By Molly Hennessy-Fiske, Los Angeles Times –
LOS ANGELES — The Texas attorney general has reached an agreement with some minority groups on a plan aimed at resolving a stalemate over redistricting and minority representation in the state.
At least seven minority groups, including the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, agreed to the plan that they said minimizes changes to the original redistricting maps drafted by the state’s Republican-run Legislature.
Those maps were tossed out last year by a panel of federal judges, who ruled that the congressional and legislative district boundaries did not reflect the growth of the Latino population.
But last month the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the judges failed to incorporate state lawmakers’ proposals. The high court told the San Antonio-based panel to try again, starting with the lawmakers’ boundaries.
The latest mapping plan, unveiled Monday, would add two new congressional districts (around San Antonio and Dallas) and two state legislative districts (in El Paso and Houston) that lean Latino and, to a lesser extent, black.
“The proposed maps minimize changes to the redistricting plan passed by the Legislature and, as the U. S. Supreme Court required, makes changes only where necessary,” Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott said in a statement. “Even though these proposed interim maps aren’t fully supported by all interest groups, modifications have been incorporated based on requests made by all parties.”
Nina Perales, MALDEF’s lead attorney on redistricting, said that while the compromise maps were “not perfect” they “more fairly reflect the growing strength of Latino voters in Texas.”
Among those opposing the latest maps are officials at the state’s Democratic Party, the NAACP and Mexican American Legislative Caucus, who say the maps do not do enough to protect the interests of minority voters.
“The maps proposed by the attorney general today are a beginning point, not an end,” said Trey Martinez Fischer, who leads the Austin, Texas-based Mexican American Legislative Caucus, adding that his group “will not be forced into a resolution that fails to recognize the fundamental fact that Texas’ growth is minority growth.”
Redistricting became necessary after Texas was awarded four additional seats in Congress due to a population boom during the past decade, with 89 percent of the population growth due to minorities, mainly Latinos.
Due to the state’s history of voting rights violations, the Voting Rights Acts required officials to get approval or “preclearance” from the Department of Justice or a federal court in Washington before they could implement redistricting maps.
Critics of the newest maps say the additional districts included in the maps are offset by changes to other minority-leaning districts, and that groups who agreed to the plan were too quick to compromise.
“The attorney general is clearly terrified that the D.C. court will find that the state’s maps are discriminatory in both effect and intent,” Texas Democratic Party officials said in a Monday statement. “Until there’s a legitimate agreement among the parties, we support the court continuing to do its work.”
The next scheduled hearing on the maps is Feb. 15 in San Antonio, Perales said. The panel of judges could accept the state’s proposal, or come up with their own.
The Texas primary is scheduled for April 3.
If the judges produce new interim maps by mid-February, state party leaders have said the Texas primaries can be held April 17 or April 24. If not, the state’s primaries might be bumped to May 29.
