Texas House Redistricting Plans, Do you still have the same REP?

Well, as I talked about in my post, Gerrymandering:  What is it and What can YOU do about it, it's Redistricting Season.  The Texas House just passed a redistricting plan for new state house districts.
Check out the redistricting maps to see the difference between current districts and district boundaries for the next legislative election, select the current state house districts map for the base plan and the HB 150 second reading and passed map for the overlay plan.

The district with the biggest boundary change is Speaker of the House Joe Straus' (R) District 121.  As I compared the boundary lines I first noticed that Trinity University is cut out of Joe Straus' District 121 and dropped down into Dem district 120 (Ruth McClendon Jones (D)) but then moves east to include Incarnate Word, a catholic university that is likely more conservative, also a lot of retired nuns and clergy live on the campus. East Terrill Hills was also dropped into District 120 and pretty much everything east of the Austin Hwy north of Rittiman Rd, and everything east of Randolph Blvd.

The weirdest new line drawn for District 121 sort of splits Devout Rd. then travels north through flood plain to Stahl Rd.  What's really bizarre about this line is some on the houses on Devout could potentially be split in half, thus not following any kind of boundary that makes sense.  Also, St. Helena's Catholic Church and the Archbishop's Chancery, just off Devout, didn't quite make it into the 121 boundary, HUH??  The line then continues on and cuts out everything south of Stahl and east of Judson, until it reaches Loop 1604 to capture the existing district until it reaches the railroad tracks that run from 1604 up to Wagon Rd and cuts out everything south of the tracks, I guess it was the wrong side.

The northern part of District 121 is pretty much the same until it gets to Cibolo Vista and cuts into the previous District 122, another Republican stronghold held by Lyle Larson.  Another odd boundary change has the northern boundary of 121 going along the TPC Pkwy until it hits Waterhole Ln in Cibolo Canyon, grabbing 2 houses and three vacant lots and then curving up to Marshall Rd, again I say, HUH??  Why not just continue on TPC Pkwy, turn right on Bulverde Rd and then left on Marshall, and avoid this oddity?  The abutting district is 122, such a solid Republican bastion that the new boundaries for 117 (John V Garza) and 121, the only other two Republican districts in Bexar County, cut into it, supposedly to take advantage of all those conservative voters.  District 121 then continues to take a pretty big chunk out of 122 as it travels south down US 281 to about Sandau Rd, where it starts to take over part of Democratic district 123 (Mike Villareal), encompassing the Airport and the Broadway area north of Loop 410.

Lyle Larson's District 122 seems to be the district to lose the most territory, only gaining a small portion of Republican district 117 north of Loop 1604.  This actually makes geographical sense, because before 117 sort of jutted up slightly into otherwise 122 territory.

Republican District 117 ceded territory inside Loop 1604 to Democratic Districts 116 (Trey Martinez Fischer), 125 (Joaquin Castro) and 124 (Joe Menendez) and territory inside Loop 410 to Dem District 118 (Joe Farias).  But then in south Bexar County, 117 takes over large swaths of the rural area of District 118.  Most rural areas tend to be more conservative.

Most of the Democrat districts remain about the same size territorially, but shift to the west and south to make room for Republican District 121.  By doing this, Republican lawmakers have made their existing districts more conservative, thus ensuring reelection.  Actually, making District 121 stronger is good for San Antonio, as long as Joe Straus remains Speaker of the House.  This gives San Antonio a lot more power in regional decisions.

Who Cares if there's a New Speaker of the Texas House?

Back after reconstruction, when Texans were spitting mad at the radical Republicans for taking over their government, as soon as the Democrats had the chance they held a constitutional convention.  The participants wanted to weaken the government as much as possible.  So they split the Governor's powers across five different offices, gave the power of choosing just about all judges to the people through election, and made the legislative session so short it would be hard to pass many bills.  But there are two offices that still remain very powerful because of their power over the two presiding legislative bodies, the Lt. Governor, who presides over the Senate, and the Speaker of the House.

The Speaker of the House is one of the most powerful offices in Texas and it is the only one not directly chosen by the People.   The Speaker is chosen by his/her fellow legislators.

So why is the Speaker So Powerful??
The Speaker of the house chooses all of the committee chairmen for the various house committees.  These committees decide whether, and in what form, a bill makes it to the House floor or whether it dies in committee.  Because the Speaker chooses these chairmen he usually has a fair amount of control over them and can, in some cases, dictate what bills he wants to see on the floor.  Also, if a contentious bill makes it to the floor anyway, the Speaker can decide not to recognize legislators who want to debate the bill, or not even allow it to come up for a vote. 
 
The current Speaker is Joe Strauss R-San Antonio.  Joe Strauss has only been speaker for one session when he wrested the position from the autocratic Tom Craddick R-Midland.  According to Fred Hill R-Dallas

under Tom Craddick, the system was set up to do what Tom Craddick wanted to do, and he
exercised his power to pass legislation that he was in favor of. If he wasn’t in favor of it, he would kill it.

 Of course Democrats wanted to be rid of Craddick, but there were also Republicans who chafed under his rule, some even contending that he was abusing his power.

... the fight was about Craddick having consolidated power with lobbyists and having used campaign contributions to maintain control in the House: "This is about the convergence of money and power and influence," Cook [R-Corsicana] said.

Tom Craddick at first was able to maintain control by not recognizing Republicans who wanted to oust him.

House Speaker Tom Craddick shut down repeated efforts by House members to remove him from his post during a dramatic midnight coup attempt Friday, refusing to recognize them for a procedural move that would set off a vote to oust him.

In an extraordinary late-night exchange before a packed House gallery, with most House members seated quietly at their desk, Fred Hill, R-Richardson, asked that the chamber be allowed to vote on Mr. Craddick's fate.

It was the climax of discontent that had been building for weeks – but Mr. Craddick, R-Midland, stymied it with carefully worded parliamentary rulings.

"The speaker's power of recognition on any matter can not be appealed," he said.

Craddick managed to maintain his position until the 2009 legislative session when Democrats came close to splitting the chamber with the Republicans (74 Ds to 76 Rs), in part due to voter unhappiness with Craddick.

Now that the Republicans have a strong majority in the House once again, Joe Strauss is in trouble because he won the Speaker position partly due to overwhelming support by the Democrats.  Part of the deal Strauss made with Democrats for their support was the handing out of some committee chairmanships to Dems. But at the time the Republican majority was only by 2 members.  Now that the Republicans have almost a Super Majority in the House, it stands to reason that the chairmanships should change hands, even under Strauss. 

Many Conservatives say Strauss is a Democrat in Republican clothing.  Some Republicans claim Strauss supported Democratic Candidates and that he is Pro-Choice.  But as with most campaign rhetoric, you have to separate the wheat from the chaff.  According to the Texas Ethics Commission, campaign contributions made by Strauss were to fellow Republicans.

Campaign finance reports from January 1 through Election Day show the names Joe Straus, Joe R Straus, Speaker Joe Straus, Joe R Straus III, Joe Strauss, and Joe R. Strauss gave $716,550 to Republican candidates and political groups.

Straus defended his efforts as “completely legal,” helping to “bring about the largest gains in the history of our party.”

It is considered part of the House speaker’s job to support the House members, in both their efforts to effectively represent their districts and in their efforts to be re-elected. It is considered bad form for a speaker to actively campaign against incumbents, even if they are in the opposing party.

In fact, former Speaker Tom Craddick , R-Midland, Straus’ direct predecessor, raised more than $2.5 million in campaign contributions in the election years during his three terms in the post. Some of Craddick’s contributions were through his speaker PAC, Stars Over Texas, which was formed to support House Republicans in their election bids.

Strauss may have raised money for his fellow Republican supporters, but he didn't raise money for any Democrats.

It is hard to say what Strauss' position is on Abortion, because he didn't vote at all on any of the recent Pro-Life legislation (2005, 2007,2009). Joe Strauss isn't even on the NARAL Abortion Issues list.  Neither did he try to obstruct votes on Pro-Life bills.  Votes for 3 Pro-Life bills were held in the House during his tenure.  If he is guilty of anything, it is by being Neutral in this contentious issue.

Two very conservative Republicans are challenging Strauss for the Speaker position, Warren Chisum R-Pampa and Ken Paxton R-McKinney.  They feel the strong Tea Party showing in Texas has given them the mandate to challenge Strauss.  Strauss is an establishment Republican, and as we all know by the recent election, the Tea Party hates the establishment. 


But, no matter who the Speaker of the House is, he will have to deal with a budget shortfall some are estimating at as high as $25 billion, not a job I would want to have!