Race to the Finish: After Ugly Redistricting Meeting, Council (Barely) Settles on Map

Categories: City Hall
newcouncilmap.JPG
This is how you explain a map to council members when you don't have time to print a new one.
Yesterday afternoon, around 5:30, as a tiny audience sat in the city council chambers, former Mayor Dwaine Caraway came by and declared to Unfair Park, "I think we got something." That's right. A final redistricting map. Finally.

Caraway spoke about three hours too soon, though. Last night at 8:30, the city council finally voted, 9 to 6, to forward a map to the feds that was a mash-up of the two they had before them yesterday. It has four African-American districts (including a so-called coalition district where blacks have 45 percent of the voting age population versus 40 percent Hispanic) and four Hispanic districts (with District 5 as the new Pleasant Grove-based district) in a city with a 42-percent Hispanic population. Putting aside their many issues, Vonciel Hill and Dwaine Caraway managed to join together in support of the four black districts. But the process the council took to get their vote wasn't very pretty. There was shouting. Accusations of back-door deals and "super councils." Slavery was mentioned. Yeah. It was that bad.

Let's review. The council spent all of Wednesday morning discussing the last two redistricting maps left standing: the "combination" map proposed by council member Delia Jasso, which had five Hispanic and three African-American districts, and the Tennell Atkins-Dwaine Caraway-Carolyn Davis map, which kept four majority African-American districts. All that debating was so much fun they broke for lunch and an executive session, then came back to do it all over again.

After a full afternoon of arguing and trying to compromise, they recessed yet again. Tennell Atkins and Delia Jasso went somewhere with Mayor Mike Rawlings and came back out with a map that combined their two plans. A compromise. Sounds good, right?

Not exactly.

Several of the other council members were so unhappy they had been excluded from the final bout of map-drawing they couldn't even bring themselves to discuss the new map. Instead, what the audience witnessed was more or less a total council meltdown.

Angela Hunt began by telling the mayor, "I can't get on board with this, because it sounds to me like the districts that were most affected were not brought to the table. ... We've had such a transparent process, I'm concerned by the idea that we're moving boundaries and not talking to the council members when we're moving their districts."

Scott Griggs, whose District 3 was one of the districts whose boundaries were changed, was more direct. "I asked to be in the meeting, and the mayor declined," he said. "I also asked to speak to the mayor about this, and he declined. This is not democracy. This is heavy-handed, and this is inappropriate. I will not support it. There was an obligation to have me in the room and have me at the table. That was the wrong decision and abandoned democracy, abandoned representative democracy and abandoned transparency."

Rawlings responded that yes, it was true, he didn't let Griggs come into the meeting, but said it was because he wanted to pull together a new map quickly and then invite discussion on it. "I wanted to do the discussion here publicly," he said. "This is representative democracy. ... I'm sorry we don't have everybody in a closed room, but we do have everybody in an open room."

Next, Jasso, one of the two council members who was actually in the room with the mayor, announced she wouldn't be supporting the map anyway. "I want to thank you for your attempt at a coalition and a compromise," she told the mayor. "That was a very good stroke of positiveness. However, I will not be supporting this map. It carves up North Oak Cliff. I have the same concerns other districts might have, where several people are running against each other. I just cannot support this map." In the end, Jasso predicted those opposed to the small number of Hispanic districts would sue over the final map.

Caraway implored his fellow commissioners to just discuss the map at hand. "It's clear to me that regardless of whatever we're going to do, we're going to be without the majority unanimously," he said. But with the new map, he said, "We moved forward with something that's reached a compromise. ... We have an obligation to move forward. We've reached an agreement here that we must vote on this, put this to bed today, move it forward towards the Justice Department and move it on with the other business of this city."

Atkins, the other council member who met with the mayor, said the same thing. "There was no hanky-panky," during the meeting, he promised. "We were very transparent." Sitting beside him, Caraway called it "disingenuous" that anyone would suggest otherwise.

Rawlings tried again to tough-love his council members. "I did this quickly so we could get it out there," he said. "Every once in awhile, I've got to go work. I hope we talk about substantive issues about this map."

Griggs, though, would not be appeased so easily. "Two maps went into that room," he said. "A super-council of three people decided which map to amend, and made amendments to that map. I had less than a minute to review it. This has not been democratic in the last hour and a half."

After a few more minutes of bickering, Rawlings called another recess so Griggs could look at the map (and probably so the mayor could avoid having a ridiculous argument between his council members broadcast on television -- too late).

When they returned, Rawlings did the best he could to restore some peace. "It's good to take time out to rest, clear our heads and think about what we're doing," he told the council members. He said he felt that the maps had reached "a standoff" adding, "I was hopeful I could broker a compromise."

Griggs was still furious, though. During the break, he apparently sent out a mass email asking supporters from District 3 to come down to City Hall. About 11 people showed up, and they didn't look too happy either. The new map, he said, only had three Hispanic districts, which he called "compromising" a Latino district to make four African-American ones. (At that point, the audience pretty much had to take his word for it, because copies of the new map couldn't be distributed. It was so late in the day that the printing service was already closed.)

"We need to have an honest and open discussion about what our priorities are," Griggs said. He said the council needed to decide whether having four black districts was a top priority, and, if so, if it warranted sacrificing a Hispanic one. "We don't have a direction and we're constantly changing the rules as we go along." He called the process "rushed," and added that "at the eleventh hour and the 55th minute, we are bringing up what our priorities are. We've done this absolutely backwards."

Hill and Caraway took serious offense to the notion that four black districts would be something that needed to be voted on. Hill called the entire redistricting process "entombed in racial discussion," and, more broadly, said race has been part of the political conversation "since the time my ancestors were stolen and chained like animals" to be brought to this country.

"Anyone who claims he or she does not understand that," she said pointedly, "must have been living somewhere other than America and certainly not in Dallas."

Rawlings tried again to make peace. "My priority is to have eight minority council people around this horseshoe in the future," he said (there are currently seven). "Change is difficult. But I want to make sure everybody's priorities are clear."

"Mayor, I'm trying to be cool," Caraway replied. "But this is pandering. This is procrastination. This is stalling. And this is a slap in the face to the African-American community and the taxpayers of this city, to play these types of childish games."

Finally, with Jasso and Griggs in one camp and the African-American council members in another, and with a consensus obviously still far from being reached, Rawlings decided to call the vote. It was 9 to 6 in favor of the new map, with Ann Margolin, Carolyn Davis, Dwaine Caraway, Jerry Allen, Linda Koop, Sheffie Kadane, Atkins, Hill and Rawlings voting for it. Jasso, Griggs, Hunt, Sandy Greyson, Monica Alonzo and Pauline Medrano opposed it.

"Unbelievable," said a woman in the crowd. Griggs' supporters left en masse, in what looked like a huff.

The map will be submitted to the Department of Justice by October 15. They will have 60 days to look at it and decide whether to accept it or send it back for more work.
My Voice Nation Help
71 comments
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Mountain Creek
Mountain Creek

All of this because of me?!?    

I am so humbled... working on my acceptance speech right now.  Despite all the work, this map can not stand.  Griggs did the right thing.  He's just fighting for facts, here.    

bbetzen
bbetzen

People died for the right to vote. This week that right was manipulated before our very eyes by 9 Dallas City Council members who did not understand their own published redistricting guideline: “A plan cannot have the effect of diluting racial, ethnic or language minorities." The map they approved failed to follow their own guidelines. (Google Dallas Redistricting 2011 for more.)

The map they approved has 6 districts out of 14, or 43%, that are majority white. Only 34% of the Dallas voting age population is white. That same approved map has only 4 out of the 14 districts, or 29%, wherein Hispanics are in the majority. Hispanics are 37% of the Dallas voting age population. Does it look like "diluting" is happening?

This week it is possible for the Council to correct this error. They can if they want to. If not, then the next move is up to the Justice Department, and to citizens who are preparing their case.

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

Your map only gave us 3 districts, so don't play like you had our best interest at heart.  Your map just packed as many black in those district as you could get. 

bbetzen
bbetzen

The four black districts in Dallas lost an average of 8 percentage points in black population over the past decade.  Is that loss pattern going to stop?  Unless you have good reasons to believe that it will stop, we need to plan forward for it.  Building a gerrymandered black district that is just barely above 50% is not good planning, especially if you are using the same geographic area of Dallas wherein the loss over the past decade happened.  There are other very solid alternatives which are the three STRONG black districts in wPlan03c by Rawlings.  None of those districts were "packed."  That is a gerrymandering term. Look at the black districts in the wPlan03c map at http://www.dallascityhall.com/... The strength that was there was simply used for compact and strong black districts.  The adopted map only had three black majority districts with an average of not quite 57% black voting age population.  They were weak. The wPlan03c map had three black majority districts with an average of 63% black voting age population.   Those wPlan03c districts are safe for the next decade.  The fourth winnable Black district can come from either one, or BOTH, of the minority opportunity districts in wPlan03c. The Black population in District 10 can easly be made the majority population in the district using population from both District 11 and 13. The Black population in District 9 can also be increased to be a winnable percentage. Why are you only planning for the next election?  Should we not also be planning for 5 years from now, and 10 years from now?   Being forced to build a gerrymandered district weakens our electorate and lessens voter participation.  The more compact we can build our districts the more voters we will have actually vote.  We must plan forward!  We are falling victim to strategies that have been used for decades to weaken minority voting and the strength of black politicians.It is long past time for that to stop!

Lacpac2011
Lacpac2011

the questions asked here about redistricting supports my argument that the public was misinformed, disinformed, and misguided about the Voting Rights Act. (maybe) The most compelling evidence of hanky panky is that the council knew or should have known the guidelines and deliberately ignored them

Under the 2006-2009 amendments to the VRA, local, state and federals political jurisdictions are not required to district proportionate to their ethnic population, in other words, Dallas was not required to configure 5 majority Hispanic districts based on  the voting age populatiion soley, because the census figures includes  non-citizens.  If Unfair Park  had referred to VRA instead of DOJ, they  could have concluded that only  CITIZENS who are 18 age and older have VOTING rights .  The Latinos and other immigrants who become Citizens  have language barriers to voting, so in high concentrations of ethnic groups, ballots and electoral signage must be in English and their native language.

The DOJ  does not use any predetermined demographic percentages at any time in their assessment, so why were we sent through Betzen's  mathematical exercise  to see how many Mexicans he could put in a compact figure using six lane highways as boundaries and black council representative for a freedman's cemetary. When came to the Africans in District 13 that should be in 11 or 3, Betzen said he thought 13 should be integrated????   The more time I spent  trying to explain the VRA  to Betzen , the more the Morning News fueled his attempt to be the great white savior to save the blacks from those horrific  gerrymandered districts that white folks drew for them . I explained at public hearing, that the current plan was drawn for   black folks, by black folks that have passed the justice departments for two DECADES so what are the folks in North Dallas complaining about???? since they got their districts like they want theirs. When the Mayor rejected my four district maps and proposed Betzen with three seats  the black and Hispanic leaders began to question what was Betzen's  agenda?  I assure you that Betzen will be  answering  these questions in a courtroom. 

Read my lips the VOTING RIGHTS ACT was enacted to protect AFRICAN AMERICANS because we were not considered citizens under the Consitution. Most of the  Mexicans in Texas are here by choice, we were captured like animals from our Motherland and brought here enslaved and only after a long hard road begining after Dred Scott  vs Sandford  in 1857 which lead to the adoption and ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment grounded in  the principles "equal protection " that all citizens in America enjoy to this date. So if you want to say that redistricting is about race, you are correct it is about race and about race and power.

The purpose of having blacks in office is to continue to protect our hard gained rights. The Voting Rights assures the blacks in Dallas in 2010,  the opportunity to elect  a representative on the council  of our choice in FOUR   districts and  no Manipulations by Unfair park, the Citizen Council, the Dallas Morning News or  Bill Betzen, or any attempts to silence my voice  will be able to take our rights away.

 As for the black trio plus one who lost sight of those who empowered them, they  will not be left off the hook for the shell game THEY played with the black community (in order to put or keep economic generators in their "districts" ) simply because of their last minute efforts to district  four strong black  seats.  I asked the Mayor  What is it ? "either you are  trying to make a fool outta the city or the blacks are making a fool outta of you by ill advising you.  These negroes are hollering on the black radios that the white man is trying to take a black seat from 14-1 and tricked the 14-1 Plaintifsf and the NAACP to call upon the black leaders to vote for 16 Amendment 1 and then  quickly abandoned it after I told the blacks that Amendment 1 offered by the black trio-one was the four black seats we already have that we have spent 20 years complaining of  How can 7 minorities and two white liberals let the white man take a seat away from them or can it be that the City Attorney is playing coy  to keep his job or is he sitting back and allowing the Negroes to make fools outta themselves.I understand he finally told them it would be a "flag" at the Justice Department if Dallas presented a map with less than four seats. I guess the Mayor told the trio you are not going to get away with blaming me and sent them to the woodshed and told them not to come back to City Hall without a map with four black districts,   uuuuggg and they wonder why the white man is  doing everything to keep this city out of the control of "minorities"  

The black trio plus one  just needs to be happy that lynching is outlawed. Instead of white hoods, they would have been lynched by black faces.

 Because we have demonstrated a twenty year history  of electing four black representatives from geographically cohesive neighborhoods  with 40% or more Black citizen populations, ANY map,  I don't care if it did Have the MAYOR's endorsement with less than four black seats and two Hispanics seats at 60% VAP would be retrogressive and would not pass without opposition. 

  

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

Griggs sent out a mass email but he didn't send it to his black constituents.  I supported him and would have supported him against Hills if they had ended up in the same district.  He didn't send the email to my neighborhood because he was giving us to Jasso and didn't want to hear what we had to say about it.

bbetzen
bbetzen

10-5-2011 was a terrible day at Dallas City Council! We showed the world a side of Dallas that was not pretty.

There is no evidence to indicate that what happened yesterday in the Dallas City Council was any "prettier" than the same redistricting processes 10 or 20 years ago, except for the critical factor that now this process happens in the open, the way it should.   In the long run it is certain this transparency will improve the process.  It will lessen gerrymandering. 

Voters hate gerrymandering. Almost all of the maps submitted by the public to the Dallas Redistricting Commission were more compact, with smaller average district perimeters, than the 35.60 mile average perimeter map that was approved yesterday. If you study the list of 21 maps submitted by the public, and summarized at http://dallasredistricting2011..., you will see that almost all the average perimeters were less than 35.6 miles.  These maps were almost all more compact than the map approved 10-5-11.

Gerrymandering will be less and less acceptable to the public as knowledge about gerrymandering grows. Strangely shaped districts are almost never misshapen so as to maximize minority representation. They are almost always formed only to help in the re-election of either an incumbent, or a person they want to follow them.  It is the reason for the legislative gridlock plaguing our nation!  Legislators fear no negative consequences from voters they have selected themselves during redistricting.  They know they will be re-elected no matter what they do or fail to do. 

Some could say that the obvious winners yesterday were the large majority of the Anglo council members who will probably keep their city council seats, something totally inconsistent with being only 28% of the population. But the price they, and all of us, pay is a less than efficiently functioning city government due to the unnecessary gerrymandering and misleading representation.  We all loose!

Others may claim that our Black Community is the winner. But, with the more compact wPlan03c Map presented by Rawlings, the Black Community would have had three much stronger Black majority districts.  The average Black voting age percentage in the three Black majority districts was over 6 percentage points higher on average in the wPlan03c map presented by Mayor Rawlings than in the map finally approved on 10-05-11.

The Rawlings wPlan03c map also has two coalition districts that could each have produced another Black council member.  With minor amendments, both of these coalition districts could have even been made significantly stronger to increase this "winnable" potential.

The Dallas Hispanic community, now the largest group in our city, is generally acknowledged as the most overt loosers in yesterday's process. They will do well to achieve 4 positions on the next Dallas City Council when, just by the numbers, they should comfortably have had 5 strong seats.

In summary it appears we now have an approved Dallas City Council Map, with over 40 unnecessary miles of boundary lines in it, that significantly weakens any potential we may have had for the minority composition of the next City Council to reflect that of our city.

Consequently thousands of us will be joining together in making valid claims to the Justice Department against the imposition of the Dallas City Council redistricting map selected on 10-5-2011.

As a small bit of the evidence to be submitted, there is a comparison of the approved 10-5-11 map with the wPlan03c map by Mayor Rawlings.  It shows what could be possible. It is posted at http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yUzw...

SayWhat?!
SayWhat?!

Delia Jasso had a big opportunity here and she completely utterly pulled a Romo.

Her new "customers" are mostly white voters in Kessler/Stevens/Winnetka. Had she been smart enough to say something like, "I am confident the voters in this new district will support me the same way they have supported Elba Garcia, Rafael Anchia and Jermoe Garza in the past. They are smart people and will appreciate my experience on the council and all I have done to help Bishop Arts grow and prosper."

Instead, she dissed them, basically calling them racists. Way to go Jasso!

In contrast, the only group Griggs might have angered were the African Americans, who won't make up much of the new district's voters at all.

Plus Griggs outrage at not being included looks a lot better than Jasso being a part of the meeting then not supporting the map she appears to have helped create.

Score: Griggs 1,000   Jasso: 0

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

I totally agree with you because I am one of the angered AA.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Honest question: are there statistics somewhere about the racial background of voters in the recent elections? I'm not talking about voting age population - I'm talking the people who cast a vote.I knew that the turnout was much higher among whites in places like Kessler and Stevens Park, but I didn't realize just how low it was among hispanics in the adjacent areas. I assume turnout among black voters is somewhere in between, given that they are significantly more organized and older, which increases turnout. My point is to ask whether current council reflects the voter turnout. If it in fact does, how do we go about making representation reflect population (as opposed to voter turnout) without serious gerrymandering?

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

District 1 has 56% registered hispanic voters, 74% voting age.  If blacks can and are expected to win districts with 45% black voting age population, you can't tell me that hispanics with 56% of the district,  can't beat 18% whites.

Mike
Mike

The voter turnout is atrocious in South Dallas, < 10% in the last election.  It's the dirty secret, exploited by these corrupt hacks we call political consultants.  The Observer is all over how northern funds keep southern leaders in line.  It only works because so few people vote.  If you could get 50% to vote, then who cares if some reverend gets 100 people to vote.  Now it is a very big deal and that reverend wants to get paid.

I find it pretty funny when people are complaining about the marginal impact of voter ID when 90% of the registered population can't be bothered to even try to vote.

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

Why does everybody talk about South Dallas?  It took more that 600 votes to win a seat in South Dallas but you have nothing to say about West Dallas.  Total voter turnout was a little over 1000 but the hispanics does not seem to be worried about District 6.  With the current registered blacks and whites, this district could easily become white or black.  I don't understand why no one is worried about this.

community leader
community leader

Why did us as citizens waste our precious time speaking only for three people to gerry-mander the process of the maps to their liking????  Thats why Dallas cannot grow, there is always racial issues, so what if there what if there is not four black seats? Has anyone looked lately COLOR DOES NOT MATTER. We have all forgotten its not about us it's about our city, take examples from FT. WORTH, FORGET ABOUT COLOR!!!!!!

Anon
Anon

Fort Worth is a small town managed by a few really wealthy families. it's not even close to facing the same issues as Dallas. because they are decent managers, they try to please everyone and things "work" because dissent is purchased.

Paul
Paul

Despite the best intentions of Ragsdale, Crenshaw and Williams, the 14-1 plan mandated by Judge Buchmeyer has institutionalized racism and segregation in Dallas politics.

One day, the city will be homogenous with regards as to where the "minorities' and "majorities" live.  When this happens, how will we design the council districts to match the ethnic makeup of Dallas?

I have not looked for the data, but does any one know what the population is in each district?

As far as I am concerned, 14-1 has given us the worst of ward politics with none of the benefits.

Ms Freedmans
Ms Freedmans

The map that the judge drew in 1991 was gerrymander!!!!!!!!!!! With District 2 and 14 that's when and where my African American Community of Freedmans Town got buildozed down, I can't say that the whites or Hispanics did it by themselves simpley , AA vote with tem all the time, so, we as a people are just srewed!!!!!!!! 14-1 was was not good for my community, it seems we have been sent backwards.

Mike
Mike

Data provides details and numbers are very even, within a few thousand just north of 82K.

We don't really have wards because the councilpersons don't really have any infrastructure.  They have an office at city hall and some money for postage and a calendar full of meetings.  It's because Mary Suhm is the real boss by the charter.  The council decides whom we vote for President and Ms. Suhm decides everything else in our municipal household.  Like everything else associated with Dallas, it's all about image, unrepented sins from 40 years ago, screaming and more rancor, but at street level it's samo samo for the last 3 decades.

Paul
Paul

Hi Mike --- have you seen that virtually every decision of consequence is bounced up to the council by the CM ... zoning cases are decided by the council members not P&Z ...

If being on the council were so inconsequential, then why the fuss?

Good to know that the districts are all relatively even in population.

As I said, we have the WORST of ward politics with NONE of the benefits.  We would be better off if we had true ward politics.

Justin Julian
Justin Julian

Once again, racism and racists dominate Dallas politics.  I hope you Dallas folks appreciate the fact that your voting districts are based strictly on who had the most people of their race on the council, and not any sort of common sense.

Mike
Mike

Dallas may be unique in that it has three racial groups, not two, with significant strength, the demographics within the minority groups are raidly changing, and it only has 14 districts.  Chicago and New York have 50.  One district changing makes a much bigger difference.  One other thing is that the councilpersons are really free agents.  They do not have a party structure to keep them in line.

Consequently our battles may seem more brutal.

Los Politico
Los Politico

Good points. I think it would make more sense if we created a new district for every 50,000 people. Population goes up-- more districts. 26 councilmembers and a mayor is no less stupid than what we have now.

Fredpmtncreek
Fredpmtncreek

Look at the numbers. Bottom line, as what was written by Jim S and shown in the census is that the SW Dallas and Mountain Creek area are responsible for most of the population growth in southern Dallas.not kessler park, not Stevens park, or any of those places in north oak cliff. And now we have our district.

Jasso said it forces people to run against each other. That's not one of the criteria they use.

bbetzen
bbetzen

There is a map that was distributed which is almost 99.8% accurate except for an amendment that was added after this Jasso/Atkins map was just barely approved by the Council last night. You can see it at http://dallasredistricting2011...   Hopefully within the next hour or so a fully accurate copy will be available.   I will be watching for the compactness numbers.  The terrible gerrymandering added to an already gerrymandered map will have pushed those numbers up.

Omar Jimenez
Omar Jimenez

I think now the city might have to be sued for this. It should of been Betzen's or something else. Not for the Council to do something all over agian.

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

You will not get elected.  Even if they put you in the Pleasant Grove district.  Nancy Bingham will win this seat.  You have a lot of learning to do.

tony
tony

Is it just me or is having the City Council remap their own districts the single worst idea you've ever heard?

Tom L (No, Not That L)
Tom L (No, Not That L)

One would think. But legislatures drawing their own districts has been happening since the dawn of the republic, so it's nothing new.

Guest
Guest

The seat that will be lost won't be "a white seat."  What is lost is the safety net that District 1 will be a Hispanic seat.  Griggs won't lose.  It will be Jasso.  He and Jasso will have to run against each other, and she can't beat him. 

elbueno
elbueno

Thats why she replied the way she did...whites vote more and are less likely to support a minority candidate.

In this map, she's toast simply because her hispanic constituents don't vote!This is awful, dirty politics...plain and simple.

Appalled
Appalled

And yet the map that won has her name on it.

Guest
Guest

She voted against it.  

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

She voted against it but she did help draft it.  She only voted against it after she made some phone calls.

yeahIsaidthat
yeahIsaidthat

Someone please explain.....all this talk about being obligated to have this many black, latino, white... Is this required by the Justice Dept? And does this mean that cities like NYC, Chicago, SF, LA have to have so many Asian, Middle Eastern reps on their cities council?Is this a dumb question?

Los Politico
Los Politico

DOJ approval is required in certain places with history of voter disenfranchisement. I believe it is required in places where less than 50% of people voted in 1964. It's mostly southern places, but also, like, new Hampshire.

So it's required in Atlanta, Houston, New Orleans, places like that. Fun fact: NYC only redistricts every 20 years.

Chris Danger
Chris Danger

I know all major cities have these issues, but it seems like Dallas always makes headlines for their sheer idiocy when attempting to do so. This is one of the major reasons I refused to vote for rawlings this past election cycle, as I knew something like this would happen. I think its past time for EVERYONE in Dallas of all stripes to finally rise up and put these "south dallas thugs" in their place IMHO.

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

Who the hell you calling  South Dallas thugs?  You sound like a thug yourself.

Fredpmtncreek
Fredpmtncreek

Well the Hispanics gained a seat...and it majesty sense . Griggs was fighting to keep a white seat and their population declined the most

Schutse had a good article on this a couple weeks ago.

Texaspainter
Texaspainter

Griggs was not fighting to keep a white seat. That's not how his brain works. All of his reasons were valid and he had the support of others who were not timid to side with him.

Hasanmary
Hasanmary

BS.  He was fighting to keep a white seat and was will to give us to Jasso.

Fredpmtncreek
Fredpmtncreek

That area shouldn't be included with mountain creek. And now It's not. I'm happy

Amy S.
Amy S.

And THAT is how they play politics up East. BOOM-YA.

Alan
Alan

If the Justice Department rejects it, do they draw up one of their own?  If Justice, or a court, draws a map on the legal principles rather than incumbent protection, do we end up back with Betzen?

Oak Cliff Res
Oak Cliff Res

No.  We end up with a map even worse!!! The city will never look the same, for all races...

Texaspainter
Texaspainter

They asked Tom Perkins the attorney that last night about a dozen times and he would not answer.

TP
TP

TP was scared to death, so much, his voice gave way. 

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...