MAP: Federal court adds new Valley seat in Texas House

November 18, 2011 1:00 AM

| Print Story | E-Mail Story

Jared Janes

The Monitor

TWITTER :

Follow Jared Janes on Twitter: @moncounty

BACKGROUND
Earlier chapters in this story:
>> Feds claim McAllen state House seat violates law
>> Voting map turmoil spurs call for state Rep. Peña to resign, shifting campaign plans
>> Federal court rejects Texas redistricting maps

A federal court released interim political maps late Thursday afternoon that give the Rio Grande Valley an additional state House seat and largely restore a GOP-drawn McAllen district to its original lines.

The court in San Antonio drew the temporary maps that will remain in place for next year’s state House and Senate elections until there is a resolution to lawsuits filed against the Legislature’s proposals. The court is expected to release a plan for new congressional districts soon, perhaps as early as Friday.

But the significant change for the Valley in the court’s temporary maps is the addition of another seat here that local officials felt was warranted due to population growth but wrongfully denied in the Legislature’s plan. The court added House District 35 to give the Valley eight state seats rather than lawmakers’ proposal to maintain representation here at seven.

The court’s map also rejects a GOP-drawn House district anchored in affluent portions of Hidalgo County that represented its best chance to elect a Republican candidate. House District 41, currently represented by McAllen Democrat Veronica Gonzales, was largely restored to its original lines in the court’s plan.

INTERACTIVE MAP: NEW VALLEY DISTRICTS

Gonzales, who unsuccessfully lobbied for the eighth seat and against the sweeping changes to her own district, said the court’s proposal vindicates arguments that the Legislature diluted minority voters statewide and denied the Valley adequate representation.

“There is strength in numbers. The more representation you have is an additional vote you’re going to have standing with you on issues that matter,” she said. “It’s only right that we have an additional representative given our population growth.”

The proposals released Thursday are still awaiting final approval with arguments before the court scheduled for noon Friday. A spokeswoman for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, who is representing the state, said the office is reviewing the maps and would prepare a response as requested by the court.

But the maps drawn by the three federal judges appeared to be a complete repudiation of the Legislature’s proposals for the Valley, one of the few remaining strongholds for Democrats in the state. Although one federal judge prepared a dissenting map, the plans drawn by the court’s minority and majority are mirror images in the Valley.

The plans will be carefully dissected by both incumbents and announced challengers for the Valley’s House seats who already made commitments on where they would run based on the state’s plan. The San Antonio court has already pushed the candidate filing period back to Nov. 28 while the litigation unfolds, giving the candidates more time to make a decision on where to run.

INTERACTIVE MAP: NEW TEXAS HOUSE DISTRICTS

The court earlier lifted a one-year residency requirement to allow candidates to run in any district as long as they reside within its boundaries by mid-December.

The key race to watch will be District 41, the McAllen-based seat that was radically redrawn by state legislators to incorporate conservative-voting precincts — making it a tossup district for its apparent beneficiary, state Rep. Aaron Peña, the newly minted Republican who defected from the Democratic Party in December.

Under the state plan, Gonzales was left with less than 1 percent of her original district as her house and law office were drawn into a neighboring seat, but the court’s proposal largely restores her district to its original boundaries with minor tweaks required by the addition of the county’s new House seat.

State Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, said Republican mapmakers “overreached” when they made the proposed changes to House District 41 that were overruled by the court. The GOP-drawn House District 41 had about 7,000 fewer residents than surrounding districts, which Democratic legislators suggested was evidence it was drawn for political purposes rather than to represent demographic changes.

The 1965 federal Voting Rights Act prevents new political boundaries from diminishing the rights of minorities to select their candidates of choice.

“The Voting Rights Act is not there to protect people who switch parties. The Voting Rights Act is there to protect minorities,” said Martinez Fischer, the chairman of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, a litigant against the state’s proposal. “I would view what was done to District 41 by the Legislature as an extreme polarization of just how bad things can go when you let politics make the decision.”

But Peña, R-Edinburg, said the creation of a new House seat in the Valley forced the changes to House District 41. Peña, who previously indicated he would run regardless of the final format of the maps, said he was reviewing the court’s proposals.

“Nothing has changed for me. I’m purposefully moving forward,” he said. “I’m glad to see that we finally have some clarity.”

The court’s proposal also gives weight to arguments of minority rights advocates that the Voting Rights Act trumps a little-known provision in the state constitution. Republican mapmakers said it was impossible to add a House seat in the Valley without violating a state constitutional requirement preventing districts from breaking county lines unless that county doesn’t have the population to warrant a district on its own.

The maps prepared by the judges found enough population for the additional seat in the Valley by spreading its boundaries across Cameron and Hidalgo counties.

The new House District 35 picks up residents in Peñitas, La Joya and the Delta as it loops around the outermost borders of Hidalgo County. District 35 then crosses into Cameron County, where it incorporates La Feria and northern portions of Harlingen.

The court also drew two Nueces County districts into neighboring counties in opposition to lawmakers’ plans.

“If you look at the plan for Nueces County and the plan for Cameron and Hidalgo counties, the state’s whole argument that the county line rule trumped the Voting Rights Act didn’t carry the day,” said Jose Garza, the plaintiffs’ lead counsel.

Hidalgo County Judge Ramon Garcia said the court’s decision to place another seat here gives the Valley legislative power to compete with delegations from elsewhere in the state.

In the Legislature’s plan, “we did not have what I felt was fair and adequate representation compared to the other urban centers in the state,” Garcia said. “We know that we’ve grown in the past 10 years and need the resources to properly develop our growth. The only way we could compete is by more representation.”

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Jared Janes covers Hidalgo County government, Edinburg and legislative issues for The Monitor. He can be reached at jjanes@themonitor.com and (956) 683-4424.