Posted on 12/10/2011 2:12:04 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Supreme Court to settle election district scuffle in Texas as a map signed by Rick Perry is accused of diluting minority voting power
Texas’ March primary will likely be delayed after the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday blocked the use of state legislative and congressional district maps that were drawn by federal judges.
The court issued a brief order late Friday that applies to electoral maps drawn by federal judges in San Antonio for the Texas Legislature and Congress that would have ensured minorities made up the majority in three additional Texas congressional districts.
The justices said they will hear arguments on January 9th, likely delaying the scheduled March voting primaries that would use the maps, to the end of May.
The judges issued the new maps for the 2012 election in Texas after a lawsuit was filed in San Antonio over redistricting maps drawn by the GOP-led Legislature.
The maps were to remain in place until the lawsuit was resolved.
The Supreme Court’s order brings to a halt filing for legislative and congressional primary elections that began November 28.
....In the second of two separate court cases in the redistricting fight, a federal court in Washington has refused to approve the Legislature’s redistricting plan without a trial, agreeing with the Justice Department that there was sufficient evidence to question whether it hurt minority representation.
Like other states with a history of racial discrimination, Texas can’t implement new maps or other changes to voting practices without federal approval under the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
The state asked a court in Washington to sign off on the maps, but those judges refused.
That case is continuing......
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I heard lord dog nuts and Donna frizzy head Howard are both upset about the new maps.
Executive power means much more than appointees. It also requires being well-informed enough to make a competent executive decision.
Nothing has changed in Texas to alter the reality that the Lt. Governor still has more real political power.
Thank you for posting Rick Perry’s reaction! Glad someone found it.
Perry isn’t tearing down others. Our fellow FReepers are doing that all by themselves.
Yep, Perry has made some 6,000 or so appointments over his tenure to the many ruling bodies of Texas. I’d bet that when the governors calls those appointees answer with a ‘yes sir governor’.
Take your anti-Perry stuff over to the site supporting your candidate.
Oh, wait, there isn’t any and apparently you don’t have a candidate.
That’s a stupid little argument you got going anyway.
Rick Perry would appoint great judges to the Supreme Court and that’s very important.
No doubt, Perry has a long way to rise. I too find the intense focus on Perry at FR interesting.
I bet they are! Here in Volente we still have a Dan Neil sign up! The rain knocked it down a little, I should pull over and re-right it today.
Hey, President Perry would have to wait for two vacancies to open up on the Supreme Court before he could nominate someone, since he thinks there are only eight justices on the court.
That axe you’ve got to grind needs sharpening.
Are you saying basically that in 11 years as governor, Rick Perry did something you didn’t like?
Did he hurt your little feelings.
And I have zero respect for anyone who comes on a Perry thread and calls their little posse of Perry haters to help them.
Fight your own battles, FM
And by the way your ping list has lost its zing.
They ain’t comin’
Funny, I don't see you chastising your fellow Perry supporters when they bash the other candidates on FR.
I love the selective application of the 11th Commandment.
It smells like ... hypocrisy.
Oh, they HAVE candidates: they’re just ashamed to type the name of their candidate for some reason.
I use the anti-Perry freepers as sort of an internal poll. When they get real loud, it tells me Perry’s making progress.
When they refuse to give any sort of kudos to Perry, it tells me they don’t want conservative solutions to our nation’s dire and lethal problems facing it.
If you’re talking about CW, I think she has posted some of her doubts about Newt Gingrich.
But if you go to a Newt thread, about 80% of the posters have serious doubts about Newt and the other 20% are only for him because they think he can beat Obama.
I don’t object to people coming on a Perry thread if they have serious questions or doubts about the particular subject we are discussing. In this case, it is the ridiculous judge’s ruling to try to gerrymander voting districts in Texas that were set by the legislature because he doesn’t think they favor minority groups enough.
I’ve only seen one person here address that issue and he is both wrong and obsessed.
Ah, so when CW or shield bashes Newt, it's raising doubts.
But let someone bash Perry, and they are obsessed.
Nice double standard.
Well certainly executive power is about more than making appointments and directing said appointees, but it also consists of more than legislated duties.
From: http://texaspolitics.laits.utexas.edu/1_2_0.html
The Texas Governor
As discussions in the 2000 national election revealed, the design of the Texas Constitution denies the governor the opportunity to exercise powers held by governors in many other states. Unlike the U.S. President, who with Senate approval appoints his cabinet, the Texas Governor must share executive power with other executive officers. But despite having fewer resources and more limitations, modern governors can be successful in implementing their priorities and policies.
The constitutional and historical contexts that have shaped their office require governors to reconcile the public expectation of leadership with limited institutional powers. Scholars of the U.S. presidency often make the argument that the president’s chief power is the power to persuade - to use the attention automatically paid the president to create what Teddy Roosevelt called a bully pulpit to build support for their priorities. It is even more crucial for the Texas Governor to exercise this kind of power. With limited real executive power placed directly in the governor’s hands, those who occupy the governor’s mansion in Austin must find indirect and informal ways to build on their limited formal powers. Governors must be able to utilize their public position as a figurehead - as the symbolic leader the public most readily identifies with state government - to influence politics and policy. Using personality and image in public media to build and maintain the loyalty of both voters and powerful political elites is the key to exercising this influence.
There are different ways of sorting out just what powers the governor possesses and how to think about them. Though the Governor exercises executive powers, some observers note that governors also influence (or attempt to influence) legislative and judicial power. We can also think about the Governor in terms of roles he or she plays - chief executive, chief legislator, commander-in-chief, head of state, party leader, and popular figurehead. This enables one to think about the different hats that governors must wear in performing a multidimensional job. One can also think of the Governor in terms of the formal and informal powers that governors can exercise. Formal powers are those that are clearly defined in the state constitution and in state laws. Informal powers develop from a mixture of interpretation, tradition, and the more or less implicit capabilities that come with being the Governor.
However one chooses to sort through the job of being Governor, the key objectives should be to understand these limits, to understand how effective governors effectively govern through and around those limits, and to use this understanding to make thoughtful judgments about how governors perform their duties. To accomplish this, we start by looking at the formal institutional rules that structure the governor’s job
Explain the difference between CW impugning a poster and the poster impugning CW.
Sometimes these fine points are hard to understand.
By the way, dirtboy, insulting people won’t make friends for whatever candidate you’re selling yourself out for.
Unless it’s Bachmann or Santorum, I think you’d better watch it.
I didn’t say they are all obsessed. The one particular poster I was referring to is obsessed about a particular judicial appointment.
Some of the anti-Perry posters have nothing of substance to say, so I can only assume that they are just obsessed with being hateful and attacking Perry.
I’ve read some long Newt threads and most of the people who post doubts and questions about Newt have valid reasons for doing so.
I don’t do that anymore as I’ve decided not to bash other candidates. The circular firing squad should be disbanded.
If Newt wins the primary, I will support him with all my heart and a little of my money.
In the meantime, I support a better man.
You mean like you did the other day in calling the freepers I pinged 'idiots'?
Once again, I never see you offering that advice to CW when she bashes other candidates.
So pardon me if I doubt your sincerity in offering it here.
Later, I gotta go stand in line at the Post Office.
Give it up, rintense.
In the heat of the moment I used an unfortunate term.
As you recall, many posters had more apt terms, some of them hilarious.
I noticed you pinged the mods hoping I would get a stern note from somebody, which is pretty funny in view of some of the things you’ve said.
I did not get a note. Jim, himself, was on that thread and we had an amicable discussion about Perry.
I don’t think he would respect a goon squad (oops) being summoned to threads supporting a good, conservative man that he likes himself.
I don’t know what’s happened to you, but it’s pretty dang sad.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.