By J. Lyn Carl, GalleryWatch.com
Austin, TX – Standing next to a tall stack of papers and measuring them with a ruler, Rep. Mike Villarreal (D-San Antonio) said the 12-inch stack represents the number of citizens who voiced their opposition to the Texas Legislature taking up the issue of congressional redistricting. Next to the 12-inch stall stack was a one-inch stack Villarreal said represents those who were in favor of taking up the issue. That alone is cause to recommit the legislation, HB 3, back to a House committee, he said on the House floor Monday.
Villarreal was one of numerous Democratic members of the House who stood to express their opposition to the legislation that passed out of the House Redistricting Committee on Saturday and came to the floor for debate Monday. Democrat after Democrat spoke against the bill, with some urging their colleagues in the Senate to block the bill from coming up in that chamber. When the dust settled, all of the proposed amendments to the bill had been tabled and the bill was passed to third reading by an 84-61-2 vote.
The vote came shortly before midnight, with Speaker Tom Craddick then adjourning the House until 12:01 a.m. so the bill could be taken up on third reading, where it passed by an 83-62-2. The one-vote change was due to Craddick casting an "aye" vote. The House then adjourned until 10 a.m. Thursday.
"This is a process that has been riddled with irregularities," said Villarreal of the committee process regarding HB 3, asking that the House send the bill back to committee "to cleanse it."
He said Texans "expect their opinion to count" but that taking up this bill shows their opinion is not as important as that of the members of the legislature. He agreed with Rep. Eliot Naishtat (D-Austin) that Texas citizens would then view the committee process as a "sham" and that the legislature is seeking to put its own interests over that of the people of Texas.
Thus, said Villarreal, if the problem is not corrected on the House floor, "it will be corrected at the polls."
Committee substitute author Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherford) continued to assert that the bill had a fair hearing, that field hearings were conducted fairly and that the legislature is bound by law to draw congressional lines.
"The map you have before you today respects communities of interest ? cities, counties, economic centers," said King. He said he went to "great extremes" to honor the spirit and the letter of the law regarding the Voting Rights Act as he drew congressional lines. He called the proposal a "fair and equitable map for Texas" that clearly recognizes voting patterns in the state.
Rep. Richard Raymond (D-Laredo) asked King if there was not an "overwhelming public sentiment" at recent public hearings asking that the legislature not take up congressional redistricting. King only conceded that a number of persons at the hearing testified against the proposal.
After Raymond repeatedly brought up what occurred in the hearings, King said "Whatever occurred in the committees is in the record, and the record speaks for itself," hoping to steer Raymond to consideration of the substitute before the House rather than delving into what happened in the field hearings.
King did note there was a great deal of organization by the Democratic Party that resulted in bussing of individuals to some field hearings to increase the number of persons in opposition. "We're here today...this is the map that is the result of the hearing process, and I'd be glad to answer any questions about this map and what it constitutes. We followed the law in both spirit and in letter."
Raymond said "not a single citizen in Texas was allowed to testify on the current proposal," noting that the current bill was adopted on Saturday.
Reps. Jim Dunnam (D-Waco) and Ruth Jones McClendon (D-Dallas) claimed there were witnesses who filled out witness affirmation cards and were not allowed to testify at the Saturday hearing. "On Saturday, another map was produced and there were witnesses in the audience who came to testify and they were not allowed to give testimony on the latest map," said McClendon. "The problem is that the committee record does not show (that) because the witnesses were never called up my Mr. (Joe) Crabb (committee chair) to testify."
Rep. Rick Noriega (D-Houston) continued the exchange regarding public testimony on the map revealed Saturday. "On July 5, there's not anyone - anyone - either for or against that gave testimony on this new product," he said.
"Didn't the court approve the congressional maps for Texas already?" asked Rep. Al Edwards (D-Houston).
King said the court was given instructions by the attorney general's office to "maintain all incumbencies and draw in two additional districts." The remainder was a "recodification" of the existing map.
Rep. Robby Cook (D-Eagle Lake) pointed out that not a single member of the Redistricting Committee is from a rural area of the state, and once again voiced his opposition to the bill because of the negative impact he said it would have on rural areas.
King said sending the bill back to committee is "unnecessary." Time is short, he said, and delaying action on the bill would likely not change a single House member's vote.
Villarreal's motion to recommit the bill to committee was tabled.
Dunnam then made a motion to postpone consideration until 10 a.m. Thursday. He said many are probably seeing the map for the first time because King said last Thursday there would be no more changes to the map. Then a "significantly different" map appeared and was voted out of committee on Saturday.
"What is the rush?" asked Dunnam, noting the Senate is still holding hearings and taking testimony from the public. "There's no reason for us to act on this today. The people deserve to have a few days to have input."
Before a vote on the motion to postpone could occur, Rep. Joe Deshotel (D-Beaumont) offered a point of order. It was overruled
The House then voted to table Dunnam's motion to postpone consideration of the bill.
A series of amendments were brought to the floor, all of which were tabled. Rep. Ruth Jones McClendon (D-Dallas) offered a complete committee substitute, which she identified as the current plan. She said it is a legal plan that will not require court scrutiny and millions of dollars to defend in court. "If you really want a plan that's fair to both political parties, the current plan has 20 strong Republican opportunity districts - 62.5 percent of the congresssional seats," she said, which is far more than the 58 percent of Texas voters who voted for Republican congressional candidates in recent elections. She said it also protects the voting rights of Hispanics and African-Americans in Texas. It provides 11 minority opportunity districts, she said of the current plan.
"If you want a plan supported by the vast majority of Texans, the current plan is the one you should support," said McClendon.
The McClendon amendment was tabled.
Numerous Democratic members of the House spoke against the bill before the final vote was taken. Rural members said it would destroy rural districts and leave them without representation. Minority members said it would destroy the voting abilities of minorities in Texas. The spoke of "vengeance" and "power grabs" and an "unfair process," and noted that in many districts voters put Republicans in statewide offices while electing Democratic members of Congress. They spoke of the costs of passing the bill - the $1.7 million for a special session and the millions it will cost to defend the bill in court, noting how that money could better be spent on school textbooks and health care for indigent children.