Democrats flee Texas to block Republican redistricting map backed by Trump
The redistricting, unveiled by Texas' majority Republicans last week and backed by President Donald Trump, would create five new Republican-leaning seats in the US House of Representatives.
Two-thirds of the 150-member Texas legislature must be present in order to hold a vote. Fifty-one Democratic lawmakers have fled, most of them to Illinois, denying Republicans the required quorum.
They said they plan to stay away for two weeks until the end of a special legislative session convened by Texas Republican Governor Greg Abbott.
The session is being held to approve the redistricting, as well as provide disaster relief for last month's deadly Texas floods and to ban THC, the active ingredient in marijuana.
Each of the 51 lawmakers could face a $500 (£380) fine for every day they are away, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, has threatened to have them arrested.He said on X the state should "use every tool at our disposal to hunt down those who think they are above the law"."Democrats in the Texas House who try and run away like cowards should be found, arrested, and brought back to the Capitol immediately," he wrote.In a statement, Texas Democrats defended the move."We're not walking out on our responsibilities," said state legislator and chairman of the Democratic caucus Gene Wu."We're walking out on a rigged system that refuses to listen to the people we represent."While Democrats nationwide have threatened tit-for-tat tactics, their options may be limited.In states where they handle the redistricting process, such as Illinois, New Mexico and Nevada, Democrats have already gerrymandered just as eagerly as Republicans.The most recent Illinois map, for example, received an F grade from the Princeton Gerrymandering Project because it was rated so politically unfair.But in other Democratic-controlled states, such as New York, California, Colorado and Washington, redistricting is handled by non-partisan, independent commissions, rather than the state legislatures.Texas Republicans currently hold 25 out of 38 congressional seats in the Lone Star State.They hope the new maps could increase that number to 30 - all in constituencies that Trump won last November by at least 10 points.Ahead of next year's midterm elections, Texas' redistricting could help pad the slender Republican majority in the US House, where Trump's party currently has 219 of 435 seats, while Democrats hold 212.The new map would include a redistricting of the Rio Grande Valley and combine two districts in the state capital of Austin currently held by Democrats.In northern Texas, the map would expand a district currently held by Democratic congresswoman Julie Johnson to include rural Republican strongholds.It would also redraw four Houston-area seats, including one held by Democratic congressman Al Green.Texas state legislator Todd Hunter, a Republican who sponsored the measure to redraw the map, called it "a good plan for Texas".This is the third time in the past few years that Democrats have fled Texas to deny Republicans a quorum.The party's legislators took off for to Washington DC in 2021 in an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to block the passage of new election rules.Texas Democrats also left for Oklahoma in 2003 in a bid to stop redistricting that Republicans eventually managed to get approved.States typically undergo redistricting every 10 years, when voting maps are redrawn to account for population changes.The most recent US Census was in 2020. Redrawing district lines in the middle of a decade is unusual. — BBC
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
4 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
US plan sees Hezbollah disarmed by year-end, Israeli withdrawal
The United States has presented Lebanon with a proposal for disarming Hezbollah by the end of the year, along with ending Israel's military operations in the country and the withdrawal of its troops from five positions in south Lebanon, according to copy of a Lebanese cabinet agenda reviewed by Reuters. The plan, submitted by US President Donald Trump's envoy to the region, Tom Barrack, and being discussed at a Lebanese cabinet meeting on Thursday, sets out the most detailed steps yet for disarming the Iran-backed Hezbollah, which has rejected mounting calls to disarm since last year's devastating war with Israel. The US State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Lebanese government ministers could not immediately be reached for comment. Hezbollah had no immediate comment on the proposal. Israel dealt major blows to Hezbollah in an offensive last year, the climax of a conflict that began in October 2023 when the Lebanese group opened fire at Israeli positions at the frontier, declaring support for its militant Palestinian ally Hamas at the start of the Gaza war. The US proposal aims to 'extend and stabilize' a ceasefire agreement between Lebanon and Israel brokered in November. 'The urgency of this proposal is underscored by the increasing number of complaints regarding Israeli violations of the current ceasefire, including airstrikes and cross-border operations, which risk triggering a collapse of the fragile status quo,' it said. Phase 1 of the plan requires the Beirut government to issue a decree within 15 days committing to Hezbollah's full disarmament by December 31, 2025. In this phase, Israel would also cease ground, air and sea military operations. Phase 2 requires Lebanon to begin implementing the disarmament plan within 60 days, with the government approving 'a detailed (Lebanese army) deployment plan to support the plan to bring all arms under the authority of the state.' This plan will specify disarmament targets. During Phase 2, Israel would begin withdrawing from positions it holds in south Lebanon and Lebanese prisoners held by Israel would be released in coordination with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). During Phase 3, within 90 days, Israel will withdraw from the final two of the five points it holds, and funding will be secured to initiate rubble removal in Lebanon and infrastructure rehabilitation in preparation for reconstruction. In Phase 4, within 120 days, Hezbollah's remaining heavy weapons must be dismantled, including missiles and drones. In Phase 4, the United States, Saudi Arabia, France, Qatar and other friendly states will organize an economic conference to support the Lebanese economy and reconstruction and to 'implement President Trump's vision for the return of Lebanon as a prosperous and viable country.'
Arab News
4 minutes ago
- Arab News
Harvard scientists say research could be set back years after funding freeze
CAMBRIDGE: Harvard University professor Alberto Ascherio's research is literally frozen. Collected from millions of US soldiers over two decades using millions of dollars from taxpayers, the epidemiology and nutrition scientist has blood samples stored in liquid nitrogen freezers within the university's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The samples are key to his award-winning research, which seeks a cure to multiple sclerosis and other neurodegenerative diseases. But for months, Ascherio has been unable to work with the samples because he lost $7 million in federal research funding, a casualty of Harvard's fight with the Trump administration. 'It's like we have been creating a state-of-the-art telescope to explore the universe, and now we don't have money to launch it,' said Ascherio. 'We built everything and now we are ready to use it to make a new discovery that could impact millions of people in the world and then, 'Poof. You're being cut off.'' Researchers laid off and science shelved The loss of an estimated $2.6 billion in federal funding at Harvard has meant that some of the world's most prominent researchers are laying off young researchers. They are shelving years or even decades of research, into everything from opioid addiction to cancer. And despite Harvard's lawsuits against the administration, and settlement talks between the warring parties, researchers are confronting the fact that some of their work may never resume. The funding cuts are part of a monthslong battle that the Trump administration has waged against some the country's top universities including Columbia, Brown and Northwestern. The administration has taken a particularly aggressive stance against Harvard, freezing funding after the country's oldest university rejected a series of government demands issued by a federal antisemitism task force. The government had demanded sweeping changes at Harvard related to campus protests, academics and admissions — meant to address government accusations that the university had become a hotbed of liberalism and tolerated anti-Jewish harassment. Research jeopardized, even if court case prevails Harvard responded by filing a federal lawsuit, accusing the Trump administration of waging a retaliation campaign against the university. In the lawsuit, it laid out reforms it had taken to address antisemitism but also vowed not to 'surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.' 'Make no mistake: Harvard rejects antisemitism and discrimination in all of its forms and is actively making structural reforms to eradicate antisemitism on campus,' the university said in its legal complaint. 'But rather than engage with Harvard regarding those ongoing efforts, the Government announced a sweeping freeze of funding for medical, scientific, technological, and other research that has nothing at all to do with antisemitism.' The Trump administration denies the cuts were made in retaliation, saying the grants were under review even before the demands were sent in April. It argues the government has wide discretion to cancel federal contracts for policy reasons. The funding cuts have left Harvard's research community in a state of shock, feeling as if they are being unfairly targeted in a fight has nothing to do with them. Some have been forced to shutter labs or scramble to find nongovernment funding to replace lost money. In May, Harvard announced that it would put up at least $250 million of its own money to continue research efforts, but university President Alan Garber warned of 'difficult decisions and sacrifices' ahead. Ascherio said the university was able to pull together funding to pay his researchers' salaries until next June. But he's still been left without resources needed to fund critical research tasks, like lab work. Even a year's delay can put his research back five years, he said. Knowledge lost in funding freeze 'It's really devastating,' agreed Rita Hamad, the director of the Social Policies for Health Equity Research Center at Harvard, who had three multiyear grants totaling $10 million canceled by the Trump administration. The grants funded research into the impact of school segregation on heart health, how pandemic-era policies in over 250 counties affected mental health, and the role of neighborhood factors in dementia. At the School of Public Health, where Hamad is based, 190 grants have been terminated, affecting roughly 130 scientists. 'Just thinking about all the knowledge that's not going to be gained or that is going to be actively lost,' Hamad said. She expects significant layoffs on her team if the funding freeze continues for a few more months. 'It's all just a mixture of frustration and anger and sadness all the time, every day.' John Quackenbush, a professor of computational biology and bioinformatics at the School of Public Health, has spent the past few months enduring cuts on multiple fronts. In April, a multimillion dollar grant was not renewed, jeopardizing a study into the role sex plays in disease. In May, he lost about $1.2 million in federal funding for in the coming year due to the Harvard freeze. Four departmental grants worth $24 million that funded training of doctoral students also were canceled as part of the fight with the Trump administration, Quackenbush said. 'I'm in a position where I have to really think about, 'Can I revive this research?'' he said. 'Can I restart these programs even if Harvard and the Trump administration reached some kind of settlement? If they do reach a settlement, how quickly can the funding be turned back on? Can it be turned back on?' The researchers all agreed that the funding cuts have little or nothing to do with the university's fight against antisemitism. Some, however, argue changes at Harvard were long overdue and pressure from the Trump administration was necessary. Bertha Madras, a Harvard psychobiologist who lost funding to create a free, parent-focused training to prevent teen opioid overdose and drug use, said she's happy to see the culling of what she called 'politically motivated social science studies.' White House pressure a good thing? Madras said pressure from the White House has catalyzed much-needed reform at the university, where several programs of study have 'really gone off the wall in terms of being shaped by orthodoxy that is not representative of the country as a whole.' But Madras, who served on the President's Commission on Opioids during Trump's first term, said holding scientists' research funding hostage as a bargaining chip doesn't make sense. 'I don't know if reform would have happened without the president of the United States pointing the bony finger at Harvard,' she said. 'But sacrificing science is problematic, and it's very worrisome because it is one of the major pillars of strength of the country.' Quackenbush and other Harvard researchers argue the cuts are part of a larger attack on science by the Trump administration that puts the country's reputation as the global research leader at risk. Support for students and post-doctoral fellows has been slashed, visas for foreign scholars threatened, and new guidelines and funding cuts at the NIH will make it much more difficult to get federal funding in the future, they said. It also will be difficult to replace federal funding with money from the private sector. 'We're all sort of moving toward this future in which this 80-year partnership between the government and the universities is going to be jeopardized,' Quackenbush said. 'We're going to face real challenges in continuing to lead the world in scientific excellence.'
Arab News
34 minutes ago
- Arab News
Pakistan says US doubling tariffs on India presents ‘strategic opening' for Islamabad
KARACHI: US President Donald Trump's move to double tariffs on Indian goods presents a 'strategic opening' for Islamabad to deepen its trade partnership with Washington, Pakistan's finance adviser Khurram Schehzad said on Thursday. Trump signed an executive order on Wednesday to place an additional 25 percent tariff on India on top of a 25 percent tariff that went into effect on Thursday. The move made India one of the most heavily taxed US trading partners in Asia. Pakistan, India's traditional arch-rival, has meanwhile improved its ties with Washington. Pakistan and the US finalized a trade agreement last week under which a 19 percent tariff was imposed on a wide range of Pakistani goods. The new rate marked a considerable reduction from the initially proposed 29 percent under a sweeping executive order signed by Trump. 'The US tariff hike on Indian goods presents a strategic opening for Pakistan,' Schehzad told Arab News. Washington's 19 percent tariff on Pakistani goods makes them less expensive than Indian goods, making Pakistan one of the countries with the lowest tariff profiles in the region. 'We see this as a moment of opportunity to deepen trade and economic ties with the United States,' the finance official added. The US is Pakistan's largest export destination, State Minister for Finance Bilal Azhar Kayani said on Thursday. He added that out of $32 billion of Pakistan's exports in the last fiscal year, $6 billion went to the US. Pakistan's tariff deal with the US took place at a time when Islamabad is pushing for an economic revival, buoyed by a $7 billion financial bailout package by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Pakistan has undertaken financial reforms over the past two years. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has tasked authorities to ensure Islamabad's $32 billion annual exports surge to over $60 billion by fiscal year 2028-29. Pakistan, having one of the lowest regional tariff profiles and also attracting a growing US investment interest, is positioned to expand its exports, particularly in textiles, pharmaceuticals, agriculture, technology, mining & minerals, and other value-added manufacturing, Schehzad said. 'This agreement will help us realize the long-term export targets we have set under Uraan Pakistan program,' he said, referring to the government's economic plan that aims to make Pakistan a trillion-dollar economy by 2035. 'MAJOR OBSTACLES' Pakistani businesspersons, especially those related to textiles, think otherwise. Atif Ikram Sheikh, president of the Federation of Pakistan Chamber of Commerce and Industry (FPCCI), said the US has imposed the lowest trade tariffs in the region on Pakistan, which Islamabad should take full advantage of. However, he said higher production costs in Pakistan could neutralize this benefit. 'Taxes and high electricity and gas prices for the industry are major obstacles to taking advantage of low tariffs,' Sheikh said. The textile industry is Pakistan's biggest foreign exchange earner, fetching $18 billion during the last fiscal year, most of which came from the US. Kamran Arshad, chairman of the All Pakistan Textile Mills Association (APTMA), was also unsure whether the new trade agreement with the US would benefit Pakistan significantly. 'The costly power and high interest rates would not allow us to compete (in the global textile market) at this 19 percent tariff,' Arshad told Arab News. Last week, Pakistan's central bank kept the policy rate unchanged at 11 percent, adopting a cautious approach. According to the APTMA, Pakistan has a higher interest rate of 11 percent, compared to India's 5.5 percent, Bangladesh's 10 percent, Vietnam's 4.5 percent, Sri Lanka's 7.75 percent, Indonesia's 5.25 percent and Cambodia's 3 percent. The power tariff for industries in Pakistan, meanwhile, stands at $0.16 kilowatt per hour as compared to $0.096 in India, $0.10 in Bangladesh, $0.08 in Vietnam, $0.06 in Sri Lanka, $0.07 in Indonesia and $0.135 in Cambodia, the data shows. Pakistani businesses are paying 29 percent corporate income tax and as much as 10 percent super tax compared to the 27.5 percent preferential taxes their competitors from India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Cambodia are paying on incomes. 'Pakistan's corporate tax, policy rate, labor costs, electricity rate put us at a disadvantage with India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Sri Lanka and Indonesia,' Arshad noted. Shankar Talreja, head of research at Karachi-based brokerage firm Topline Securities, said the US is a 'big market' for pharmaceuticals, textiles and food products. 'If Pakistan gets preferential treatment in the US market, this will help our companies grow further,' he said.
