Federal Debt, Blue and Red Patterns

How can anyone concerned about the future of our nation ignore the taxation and debt patterns for over 40 years in the US?

 

 

U.S. Federal Debt as Percentage of GDP since 1969

Some argue that Congress was the major factor in these deficit changes. 

Notice how the changes happened immediately once Reagan and Bush II began their presidential terms.  That damage was much hard to repair and improvements only happened more slowly once Clinton entered office, and hardly at all once Obama entered office due to the economic disaster we faced.

Comparing states voting for Romney with states voting for Obama

Comparing states voting for Romney with states voting for Obama
(Right-click on image and click on "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)



The above chart was made using the 9/24/12 electoral map by Karl Rove that can be found at http://rove.com/uploads/0000/0711/Romney-Obama9.24.pdf .  This map is probably the most reliable in that the states indicated are probably strongly dedicated to the candidates they are allocated for. The other data came mostly from Census Data found on the US Census site. 

1. Execution by state data came from http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/number-executions-state-and-region-1976
2. Murder and Forcible Rape data came from http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/law_enforcement_courts_prisons/crimes_and_crime_rates.html  using selection # 308 on that page and the Excel file at that selection.
3. Educational expenditures by state were secured from the Excel file at Item # 262 at http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/education/elementary_and_secondary_education_staff_and_finances.html
4. Educational achievement by state was secured from the Excel file at item # 233 at http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/education/educational_attainment.html
5. Median income for each state was secured from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/statemedian/ by going to "Annual Social and Economic Supplement" on that page and the "Income of Households by State Using 2-Year-Average Medians"
6. The information on which states still allow physical discipline in public schools came from http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934191.html
7. Finally, the information on Food Stamp usage by state comes from http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/cats/social_insurance_human_services/food_programs.html

Additional ideas are welcome as to variables that should be explored in this effort. 

Bill Betzen
bbetzen@aol.com

Voting Rights Act Revived in Texas: 3 maps

The 2011 Texas Legislature redistricted three maps to shift the previous decades massive population growth into new legislative districts.  This was done for the Texas House and Senate, and for the US Congress with four new seats added to the U.S. House from Texas. The maps created were so discriminatory against minorities that they were immediately challenged and repeatedly declared discriminatory by the courts.  Most recently, on 8-28-12, a three judge Federal Court in Washington affirmed that judgement. The maps are now on the way to the Supreme Court.  Study the three reports below, one on each map. Form your own opinion.  What should the decision be?  

Anatomy Chart on Texas House Map PlanH283
(Right-click on image above & hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)

The chart above is for Texas House map PlanH283 for the 150 Texas House districts. The study of this map was done with a bar chart due to the large number of 150 legislative districts. It more easily illustrates the gerrymandering pattern of discrimination, a pattern that has the same components in each map. Each map has an area that is designated as a "Maximum Win" area and a "Maximum Loss" area. In the bar chart above, the area highlighted with yellow is the Maximum Loss area.  The green area is the Maximum Win area. Notice the consistent fact that Anglo districts dominate the Maximum Win areas in every map.  Minority districts dominate the Maximum Loss areas in every map.  How can that be an accident?

Anatomy of Texas State Senate Map PlanS148r
(Right-click on above image and hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)



In both the Texas State Senate map above and the Congressional map below it was easy to document the "gaps" that existed. In the Maximum Loss area there were no Anglo districts. In the Maximum Win area there were no Minority districts.

Anatomy of Texas Congressional Map for U.S. House Map PlanH283
(Right-click on above image and hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)

These maps are perfect examples of gerrymandering. They should find their way into the next generation of government class text books in Texas.
 

These maps are also online at http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/09/texas-plan-h283.html, http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/09/texas-senate-redistricting-plan-s148r.html, and http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/08/texas-congressional-redistricting-plan.html

Questions are welcomed and encouraged.

Hopefully the above information will help in spreading the word as to the debt of thanks we owe the Legislators of 2011 who designed these maps. They have created maps that will help assure everyone involved, including the judges, that the Voting Rights Act should have a long life.

Such maps must NEVER again become law and go into use. They reflect the painful history of racism that, with the current creation of these maps, obviously continues to afflict Texas. These maps should only be used in text books as examples of the gerrymandering damage that can be done to democracy if voters are not vigilant.

I've joined the League of Women Voters to work together with them in maintaining our democracy and the right to vote. (There are now over 18 men who are members in Dallas.  Everyone is welcome to join!)  It is an honor to work with them to continue their noble history of achievements on behalf of our nation, and democracy.  Join your local League of Women Voters and support democracy!

7-14-13 addendum: It appears maps very similar to those above will become the law in Texas now that the Supreme Court has kicked out critical protections in the Voting Rights Act. This is a painful and uncertain time in the history of our nation.  Will the necessary work be done?

Bill Betzen

bbetzen@aol.com

The REAL 47%!

The real "47%" are Romney supporters.
(Right click and hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)

The original of the above map comes from  http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/where-are-the-47-of-americans-who-pay-no-income-taxes/262499/.  It appears that Romney was speaking about his own supporters based on an electoral map from the Karl Rove web site:

 

Obama voters are more generous.

Dallas Fort Worth giving and voting patterns in 2008
(Right-click & hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)



On 9-17-12, on the front page of the Dallas Morning News Business Section, the larger map above of the DFW area was printed.  Inserted into it by zip code were the giving levels according to 2008 tax returns.  The darker green areas are thoses areas giving the highest percentage of their income to charity. This map can be found online at http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20120916-dallas-fort-worth-giving-trends-show-surprises.ece .

The smaller inserted map is of the 2008 presidential election returns for the same DFW area. This copy of those 2008 election returns comes from http://gregsopinion.com/?p=7131.  Notice the correlation between high rates of giving and voting for President Obama.

Generosity was not a quality mentioned by the other presidential candidate as he spoke of what he called "the 47%" who will "always" vote for President Obama.  He described them in his view as people "... dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them."  Generosity was not mentioned. He needs to see the above graphic.

Texas Plan H283, House Redistricting Plan declared discriminatory 8-28-12

Following is a chart made from demographic data on Plan H283, as approved by the 2011 Texas Legislature, that can be found at http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/redist/redist.htm. 


Texas House District Plan H283 Declared Illegal 8-28-12
(Right-click on above image and click "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)

The information about Anglo non-Hispanic population percentages in each of the 150 House districts created was collected as well as the Minority population percentages in each district. A count was then made as to how many Anglo districts, and then how many Minority districts, were in the 0 to 4% range, the 5% to 9% range, the 10% to 14% range, and so on up to 99%. This shows which ethnic group has the most favorable percentages for winning an election without "wasting" too many votes and which group has the worst percentages where their votes are more likely to be unable to elect a candidate of their choice. (This presumes voters are more likely to vote together as either Anglos or Minorities as a group. If that were not true, why does this redistricting plan have a very definite pattern among racial lines? What are these map makers telling us they expect to happen?)





Below is the list used to make the above chart.  It was made using the PlanH283 data linked from the right hand column on the page at http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/redist/redist.htm.

Demographic Data from House PlanH283, used to make above chart
(Right-click and hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)



 On 8-28-12 when PlanH283, the above House district map, was declared discriminatory, the other two maps, one for the Senate and one for Congress, were also declared illegal due to discrimination.  Reports on those maps have also been done.  The report on Congressional Map, PlanC185, can be seen at http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/08/texas-congressional-redistricting-plan.html   The report on the Texas Senate Map, PlanS148r, can be seen at http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/09/texas-senate-redistricting-plan-s148r.html



Texas Plan S148r, Senate Redistricting Plan, declared discriminatory 8-28-12

Anatomy of Texas Senate Redistricting Plan S148r
(Right-click on above image and hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)

The above anatomy demonstrates the gerrymandering patterns that led to this map and two others from Texas being declared illegal and discriminatory by Federal Courts in Washington on 8-28-12.

Making Dallas Early Voting Work, 10-22-12 to 11-2-12

Dallas Early Voting begins 10-22-12 and ends 11-2-12, before the 11-6-12 election.  This year for the first time there will be 3,500 Dallas County Election Department Early Voting signs with arrows on them to use in helping the public locate early voting locations.   The plan is to place about 10 of them at each major intersection within 2 miles of each early voting location and then have a trail of identical signs leading the way to the election location.  Just follow the arrows!  An experiment on this in 2010 led to an increase of 40% in the number of early votes cast at the location tested.

Here is a link to the Dallas County Elections site with the locations, times, and other details given for early voting.

National Voter Registration Day is 9-25-12.  The last day to register in time for this election is 10-9-12.  You can go to the National Voter Registration Day web site to find details about registration in your area, or to help in voter registration efforts for the future of our nation.

Google & political lies

The volume of lies this political season is overwhelming, especially online. They seem to almost always be made in support of Republican candidates. I wondered if the way I was set up online and in Facebook was simply directing all such anti-Republican postings toward me. Are not lies being associated with the Democrats just as frequently? Research was done to see how often the possessive form of the party name was followed by the word "lie" online. The chart below is the result. Corrections are welcomed! bbetzen@aol.com

Google study of terms related to political lies
(Right-click and hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)

It appears that the art of the political lie for political gain may have been perfected during the time of Karl Rove at the turn of the century, developed through examples such as the Swift Boat exercises, and is now used with abandon.  It appears to be dominating political dialogue. Is our democracy in danger if the public cannot be educated as to how to verify facts?  Or will this method of winning votes ultimately be exposed to the general public for what it really is before we endure another decade like the last one?  Lies contributed to the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives, and trillions of dollars, dollars that are now part of the debt we are leaving our children.

Trust but verify! This is a brilliant phrase often used by President Reagan.  We all must follow his advice with all political statements being made in this exceptionally dangerous time.  We must not have another decade like the last one.

Texas Plan C185, Congressional Redistricting Plan, declared illegal 8-28-12

Below is an anatomy of the Texas Congressional Redistricting PlanC185 that was declared intentionally discriminatory by the courts on 8-28-12.  

Anatomy of Texas Congressional Map Plan C185 decleared discriminatory
(Right-click and hit "open link" to enlarge and/or print.)



PlanC185 was originally thrown out by local Texas courts soon after it was created and was replaced by those courts with Planc235, which is not much better. The Texas Attorney General appealed that ruling and the 8-28-12 decision was the result. See details and links to a copy of the 154 page ruling in this linked Dallas Morning News article on this decision.

As you study the above chart note that the demographic group percentages are relatively evenly distributed between the high percentage of 86% and the low percentage of 13%, except for a gap of over 12 percentage points!  That gap tells the story of gerrymandering.

It is a gap that for the Anglo percentages is between 31.7% and 44.4%.  No group would want to be in this "Maximum Loss" range. Sadly that is a range of percentages that are occupied by 15 Minority districts, but not a single Anglo district.  That same gap translates to a gap between 55.6% and 68.3% for the Minority districts with not a single Minority district with percentages in this "Maximum Win" gap.  However there are 15 Anglo districts with those percentages.  Do you think this happened by chance? By accident?

Is this really 2012?

Hopefully in the next redistricting in Texas in 2020 citizens will be able to go online and build their own Texas redistricting plans.  As the public becomes more aware of the power in redistricting they will no longer allow maps such as PlanC185 to even be considered.  Yesterday's decision was a strong step forward.  Texas also needs a replacement for PlanC235 which is the current Congressional redistricting plan we are working under.  It is almost as bad as PlanC185.  See a similar anatomy of Plan C235 at http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/03/gerrymandered-texas-congressional-map.html .

Reasons for Hispanic lawsuit against Dallas City Council

It was very good news to read of the lawsuit being filed by voters against the Dallas City Council redistricting plan approved by the Council on October 5, 2011.  The map created by that redistricting plan continues a long Dallas tradition of denying equal representation to minority communities in Dallas.  With this approved map it is very hard, if not impossible, to explain how the Hispanic Community was not the primary target.  The approved map analysis by city staff clearly shows it only has 4 districts in which the voting age population (VAP) is over 50% Hispanic.  

On 9-24-11 the Dallas City Council Redistricting Commission was considering a total of 11 different maps and eight of those maps each had five districts with Hispanic voting age populations above 50%.  See the details for each of these 11 maps on a chart at http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2011/09/dallas-city-council-redistricting-maps.html .  Please note that in one of those maps, wPlan03c submitted by Rawlings, the weakest of the five Hispanic majority districts was 57.6% voting age Hispanic!  On 10-5-11 the meeting began with 5 maps still in consideration, including the wPlan03c map, and only two of those 5 maps did not have 5 majority Hispanic VAP districts: http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2011/10/october-5-2011-final-city-council.html .

That same map also had the strongest three Black districts, stronger than any other map considered, with an average Black percentage of 63.07%.  In the Approved City Council Map this percentage was only 56.9%, and there were only 3 Black majority districts, contrary to what at least one TV reporter said this evening.  Also, the Wplan03c map was the only map with two "minority opportunity districts" increasing the potential for a Dallas City Council with 10 minority members!  No other map so strongly increased the potential for 71% (10) of the 14 council members to be minorities, just as the 71% of Dallas are minorities!

The wPlan03c map submitted by Rawlings was also the map with the most compact districts with an average destrict perimeter of only 32.64 miles.  The approved map was significantly gerrymandered leading to an average perimeter of 35.60 miles.  This means there are 41.44 more miles of boundary lines in the gerrymandered, but approved, City Council map.  More details about the wPlanc03 map are linked from the same page linked above: http://www.dallascityhall.com/redistricting/planReview.html   The WPlanc03 Rawlings map is the 8th map listed on that page.

The problems with the finally approved map were summarized in a letter to the editor posted on 10-9-11: http://dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2011/10/letter-to-editor.html, and in a second letter just published on 8-5-12 at http://letterstotheeditorblog.dallasnews.com/2012/08/its-time-to-change-dallas-voting-landscape.html/ .

In any redistricting plan every resident must be counted, citizen, adult, child, non-citizen.  Everyone is counted!  That is the law.  People complain that the ability to vote should somehow be used in drawing the lines. While there are many estimates as to how many eligible voters are in each district, they are only estimates.  It is only at the voting booth that the real determination can be made. Until then the total population is the only population factor that should be used in drawing district lines.  The numbers for each district must be within a 10 percentage point range, generally no more than 5 percentage points above or below the target population of 14th the Dallas City Population.

There was a time in history when some claim gerrymandering was used in Dallas to maximize minority representation.  Those days are past, if they ever existed.  Gerrymandering was certainly used to confuse and discourage voter participation, as that is the most consistent effect.  With the approved City Council Redistricting Map it is obvious gerrymandering continues to be used in attempts to fragment the Dallas minority community, now 71% of Dallas population.  It must be stopped. The future of Dallas rests with everyone voting and being counted in compact city council districts.

Voter ID & Voting Rights Violations, Dallas County 5-29-12

The following sign was in the election packet for posting along with all the other signs for polling locations on election day, 5-29-12, in Dallas County:

Voter ID Signs in Dallas County 5-29-12

Other, black and white signs, in both Spanish and English, and in much smaller print, explained in detail that the Voter ID law was not in effect for this election.  Those signs listed all the forms of ID that were allowed. During 14 hours yesterday at my polling place I never saw anyone read those more detailed signs posted on the door.  Obviously, if the above sign had been posted, it would have been read much more frequently due to the larger size of the print, the short message, and the red color. 

Due to this high potential for the wrong message to be given, this sign was not posted at our polling location.  While literally correct, without more information it left the impression that a photo ID was required.  A formal complaint has been filed about the use of this sign.  More information is needed on this sign before it is posted again.

Trinity River Tollway for Through Traffic: but at what cost?

Do you remember the promises made during the 2007 Trinity River Tollway Vote?  Politicians said it was already approved and paid for!



Photo taken in November of 2007 outside Beckly Courthouse voting locastion when two city council members were present and encouraging voters to vote "No."
(Right click to enlarge and/or print.)

Misleading campaign signs were a factor in the election. 
Which sign would you consider to be the most accurate?

The Trinity River Toll Road issue from 2007, after almost dying a natural death in spite of the close win in the 2007 election, has now been resurrected by Dallas Mayor Rawlings. Somehow the value of the 60+% of mixmaster traffic that is non-stop traffic through Dallas is pushing the cause.

This Tuesday evening, 5-8-12, there will be a NTTA (North Texas Tollway Authority) meeting at the Dallas Convention Center accepting public testimony regarding opinions on the value of this floodway toll road. The meeting starts at 7:00 PM, but from 5 - 7 PM, for two hours before that meeting, staff from the NTTA and exhibits will be available to answer all questions.  A map with free parking information is at http://www.trinityrivercorridor.com/pdfs/trinity-meeting-050812.pdf .

I will be there asking about estimated sound generated by the tollway and the current sound levels on the Trinity River.  How will the noise levels be affected by a tollway?  Has a sound map been created indicating the areas which will have significant noise increases?  Noise levels designated as unacceptable have already been documented in some NTTA maps but only in areas where there are current parks and residences.  There is no floodway area map with indications given of the sound increases anticipated in the currently unused areas, except for an occasional canoe.

The final question is: "Does Dallas want to sacrifice the last quiet place it has near downtown for the benefit of the large majority of current mixmaster traffic that is simply through traffic?"  Do suburban residents and truckers wanting to only drive through Dallas win, or can Dallas ultimately win?

If you are concerned about this floodway toll road, and want to join the movement against it, please google the three words: trinity river petition, and sign the simple one sentence petition against the floodway toll road.  This search will take you to http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/no-trinity-river-floodway-toll-road-in-dallas/ .  Please share this information with others you know of who may be concerned about protecting our city and the potential of our river to become a true world class park in the center of our city.

Do we need another election where choices are more clearly stated than in 2007?  Any second election demands that we have clarity in the meaning of each choice, as reflected in this modification of one sign from the 2007 election.

Please sign the petition and join with us on Tuesday at 7 PM at the Dallas Convention Center to give your opinion.  Your questions may be answered from 5-7, during the two hours just before the hearing.

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.