Texas lawmakers launch redistricting hearings amid political and community concerns
The effort to redraw the congressional boundaries could have major consequences on local, state and national politics.
"All eyes are on Texas right now," said Michael Li, a redistricting expert at New York University's Brennan Center for Justice.
When Gov. Greg Abbott called this special session, he said the current congressional maps needed to be changed because of constitutional concerns raised by the U.S. Department of Justice.
The DOJ sent a letter to the governor earlier this month, saying four of the state's Democratic-controlled districts, including District 33 – which covers parents of Tarrant and Dallas counties and is currently represented by Marc Veasey, are illegal because of racial gerrymandering.
However, Democrats believe that's not the real reason for the unusual mid-decade redistricting effort.
Texas Republicans are facing pressure from President Donald Trump to help maintain the GOP's control of the U.S House.
"It is very unprecedented that you would have the president of the United States step in in this way and sort of command a redrawing the map," Li said.
Republicans currently have 25 of the 38 congressional seats in Texas. Mr. Trump has said he wants five more ahead of next year's midterm elections.
The Republican-dominated state legislature finalized the existing maps just four years ago, in 2021, after the release of the 2020 census data.
"It's very unusual for a party that they got exactly what it wanted in redistricting, go back and redo the maps, potentially to make them better for them, but also potentially creating a lot of risk that it backfires on them," said Li.
He believes what Texas Republicans are doing is a "brazen power play" that will lead to a legal fight.
"It's very hard to get more Republican seats in Texas without aggressively targeting the power of communities of color who last year provided 100% of the growth, and about 98% of the growth since the 2020 census," said Li.
The president and CEO of the Dallas Black Chamber of Commerce, Harrison Blair, has been fielding calls from business owners who are worried about the consequences of redistricting.
"They're telling me right now they don't want to be redistricted," Blaid said. "It would be like driving a new freeway or a train track through the middle of an existing community. It harms the businesses. It harms our ability to have a voice."
Blair is encouraging members to send letters, attend the public hearings on this issue, or call their state lawmakers.
"Texas marches to the beat of its own drum," said Blair. "But right now it seems like the president is running what's happening in Texas in this special session out of DC. So it's disconcerting to say the least."
State lawmakers haven't release any proposed maps yet, so it's not clear which districts could be impacted.
"The problem is when you're redrawing the lines in one place, it's very hard to do so without affecting surrounding communities," said Veronikah Warms, the voting rights policy attorney at the Texas Civil Rights Project. "It can have a ripple effect that goes out through the entire state."
In this case, it could change who represents you in Congress and what policies they advocate for.
"So I would encourage you, to tell lawmakers about it," Warms said. "Tell them not to put you in with a community that does not have the same interests and priorities and values that you do because otherwise your representation in crafting federal law is going to be not what it should be. It won't be fair."
Saturday, July 26 in Houston
Monday, July 28 in Arlington
All testimony in person will be limited to two minutes per witness, and the duration of the public testimony portion of hearing will be limited to five hours.
Texas residents who wish to electronically submit comments related to congressional redistricting without testifying in person can do so until the hearing is adjourned by clicking here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
24 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Cincinnati officials discuss city crime and widespread response to video of violent fight
Days after a brawl that injured six people in Cincinnati, the mayor and other city leaders said Friday they would beef up law enforcement patrols but criticized how the much-shared video of the fight had portrayed the city in what they see as an unfair and cynical light. 'Let me be clear, there is no place for violent crime in Cincinnati, whether it's a fight or gun violence,' Mayor Aftab Pureval said. 'We will pursue those responsible and we will hold them accountable no matter who they are.' Video of the fight quickly went viral, and conservatives leaders and influencers seized on the brawl to point out what they see as lawless urban areas in America. Those voices included Vice President JD Vance, Ohio gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and the vice president's half brother, Cory Bowman, who is running to be mayor of Cincinnati. A video of the fight shows a crowd milling about before several people start throwing punches. One man falls to the ground and is repeatedly punched and kicked by bystanders. Another woman is punched in the face and falls to the ground, lying motionless before another woman helps her. She can be seeing bleeding from the mouth. The mayor acknowledged on Friday the perception remained that the city was dangerous, but he pointed out that data showed the violent crime was declining in the city. Pureval also said 'there's a concerning increase in burglaries and breaking and entering, and shootings in some specific areas' without providing the data. 'Currently too many Cincinnatians don't feel safe,' he said. 'All of us, especially me, are clear-eyed and working urgently to fix that.' Pureval said he was working with Republican Gov. Mike DeWine to deploy state highway patrol to work highways into the city, which should free up more police officers. He also said police units like SWAT and the Civil Disturbance Response Team will expand their reach in the city. Cincinnati Police Chief Teresa Theetge said five men and one woman 'were subjected to unimaginable physical violence' in the brawl. She didn't identify them. She also said six people have been charged with assault and rioting for playing a role in the brawl, three of whom are in custody. 'This remains an open investigation, and I want to assure you, we will not stop until justice is finally served,' she told reporters, adding that they plan to release footage of the brawl, including body camera footage next week. But several speakers, including a pastor and a council member, talked about how the fight had been racialized and several blamed conservative Republicans for fueling that narrative. 'We would not be here and this will not be national news if this was a group of Black people that jumped on other Black people,' Pastor Damon Lynch, III told reporters. 'Obviously it's national news because it's been racialized.' Lynch said critics were focused on the Black participants but haven't mentioned a white man who, he says, could be seen in a video of the brawl slapping a Black man during the fight. 'Nobody's asking why didn't he just walk away?" Lynch said. Council Member Scotty Johnson also criticized the media for playing the brawl on a loop all week. 'What role do you play in quoting misdirected national leaders talking about a city that is on the right track, but they are doing everything they can to try take us off that track,' Johnson said. Toward the end of the press conference, a reporter asked Pureval how he would deal with the racial tensions in the city that have been exacerbated by this brawl. 'It's overt racial tensions that have been claimed by irresponsible leaders, who have unfortunately cynically tried to take advantage of this awful fight and try and divide us,' he said, noting that Cincinnati 'has a long history of being, on the on the very front foot of racial justice' including as a stop on the Underground Railroad.
New York Times
25 minutes ago
- New York Times
Senate Passes Its First Spending Bills, but Battles Lie Ahead
The Senate on Friday overwhelmingly passed the first of its spending bills for the coming year, with bipartisan approval of measures to fund military construction projects, veterans and agriculture programs and legislative branch agencies. But the broad agreement over the $506 billion package of bills, typically the least controversial of the annual federal spending measures, masked a bitter fight in Congress over how to fund the government past a Sept. 30 shutdown deadline. Senators pushed through the legislation after several intense days of haggling as part of an agreement to allow the chamber to make progress on funding the government before senators leave Washington for a monthlong summer recess. 'We are on the verge of an accomplishment that we have not done since 2018 — and that is pass appropriation bills across the Senate floor prior to the August recess,' Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, said on the floor. Still, debate over the package hinted at the bigger spending challenges that lie ahead. Democrats, furious about the White House's efforts to subvert Congress's power in the purse, are wary of striking spending deals with Republicans when President Trump and his team have signaled they intend to continue ignoring or defying lawmakers' spending dictates, even those enacted into law. And Republicans are fighting among themselves over how closely to hew to the Trump administration's spending targets. The package approved on Friday night would provide $452 billion for veterans programs, $300 billion of it mandatory spending to fund veterans benefits; $19.8 billion for military construction and family housing projects; $27.1 billion for agricultural programs; and $7.1 billion for the operations of Congress and legislative agencies. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
36 minutes ago
5 years after Ohio's $60M bribery scandal, critics say more could be done to prevent a repeat
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Five years after a $60 million bribery scheme funded by FirstEnergy Corp. came to light in Ohio, expert observers say the resulting prosecutions, lawsuits, penalties and legislation haven't led to enough change and accountability to prevent politicians and corporate executives from cutting similar deals in the future. The scheme — whose prospective $2 billion-plus pricetag to consumers makes it the largest infrastructure scandal in U.S. history — surfaced with the stunning arrests of a powerful Republican state lawmaker and four associates on July 21, 2020. That lawmaker, former House Speaker Larry Householder, is serving 20 years in federal prison for masterminding the racketeering operation at the center of the scandal. Jurors agreed with prosecutors that money that changed hands wasn't everyday political giving, but an elaborate secret scheme orchestrated by Householder to elect political allies, become the House speaker, pass a $1 billion nuclear bailout law in House Bill 6 and crush a repeal effort. One of the dark money groups Householder used also pleaded guilty to racketeering. Householder and a former lobbyist have unsuccessfully challenged their convictions. Two of the arrested associates pleaded guilty, and the other died by suicide. Any hope that the convictions would have clarified federal law around 501(c)4 nonprofit 'dark money' groups or prompted new restrictions on those hasn't materialized, said former U.S. Attorney David DeVillers, who led the initial investigation. 'I think it's actually worse than it was before,' he said. 'Nationally, you have both Democrats and Republicans using these, so there's no political will to do anything about it.' Indeed, a study released in May by the Brennan Center for Justice found that dark money unleashed by the 2010 Citizens United decision hit a record high of $1.9 billion in 2024 federal races, nearly double the $1 billion spent in 2020. The vast majority of money from undisclosed donors raised into dark money accounts now goes to super PACs, providing them a way to skirt a requirement that they make their donors public, the study found. DeVillers said one positive result of the scandal is that Ohio lawmakers appear genuinely concerned about avoiding quid pro quos, real or perceived, between them and their political contributors. Anti-corruption legislation perennially introduced by Ohio Democrats since the scandal broke has gone nowhere in the GOP-dominated Legislature. Republican legislative leaders have said it is outside their authority to amend federal campaign finance law. The U.S. Attorney's office declined to discuss the investigation because prosecutions remain ongoing. Two fired FirstEnergy executives have pleaded not guilty on related state and federal charges and await trial. Former Public Utilities Commission of Ohio Chairman Samuel Randazzo, to whom FirstEnergy admitted giving a $4.3 million bribe in exchange for regulatory favors, had faced both federal and state charges. He died by suicide after pleading not guilty. Akron-based FirstEnergy — a $23 billion Fortune 500 company with 6 million customers in five states — admitted using dark money groups to bankroll Householder's ascendance in exchange for passage of the bailout bill. It agreed to pay $230 million and meet other conditions to avoid prosecution, and faced other sanctions, including a $100 million civil penalty by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. But FirstEnergy hasn't yet faced consequences from the state regulator. 'They never actually got penalized by regulators at the PUCO level,' said Ohio Consumers' Counsel Maureen Willis, the lawyer for Ohio utility customers. Testimony in four PUCO proceedings stemming from the scandal finally began last month after the cases were delayed for nearly two years, in part at the request of the Justice Department. They're intended to determine whether FirstEnergy used money for bribes that was meant for grid modernization and whether it improperly comingled money from its different corporate entities. FirstEnergy spokeperson Jennifer Young said it invested $4 billion in grid upgrades in 2024 and plans to spend a total of $28 billion through 2029. Young said FirstEnergy has redesigned its organizational structure, established a dedicated ethics and compliance office, overhauled the company's political activity and lobbying practices and strengthened other corporate governance and oversight practices. 'FirstEnergy is a far different company today than it was five years ago,' she said. The PUCO also made changes in response to the scandal. Chair Jenifer French told state lawmakers that ethics training has been enhanced, staff lawyers and the administrative law judges who hear cases now report to different directors to ensure legal independence, and she never takes a meeting alone. Ashley Brown, a retired executive director of the Harvard Electricity Policy Group who previously served as a PUCO commissioner, said the commission is the only state entity with the power to order FirstEnergy to return tainted cash — including the bribe money — to customers. That largely hasn't happened. He said the Ohio commission had vast power to hold FirstEnergy accountable for its misdeeds but hasn't conducted its own management audit of the energy giant, demanded an overhaul of FirstEnergy's corporate board or pressed for public release of FirstEnergy's own internal investigation of the scandal, whose findings remain a mystery. Shareholders won some accountability measures as part of a $180 million settlement in 2022, but they continue to fight in court for release of the investigation. Willis does, too. 'How do you allow a utility to operate a vast criminal conspiracy within the utility (with) consumer dollars, and you don't even look at what went wrong?' Brown said. PUCO spokesperson Matt Schilling reiterated that the commission's probes are ongoing. He said the panel has vowed to take its proceedings 'wherever the facts lead.' The portion of HB 6 that bailed out two FirstEnergy-affiliated nuclear plants was repealed in 2021, and $26 million was refunded to customers. The scandal investigation revealed that other power distribution companies got a lucrative payout of their own added to the bill in exchange for their buy-in: subsidies for two unprofitable Cold War-era coal plants. It wasn't until April that a law was passed repealing those subsidies. Until that takes effect Aug. 14, the charges cost Ohio ratepayers $445,679 a day — and it's unclear if or when they'll get that money back. A ticker on Willis' website puts the total they've paid at more than $500 million and counting.
