The Texas Congressional Map for 2012 to 2022

This chart is built around two ordered lists of the percentages of Anglo non-Hispanic population and of minority population in each of 36 new congressional districts in Texas. The minority percentage used is for all minorities, including Asian. This anatomy is done on C235, the redistricting plan mandated by the courts to replace C185 which was the plan passed by the Texas Legislature.  Plan C185 was thrown out by the first courts to review it.  Plan C235 was ordered by those courts to remedy this, but notice how bad C235 still is!!  On appeal the courts in Washington have now agreed with the lower court ruling and have judged PlanC185 to not have been drawn "without discriminatory purposes."    An anatomy of C185 has been completed and is now online at http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/08/texas-congressional-redistricting-plan.html .

Anatomy of Texas Congressional Map for 2012-2022
Right-click to enlarge and/or print.

Except for the Texas Legislature itself, Texas is only 45% Anglo. But, due to classic gerrymandering, Anglos are the majority in 61% of districts, before there is even an election.  In elections Anglo percentages have historically gone up due to both the legal inability for some minority residents to vote combined with apathy induced by generations of adverse gerrymandering against minorities, such as that illustrated in these charts.  This history is combined with other methods used over the generations to discourage minority voting, most of which have since been declared unconstitutional. Voter-ID laws in Texas are now planned to add to the collection of methods used to minimize minority voting. 

While there are no districts with Anglo percentages in the "Maximize Loss" range between 47.2% and 29.4%, there are 15 minority districts with percentages in that same "Maximize Loss" range.  See the chart above.  In a similar manner, while there are no minority percentages between the most favorable section of the "Maximized Win" range from 52.8% to 70.6%, there are 15 districts with Anglo percentages in that most favorable range. Why? 

Could this have happened by accident?

The scattergraph below is another illustration of this same gerrymandered manipulation of Texas Congressional Maps.  It will continue to deny equal representation to minorities until 2022.

Scattergraph of Gerrymandered Texas Congressional Map, PlanC235
Right click above chart to enlarge and/or print.

Each column in the scatter chart above represents one of the 36 Congressional Districts in Texas. The large square blocks, representing the Anglo non-Hispanic, percentage, are concentrated either in the “Maximized Win" range from 52.8% to 70.6% inclusive to most efficiently use their votes, see #2 above, or in the “Minimize Loss” range below 22.9%. See #4 above. Meanwhile the red diamond markers for minorities are generally in less than optimal ranges. They are either bunched in the “Packed" range above 77.1%, see #1 above, or in the central “Maximize Loss" range between 47.2% and 29.4% where the highest percentage possible of minority votes are “used up” without electing a minority candidate. See #3 above. 
 

Please print and share the above charts with anyone interested in voting rights and equality of opportunity.  Both these charts were made from demographic data on the U.S. House Districts created and approved by the Texas Legislature.  This data is from PlanC235 found in the Texas DistrictViewer, online at http://gis1.tlc.state.tx.us/.  The above charts were done in an attempt to illustrate the evil that "gerrymandering-gone-wild" has again done to Texas for the next decade.

In 2020 our nation will start another redistricting process.  Hopefully every jurisdiction will have the redistricting process online and available to citizens so that everyone can more easily see what is happening.  Transparency is our best weapon in the war against gerrymandering.  But it will only work if more citizens are involved.

Questions are welcome, especially if any technical errors are noted on these charts, or if you want a pdf copy of these charts for a better quality print.
Bill Betzen
bbetzen@aol.com

Irving Texas Education Coalition: 5-2 vs 7-0

On 1-19-12 the Irving Education Coalition held a meeting to coordinate efforts to fight the vote of the Irving School Board to establish a 5 single member district voting system with two at-large districts to select the 7 members of the Board.  It was a positive meeting with the following handout passed out containing two copies of maps to use in comparing the 5-2 and 7-0 systems.  Here is page one:

Page one of Irving Education Coalition Handout 1-19-12
(Right click on above image to enlarge it or save a copy.)

Page two of the handouts included demographic spreadsheets for both the 5-2 and 7-0 systems so as to compare in detail what the differences are.  Here is page two:

Demographic differences between 5-2 and 7-0 redistricting plans for Irving ISD.
(Right click on above image to enlarge it or save a copy.)

 These handouts provide documentation to support the 5 main points comparing the 5-2 plan with the 7-0 plan.  Our students should see democracy in action with this battle over at-large districts and single-member districts.  They also need to see the vital lessons as to how democracy can be denied by gerrymandered redistricting.

Justice in Irving ISD: Comparing 5-2 with 7-0

Five single member & two at-large districts vs seven single member & no at-large districts

On 1-12-12 the Irving ISD School Board, with a 3 to 4 split vote, denied voters a 7 single member district system for the selection of members for the school board.  Instead they selected a 5 single member and 2 at-large member district system.   This system has the following characteristics:

1) The 5-2 system will not allow for a single district wherein Black residents are the largest group.  This is possible in a 7-0 system in Irving ISD. 

2) The 5-2 system virtually guarantees that the School Board will remain under the contol of Anglo non-Hispanic members. This is in a School district with only a 10.7% Anglo non-Hispanic student population and a 29.99% Anglo non-Hispanic resident population. With the 5-2 district map submitted by the IISD Board there are only three districts wherein there is any statistical improvement for the Irving minority population as a unified group to have any increased advantage in electing a candidate of their choice. In the 7-0 map submitted by the Irving Education Coalition there are 5 such districts, a significant improvement in the potential for the Irving minority community to elect candidates of their choice, and a probable majority on the IISD Board.

3) The 5-2 system creates an unequal situation for two board member positions by continuing the burden for them of the expensive citywide campaigning. These two positions must connect with a population of over 170,000 people while the other 5 single member positions will have significantly less expensive campaigns targeting populations of only 34,000 people. These positions all have equal votes on the board.

4) The 5 single member district campaigns for office will be more expensive in time and money than those for 7 single member districts. There is a big difference between the need to connect with populations of over 34,000 people in the 5 district system and the need to connect with the smaller communities of 24,000 people in the 7 district system. The campaign for office in a 7-single member district system could much more easily be based on personal connections. Success in being elected can much more easily depend on effort and reputation, not on money. Plus, all the members in a 7-single district board of trustees would truly be equal, representing equal numbers of the population.

5) A majority Hispanic CVAP (Citizen Voting Age Population) district is not possible without a 7-0 district system! The court order signed by Judge Fitzwater in January of 2010 stated that once a district with a majority Hispanic CVAP could be proven, that the move to single member districts could happen without a return to court being necessary. With 7 districts such a majority Hispanic CVAP district has been created.  Such a district is not possible with 5 single member districts.

6) A 7-0 single member district system will obviously most encourage local involvement.  It will provide the greatest potential for personal connections in the Irving ISD system.  Parents will know that their board member has their local interests in mind.

7) A 7-0 single member district system will also encourage local parental involvement, the goal of all schools.  Local involvement of the community is what our schools most need to motivate students to work hard toward their own graduation, well prepared for work and/or college.

Enrollment and Board Profiles for 14 Dallas County Independent School Districts

Right click to enlarge or save a copy.

The above chart is for the 14 largest independent school districts in Dallas County, Texas. It is made up of data pulled from the Texas Education Agency data base online for the 2010-2011 school year enrollment.  The board information was pulled from the web sites for each of the respective school districts.  Board ethnic distribution was based on photographs online, personal knowledge, and Hispanic surnames, and therefore is not fully reliable.

Irving ISD, Irving, Texas - Demographics

Media coverage erroneously suggested that the percentage of the IISD student body who are Anglo is over 15%.  It is only 10.74%.  Below are numbers released by IISD on 12-9-11:

This fact, combined with the 29.99% Anglo population now living in the area served by IISD, and a current school board with no setting minority members,  mandate the need for a 7-0 form of single member district selection for board members.  This would encourage greater citizen involvement and increase the potential for representation that reflects the community. 

On Thursday, January 5, 2012, the Irving ISD Board accepted testimony from the public related to decisions to be made about possibly moving to single member districts for the election of the 7 school board members. Over 60 people were present.  When those wanting no change from at-large districts were asked by a similarly minded speaker to stand, based on the video shown on the Channel 11 evening News, only 7 people stood up.  This means that a total of 8 people, from the 60+ present, wanted no change.  The support for a change to 7 single member districts appears very strong. The next two IISD Board meetings for public input on this potential change for IISD begin at 7 PM Monday and Tuesday nights, 1/9/12 and 1/10/12.  Monday's hearing is at MacArthur High School.  Tuesday's hearing is at Nimitz High School.

Texas Congressional Redistricting Plan is obviously discriminatory

The federal courts have again declared that Texas redistricting plans may be discriminatory.  A federal hearing will be in January to answer a question that seems rather easy to answer.  The 45% of Texans who are Anglo are already the majority in 64% (23) of the 36 congressional districts in Texas, even before there is an election!  Click here to see the approved PlanC185 map. Study the following data taken from the redistricting plan, PlanC185, approved by the Texas Legislature and signed by Governor Perry.



Click above image to enlarge.



The most valuable place to be in a new legislative district is in the group that represents just over 50% of the population.  You are on the winning side with the most efficient investment of votes from the people who agree with you. If you are in the group that is less than 50% of the population, like the 45% of Texans who are Anglo, you should be loosing the majority of the time, unless you control the redistricting process.  

If you are allocating "resources,"  in this case voting age population, you can make certain that the resources on "your side" are the most well used and those on the "other side" are neutralized or wasted.  Therefore avoid having the voting age population on "your side" go over 70%, and certainly never over 80%, as any votes beyond 51%, and certainly beyond 70%, are unnecessary.  Meanwhile, try to place the votes of the "other side" into the 30% and 40% range so that the maximum number of the oppositions votes are "neutralized," i.e. invested with no return. Look at the scatter chart above.  Compare where Texas Legislators allocated minority voting age populations and Anglo voting age populations.

Notice how the highest percentage Anglo population in any district is 77.1%, but there are 8 minority districts over that percentage, 7 of them over 80%!  That is the way to "pack" a district and get as many minority votes "out of the way" as possible in those districts where a minority majority is impossible to avoid.  Such packing also creates a district where the elected official will have a "free ride" and will not do the harder work needed to please voters back home when a district is balanced closer to 50%.

Notice in the scatter chart where the most blue Anglo diamonds collect.  It is in the very valuable area over 50%, and up to 70% population, where votes have the most power.  The minority majority districts are represented by the majority of red minority squares, 10 out of 13, are in the "packed" area above 70%, with 77% of minority majority districts in that area, and the large majority over 80%.   The remainder of the minority populations are placed in the "looser" percentages of the 30% and 40% ranges, just below 50%, so that as many minority votes as possible are "used up" in what would be loosing campaigns for candidates they may support.

What is the Texas Legislature trying to do?  What is really happening?

Such gerrymandering politicians have caused the legislative gridlock our nation is suffering from.  With such home districts, legislators on all sides of the aisle have little to fear relative to being re-elected.  They have had their voters selected for them. They can do anything they want in Washington, or nothing, and be re-elected. 

Some voters want to cure this problem with term limits.  The real issue is redistricting and compact districts.  Then the apathetic legislative behaviors due to automatic re-elections never start in the first place. Term-limits alone would only increase the potential for making legislative mis-behavior worse during the last term in office before a forced retirement.  Legislators should always be held accountable back home for their behavior in office.

U.S. Justice Department has approved Dallas' controversial plan for redrawing City Council districts

I was surfing online as my family watched a movie I had already seen: "The Help."  As they watched I received notice that the U.S. Justice Department has approved Dallas' controversial plan for redrawing City Council districts.

It appears things have not changed as much as we would like to think they have from the times covered in "The Help."