Needless redistricting fight only between rounds This map versus that map. Rural interests versus urban. Senate rules versus a Senate boycott. Who has the power to arrest whom. As predicted, the summer in Austin is proving long, divisive, costly and possessed of much hot wind. Needlessly so. Even so, congressional redistricting, the principal aim of the waning special session of the Legislature, has been declared a dead issue before the session's Tuesday deadline. Everyone, however, expects Gov. Rick Perry to declare a second special session to attempt to force the issue again. How Texans' interests are better served by this remains a mystery, the rhetorical justifications of the Republican leadership notwithstanding. Reasons against redistricting more than once every 10 years, following the census have been frequently and laboriously recounted Among them: Redistricting this year would needlessly confuse voters thrown into new districts and confronted with unfamiliar candidates. It would set a precedent for disruptive redistricting any time control of the Legislature changed hands. And special sessions cost taxpayers millions of dollars -- dollars that Texas certainly could spend more wisely and usefully. And all of this is before the round of costly and divisive litigation that is sure to follow any new map that may be adopted. The fact that all statewide elected officials are Republicans has been one of the GOP arguments in favor the unusual effort. That sounds good, but it's overly simplistic and ignores a number of congressional districts where the majority of voters voted for those statewide GOP candidates, but also voted for Democratic congressional candidates. Even if one agreed that the need to redraw lines was so urgent -- a dubious contention -- the scorched-earth, rushed process we are witnessing is a terrible way to go about it. Much of this effort is being driven not from Austin, but from Washington where House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R- Sugar Land, is trying desperately to maneuver his party into a more powerful majority in next year's election cycle. DeLay, according to the New York Times is on a mission to the Middle East. Let's hope he doesn't do for that part of the world what he's done for the peace and welfare in Texas this summer.
If we know with a reasonable certainty that the senators are going to bolt, then the only reason to call a second session is to play a bit of finger pointing during the next election cycle. There was another article in the Chronicle today that was equally interesting. Let Texas voters make the redistricting call By LINDA CURTIS We need another session like a ... You can fill in the blank. A special session on redistricting is like Friday the 13th. It keeps coming back. Why? Because the governor and his party, say so, that's why. And the Democrats' response in Washington? You guessed it -- they held a fund-raiser! That is why Independent Texans has been joined by a number of watchdog groups, from the League of Women Voters to Campaigns for People, in calling for a vote of the people on an independent citizens' redistricting commission similar to those in Iowa and Arizona. Independent Texans, an affiliation of independent reform voters, has initiated an informal on-line petition drive to Gov. Rick Perry and the Legislature to place a statewide proposition on the November ballot for a citizens' redistricting commission of equal numbers of Democrats, Republicans and independents. This would effectively put a stop to any more special sessions for which Texas taxpayers will have to continue to foot the bill. Until now redistricting has threatened to become the bloodiest battle in Texas since the Alamo. However, a new factor has entered the two-party power equation. That is the emergence of the independent voter. Maybe the two parties didn't notice the CNN/Gallup poll last October, indicating a 35 percent plurality of voters who self-identify as "independent," with Republicans at 32 percent and Democrats at 31 percent. Despite our numbers, we have been completely ignored in the redistricting war. And because of this, we, independent voters, may be the only ones capable of stopping the fight. Independent voters are all over the political map -- we're left, we're right and all points in between on social and economic issues. But what unites us, along with many Democratic and Republican voters (as opposed to party loyalists), is the call for political reform. A supermajority of the electorate wants to clean up and open up our dying democracy and get rid of special-interest control of government. The Republicans want to shore up their control of Congress. But even the Republicans in Texas need to watch their step, because independents are getting organized, both here in Texas and across the country, to play a greater political role. For example, the "Choosing an Independent President" process already is under way in Texas. Independents will hold a regional conference in Austin on October 26 to begin screening the presidential candidates, regardless of their party affiliation. Politicians from both parties can ignore the 35 percent independent plurality at their peril. Most voters have grown tired of their partisan power wars. It is time for the politicians turn their weapons over to the people. Curtis, based in Austin, chairs Independent Texans, an affiliation of independent reform voters. The group's petition supporting an independent citizens redistricting commission in Texas can be found at independenttexans.org.
It is precisely that 35% that is going to swing the other way if Republicans continue their shenanigans. I have always said that most Americans are actually in the political middle. We see issues on both the left and right that are important to America, and we think about issues and are even able to see reasonable compromise where the shills for the left and the right cling to their one track rhetoric. I actually think it is time to create a party that actually represents the middle to take some of the power out of the two majors. Eventually, I think the party that can represent the middle of the spectrum can become a major influence on politics and can help to balance out the power. As we have seen with warfare, there is a benefit in building a coalition to get something done. Bush I got very little flak for his Gulf War because he signed on the rest of the world in support. W would have received a lot less criticism if he had been patient and built a coalition for GWII. If we have three major parties, the balance of power shifts so that the one has to have the support of two of the three parties in order to get things passed. Coalition building would become the rule rather than the exception and hopefully the tone would change in Washington.
