RACE AND THE VOTING RIGHTS ACT IN 2011 TEXAS REDISTRICTINGRedrawing the Maps Stanford Law School January 28, 2012

Partisanship? Not so much. Republican v. Democrat is outmoded and

not a reflection of reality Latino population growth and political

mobilization pose challenges to non-Latino incumbents and political party leadership of both parties

Start with some context . . .

Texas Population Change 2000-2010

Population Growth in Latino-majority Districts in South Texas

Texas Congressional Plan - DFW

CD26 “Lightning Bolt” by Race

Benchmark: Nueces County House Districts

State Proposed: Nueces County House Districts

State House Plan: “Antlers in El Paso”

“Antlers” Close-up

Failure to Add New “Valley” House Seat

What’s at Stake?

What’s at Stake?

What’s at Stake?

The Texas 3-Ring Circus Perez v. Perry, challenge to Texas

redistricting plans under Voting Rights Act and Constitution

Texas v. U.S., lawsuit filed by Texas seeking judicial preclearance of its redistricting plans under sec. 5

Perry v. Perez, appeal to U.S. Supreme Court challenging court-drawn interim plans

The Big Top Texas must hold primary elections Texas election law calls for March 6

primaries and start of election process in late October 2011

Urgency for political parties to hold conventions in June, 2012

WDTX drew interim maps to accommodate primary schedule

Remand hearing yesterday and order for agreed maps by February 6

The Continuing Relevance of Race Racially polarized voting in primary and

general elections Non-Latino Democratic incumbents

concerned about losing the primary to a Latino challenger

Non-Latino Republican incumbents concerned about pressure to change policy positions and backlash from the base

Continued fracturing by partisans of both political parties to protect incumbents

Texas Redistricting: Partisanship v. Oppportunity

D leadership opposes Latino-majority CD35 because they don’t want Latinos to nominate a candidate other than a nearby incumbent

Rs gerrymander CD23 because they don’t want Latinos to elect a candidate other than the incumbent

Texas Latinos flexible in partisan affiliation.

Latino Mobilization Rejection of fracturing to protect non-

Latino incumbents of both political parties.

Litigation to enforce the protections of the Voting Rights Act: the opportunity to elect Latino candidates of choice

Recognition that political partisans invoke the VRA to advocate for partisan goals, not well-being of Latino voters

Why the Confusion? Inability to recognize political

mobilization of the Latino community Distraction of media focus on

partisanship instead of voting rights Low visibility of court proceedings Political party messaging intended to

serve incumbents, not voters Partisans suggest that the VRA has

outlived its utility

Looking to the Future Greater Latino participation in partisan

primaries and associated transformation Greater participation in general elections

and the changing face of elected officials Changes to political party platforms

THANK YOU Nina Perales VP for Litigation MALDEF nperales@maldef.org