Opinion

Texas’ image tarnished — again

Back in 2017 protesters gathered outside the John H. Wood, Jr. Federal Courthouse to speak out about how gerrymandering suppresses votes. Republicans are likely to control the redistricting process in 2021. Back in 2017 protesters gathered outside the John H. Wood, Jr. Federal Courthouse to speak out about how gerrymandering suppresses votes. Republicans are likely to control the redistricting process in 2021. Photo: JOHN DAVENPORT /San Antonio Express-News Photo: JOHN DAVENPORT /San Antonio Express-News Image 1 of / 1 Caption Close Texas’ image tarnished — again 1 / 1 Back to Gallery

Both sides could claim victory from a recent ruling by a panel of federal judges on whether Texas congressional districts were discriminatory. They could do the same on a ruling Thursday on state House maps. And, they, in fact, did.

The plaintiffs, those arguing that the U.S. House maps were unconstitutional, were pleased that the judges in San Antonio found that two congressional districts — 27 and 35 — were intentionally drawn to diminish minority clout. The state could crow about the judges’ failure to find the same of Congressional District 23, represented by GOP Rep. Will Hurd, and for districts in the Dallas and Houston areas.

And, out of Thursday’s ruling, the plaintiffs could point to nine state House districts the same panel of judges said were intentionally drawn to be discriminatory, and the GOP could point to Republican-controlled districts the judges left alone.

But there is a definitive loser in all this. That would be Texas voters. Through the decades they have been ill-served by a redistricting process whose only aim has been to ensure that whatever party is in power remains so. This has translated into systematic denial of adequate representation for the state’s minorities. And that means shortchanging all of us because the other casualty here is representative democracy.

Texans are doubly injured by Attorney General Ken Paxton’s decision to appeal both rulings rather than advising the governor to call legislators back into special session to redraw the offending maps.

Here’s how Texas gerrymandering works: Each census (in recent history) has found that the state’s minority population — particularly Latinos — boomed. This decade, this resulted in four new congressional districts for the state. Then those in charge of redistricting worked their software-driven magic to create as few districts as possible that elect minority or Democratic representatives, substantively one and the same because the state’s minorities tend to vote heavily Democratic. The redistricters do this by packing high-voting minorities into a few districts and shuffling traditionally low-voting minorities into other districts to create the facade of Voting Rights Act compliance.

The judges on Aug. 14 said this discrimination was transparently intentional for Congressional Districts 27 and 35, held respectively by GOP Rep. Blake Farenthold of Corpus Christi and Democratic Rep. Lloyd Doggett of San Antonio. It gave the state a deadline to advise the court how it would remedy this. Paxton’s decision to appeal was the state’s way of saying it’s not going to of its own accord.

On Thursday, the same panel of judges found “intentional discrimination” in the way the Legislature drew boundary lines in two House districts (54 and 55) in Bell County in Central Texas, three in Dallas (103, 104 and 105), two in Nueces County (32 and 34) and two in Tarrant County (90 and 93).

Any redrawing of these maps could have immense impact on the 2018 election because each recrafting of any individual district creates a ripple effect for neighboring districts. Theoretically, delays in redrawing these maps could cause a court-ordered delay in next year’s elections.

But, also at stake is whether Texas will again be required to have changes to voting law pre-approved by the federal government, as it had been before the Supreme Court gutted a key portion of the Voting Rights Act. The state’s history of discrimination in voting put it in this position. The rulings on congressional and state House districts might make pre-approval a requirement again.

Also looming is how the Supreme Court will rule on a Wisconsin case that tests the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering, as opposed to racial gerrymandering. Partisan gerrymandering is when redistricting occurs purely to achieve partisan advantage. Previous courts have said this is allowable. Racial gerrymandering — purposeful discrimination against minorities — has been viewed as unconstitutional where found.

But a ruling that partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional could, in effect, undo the racial gerrymandering in Texas since the state’s minorities vote heavily Democratic. In fact, Texas had argued that what it was doing was OK because it was done for partisan purposes.

Neither should be allowed. Instead, Texas should long ago have had an independent commission doing its redistricting as a few other states have done.

But here’s what should end, whatever the redistricting process. The kind of intentional discrimination that the judges said occurred in congressional and state House maps. It is yet another blot on Texas’ image — accentuated Wednesday when a federal judge in Corpus Christi ruled that the state’s updated voter ID law is still discriminatory. These are parts of a long history of voter discrimination. By appealing the redistricting and voter ID rulings, the state is saying that when it comes to who wields power, winning isn’t everything; it’s the only thing.