each district to retain a Republican edge.

The proposal yields a Travis county based Congressional district 10
with an ORVS of 54% or so; it could be strengthened further by
adjusting boundaries in Travis county. The non-Travis district 10
counties went 65% or more for Republicans. The new district 10 retains
central Austin residents (white Liberals, College students etc.),
but adds enough Travis suburban and Hill country voters to
counterbalance to create a Republican-leaning seat.

The remaining central Texas districts (14,21,31) would still be
safe GOP districts, with ORVS of over 60% for each.
District 21 would increase hispanic minority representation somewhat
over previous plans, by taking in parts of Travis in Tx house district 51.
Black minority voting strength in district 31 would increase.
Both alleviate VRA concerns of minority voting strength dilution
in Congressional district 10.

Details on the proposal map changes:

New district 10:
- Non-travis counties: Blanco, Burnet, Llano, McCulloch, Gillespie (27%),
Mason, San Saba. (population: 83,300)
- Travis county - Western precincts in dist. 21 in 1268C (population: 160,660)
- Central Travis and central Austin precincts (population: 407659)
Total Travis population: 568319, 70% of Travis county

District 31 adjustments:
- Remove the counties west of Williamson ( population: -83,300)
(Blanco, Burnet, Llano, McCulloch, Gillespie (27%), Mason, San Saba.) - Add 100% of Lee (+9480)
- Add Washington county from district 14 (+30,373)
- Add in northern Travis county precincts (+43447)
5% of Travis county

District 14 adjustments:
- Remove all of Caldwell and Lee ( population: -2464, -9480)
- Remove Washington county from district 14 (+30,373)
- Add in Travis county precincts in the Eastern part of the county (+42317)
5% of Travis county

District 21 adjustments:
- Add in rest of Caldwell (+2464)
- Replace precincts in western Travis with precincts in southern Travis.
(160,660 - 2464 = 158,196) 20% of Travis county

More specifics on how Travis County district lines are drawn:

Travis county population total is 812,280. We will use the
Texas House districts to outline how to divide Travis county.

House districts:
# pop minority ORVS 2002 turnout GOP DEM
46 141,076 68% 29% 23,653 6,670 16,793
47 135,351 22% 58% 47,480 27,538 19,941
48 132,858 16% 59% 47,840 28,225 19,614
49 135,832 25% 32% 38,609 12,354 27,026
50 132,499 25% 57% 39,160 22,321 16,838
51 134,664 67% 26% 18,784 4,883 13,900
95,000 114,000
Total 812,280

District 10: 568,320 population in Travis
50% of Travis, tx house districts 47,48,49 ( 403,664 pop)
47 135,351 22% 58% 47,480 27,538 19,941
48 132,858 16% 59% 47,840 28,225 19,614
49 135,832 25% 35% 38,609 13,503 25,096 (32% orvs in 2002)
69,226 64,651
90% of dist 50 (119,249 pop) west of Dessau
50 132,499 25% 57% 39,160 22,321 16,838
20,088 15,154
10% of dist 51 (13,467 pop) selected precincts west of I-35
51 134,664 67% 26% 18,784 4,883 13,900
488 1,390
23% of dist 46 (31,563 pop) all precincts west of I-35, other precincts
(House district 46 west of I-35 precincts include 161,142,150,144,143,166).
46 135,000 68% 29% 23,653 6,670 16,793
1,534 3,862
Travis Total: pop - 568,320 91,336 85,057
Nontravis district 10:
83,300 65% 29,400 19,100 10,290 Total: population 651,620 110,436 95,374
New district 10 ORVS is 53.7% (could be 1-2% higher depending on
precinct selections in travis)

District 31: 43,447 in Travis
10% of tx house dist 50 (13,250 pop) east of Dessau Rd
22% of tx house dist 46 (30,197 pop) east of I-35 north of 290

District 14: 42,317 in Travis
- Add in Travis county precincts in the Eastern part of the county (+42317)
31% of tx house dist 46 (42,317 pop)
Del Valle and area south of 290 and east of Ed Bluestein
District 21: (need 158,196 in travis total)
90% of dist 51 (121,196 pop)
All dist 51 precincts west of I-35
28% of tx house dist 46 (37,000 pop)
District 46 precincts adjoining district 51 and west of I-35.

Impact on ORVS numbers:

District 21: ORVS was 67%, gets reduced to about 60%.
150,000 goes from 65% GOP to 35% GOP, or .149 GOP contribution goes
down to .08, or an ORVS reduction of 7%.

District 14, 31: Change in 40,000 population, or 8% of total
district, from 60% Republican to about 30% Republican.
This reduces the ORVS for each district by about 2.4%.
For district 31, it goes from about 63.9% to 61.5%
For district 14, it goes from about 62.4% to 60%

So, the impact on Republican voting strength on the four
central Texas districts is approximately:
ORVS before ORVS after
10 40% 54%
14 62.4% 60%
21 67% 60%
31 63.9% 61.5%

Voting Rights Act Considerations:

One reason for Republicans to be cautious to implement this
would be out fear of going outside voting rights act limitations.
Since the Austin metropolitan area already has 3-4 central Texas
congressional Reps and since the proposed solution is as
compact as the 1268C baseline, the only voting rights act
issue raised by this proposal is "The extent to which minority
concentrations are fragmented among different districts".

The proposal divides (mainly white) liberal central Austin
precincts from minority precincts in East Austin, putting
many hispanic precincts into 21 and many black precincts into
31 and 14. We contend that this is not a racial fragmentation,
but a political fragmentation of the political alliance that makes
district 10 of today a majority Democrat district. Consider:
- District 10 was and is not a majority minority district;
it is 44.6% total minority, 33.2% hispanic and 11.9.% black.
- District 31 in 1268C has the identical black population ratio
as district 10, and indeed would increase the ratio with our proposal
beyond the ratio in 1268C's district 10.
- Likewise, the Hispanic ratio in 1268C for District 21 is already
22%. The proposed changes raise it to nearly 33%, equal to the
current ratio in district 10.
- The wider context of Texas redistricting provides many
districts that retain and enhance minority voting concentrations overall.

In other words, the racial composition changes are
not significant when taken individually: District 21 under the
new arrangement puts Austin hispanic voters in 21 in a district
with the same concentration as the district they were in before;
Likewise black voters that were in district 10 maintain the
black voting population ratio in district 31 (and less so in 14).

Thus, the argument against this redistricting would have to be
that black populations need to be put in the same district with
hispanic populations and both need to be put in with
white populations that happen to vote a certain way (i.e. for Democrats).
Since the alliance is a political alliance, the proposal can and
should be seen for what it is: A redistricting that fragments
not minority populations, but the Liberal Austin political alliance
which consists of whites and minorities, and does it
in order to further a political end.

This proposal is likely the best way to break up the current
district 10 in a way that meets voting rights act guidelines.
If a voting rights act violation follows from simply splitting a Democrat
coalition-based district, then much redistricting would be impossible.