Friday, February 18, 2011

Deep In The Changing Heart Of Texas

The 2010 Census numbers bear out what many have estimated for years now:  Texas, like California, is now a majority minority state, and that's going to make things difficult for the GOP to keep their supermajority.

Texas is a majority-minority state for the first time in a redistricting period, according to just-released census data, a fact that could complicate Republicans’ hopes for a partisan gerrymander—and make the state competitive for Democrats in future years.

Whites now account for just 45 percent of the state's population, down from 52 percent a decade ago. The Hispanic population is now 38 percent of the total population—growing by 42 percent—while the African-American population grew slightly and is now 12 percent of the total population. The state gained four congressional seats in reapportionment, largely due to minority growth: Almost 90 percent of the state's growth was from minorities.

The census findings complicate Republicans' hopes for a partisan gerrymander during this redistricting process. The Democratic lean of Hispanic voters and Voting Rights Act requirements that protect the group's voting strength from being watered down means that despite Republican control of the redistricting process, the GOP will struggle to make the map much more favorable to their party.

"The numbers will dictate what is possible and what can be done," said state Sen. Kel Seliger, one of the Republicans tapped to run the redistricting process. Seliger predicted there would be at least one more Hispanic opportunity district in the Rio Grande Valley, but said it was too early to predict whether there should be a second, something Hispanic groups have called for, because the redistricting committee has yet to analyze the Citizen Voting Age Population data that they must use to draw the lines.

Republicans under former Rep. Tom DeLay effectively re-redistricted the state in the middle of the decade, tearing apart districts Democrats had carefully drawn to protect their "WD-40s"—white Democrats over 40. The plan was a big success for Republicans: The delegation went from 17-15 Democrat earlier in the decade to 21-11 Republican in 2004. Republicans now hold 23 of the 32 House seats after picking up three districts in the 2010 wave election, and Democrats hold only one House seat where whites make up more than a quarter of the district's population. Forty-two of the 49 Democratic state representatives are minorities.

So, we'll see what this means down the road for the Lone Star State, but odds are pretty good that Texas may not be the blood red state that gave us Dubya for too much longer.

8 comments:

  1. Zandar's Credibility ProblemFebruary 18, 2011 at 10:38 PM

    How many of those minorities are really illegals?

    If Texas's growth in the last decade was 90% minority, and almost all Hispanic, how much of Texas's growth is from non-American citizens draining Texas of taxpayer money?

    The answer is certainly in the thousands and almost certainly in the millions.

    It's safe to say that each of those illegals is costing Texas tens of thousands of dollars yearly more than they are paying in sales taxes.

    A million illegals times tens of thousands in state services...gosh, that's tens of billions of dollars...and Texas has a $27 billion shortfall for FY 2012.

    If Texas was allowed to pursue and deport these illegals, why the state would be running a surplus.

    Why do you think voters turned the state into one of the reddest in the nation, with a Republican super majority?

    The odds of Texas going blue are about the same as the odds of you going a single day of posting without spewing out a complete fucking fabrication, that is ZERO.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Zandar's Credibility Problem certainly jacks off over pictures of Tinkerbell five or six times a day.

    Zandar's Credibility Problem certainly steals his neighbor's panties and wears them on his head at night.

    Zandar's Credibility Problem certainly eats his own poop.

    Hey, this is fun!

    ReplyDelete
  3. ZCP and steveAR have won. the comment threads here are a drag now. the same tedious "you're a liberal and a liar and you're wrong about everything and here's my doctrinaire conservative response to whatever you say, blah blah blah" bullshit, over and over again.

    on a certain level, it's admirable that Z leaves their tripe up, on the other hand... yuck.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You know, I don't really think so, but then I tend to be in the thought of strong moderation and that assholes should be thrown out with extreme prejudice.

    I mean, why let them around when the only thing they do is shit on every last comment thread? If you were feeling forgiving, you could make the case that SteveAR is just a moron and not full-on asshole, but ICP is basically just a douche.

    Christ, I miss Waffles now. At least he didn't convince me that there was no loving god with every post. Or maybe that's just nostalgia setting in.

    ReplyDelete
  5. wafflez may have been politer (sometimes) in making it, but his general point/purpose wasn't especially different from the douche brothers. trolls suck. and that goes for liberals who post comments on conservative blogs as well. it's pointless and stupid.

    full disclosure: i did visit steveAR's blog a couple of times to call him an idiot, but it's not something i plan on doing again.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Zandar's Credibility ProblemFebruary 19, 2011 at 4:49 PM

    Mission accomplished.

    One more shitty liberal blog for the scrap heap of history.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Zandar's Credibility ProblemFebruary 19, 2011 at 4:57 PM

    And I honestly don't see why you're upset, Starstorm.

    Everything Zandar's said to you about Wisconsin, the phony National Guard threat, the ginned-up shortfall, the job losses and the loss of all bargaining rights for state workers, has been a lie.

    He's been proven wrong on every single point he has made in his capacity as a "pundit" on this issue.

    He has lied to you, his readers.

    So why do you bother to defend him? He's a hack who thinks you are too stupid to fact check. He's insulting YOU by lying to YOU and he's doing it on purpose.

    Why tolerate that as a reader, someone who clearly has no respect for his readers like that, someone who spews out lies that can be debunked in minutes?

    The one you should be demanding apologies from is Zandar. He's lied to you knowingly and repeatedly.

    How about it, Zandar? Do you have the balls to apologies to the few readers you have left for being a pathological liar?

    Do you have the courage to do what's right and fess up, and shut the blog down for good?

    You owe your readers at least that much.

    Do the right thing.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Yes, yes, we know you're concerned.

    ReplyDelete