Recent census data suggests that Hispanics will make up 1/3 of America's population by 2050, and a majority of Californians long before that. For the last couple of decades, Hispanics (of whom Latinos make up the largest portion) have been demanding more representation in both state and congressional legislatures to match their numbers. Should state legislatures gerrymander to ensure the election of more Hispanic legislators?
Texas Latinos hope redistricting gives them a voice
I do not think state legislatures should gerrymander to ensure the election of more Hispanic legislators because gerrymandering based solely on race is not allowed according to SCOTUS rules. As of right now I tend to have more conservative/ Republican views and don't necessarily want more democrat seats in the House of Representatives, however I do not agree with gerrymandering for a party to win or having race as THE factor. Even though I enjoy having Republican representation because California is such a Democratic state, I actually think these elections should be fair and that both parties should have an equal chance of winning. This article argues that gerrymandering based on race is alright if there is a minority, however if Latinos make up 42.4% (the same percetnage as the Whites in Texas) than they are no longer a minority. If they have a majority in seven districts then they have enough to vote in a representative. It is not the other districts fault that Latinos have a lower voter turnout rate, if you want a recognizable "face" in government then vote one in. When I vote I will vote for the person that best fits my beliefs, I am not going to vote based on if the candidate has blonde hair and blue eyes like myself. Yes Latinos have contributed immensely to the population growth in Texas, but i do not agree with gerrmandering based on race and making it easier for Hispanics to vote in a Latino face just because they are the same race.
ReplyDeleteHaley Couser ^
ReplyDeletePeriod 3
I do not think that state legislatures should gerrymander to ensure the election of more Hispanic legislatures. Gerrymanding based solely on race is not something that legistaltures are supposed to do. And although is it considered acceptable when that race is a minority whose political voice cannot be heard, this is not the case here. Just becasue Hispanics tend to have a low turnout does not mean that legislatures should gerrymander around them to make it easier to vote in a representative that is Hispanic. As Haley said, I would vote based on where the representative stands on matters, not what race he or she is.
ReplyDeleteMariah Tropez
period 3
P.S BOOM! :D
I don't think the districts should be gerrymandered simply based on race. Even though Latinos have a valid point in wanting to be represented, they don't need a Latino representative or a district specifically for them to be represented properly. Even though racial gerrymandering has been done before, it shouldn't continue because it's still illegal and unfair. Latinos, as well as other races, can be still represented well by someone of a different race. Districts should be seperated by region instead of social class or race in order to have a genuinely fair election.
ReplyDeleteLindsay Riggans
Period 2
I do not think that state legislatures should gerrymander to ensure the election of more Hispanic legislatures. Gerrymanding based solely on race is not something that legistaltures are supposed to do. The low turnout is not a reason for the Legislature to Gerrymander them. I agree with Haley though when she says that I would also vote on the person not just the race.
ReplyDeleteLogan Rhind
Period 3
I would say give the Latinos the two districts they desire. It may not even have to be drawn based on their ethnicity, rather based on their Democratic ideology (since Latinos tend to lean more liberal). The Republican legislators are capable of redistricting Texas so only two or three of the districts would have Democratic (Latino) majority, which means only a few Democratic state legislators of the 30+ Republican representatives in Texas. Republicans would still have the majority say in Texas, why should they be worried about a couple Democrats seating alongside them?
ReplyDeleteBlake Hewelt
Period 2
I disagree with the whole situation going on. From the article it sounds like the republican seat holders are trying to crack up new distracts of hispanics and gerrymandering present latinos by giving the 7 seats and from what the article says two of the are latinos that are republicans and one of the others voted in a non hispanic republican representative this last time also. So republicans are being mostly unfair. I dont agree that latinos should demand for two mainly hispanic districts for a chance at receiving more representation. From the way the article sounds i would say both sides are wrong. The districts should be drawn fairly not for a power play.
ReplyDeleteLucas Cogger
Period 2
I think that even though Latinos don't NEED to have a Latino representative in the House in order for their needs to be met, I think that giving them two Latino representatives would give a lot of Latinos the impression that they actually have a say in government, which could result in a higher voting turnout. I feel that America is very diverse and because Latinos make up such a big percentage of our population I think it would be helpful to give them Latino representatives. I think that Republicans might not want to have more Democrats in the House, but I feel like it's time that our political parties become more open-minded and focus on what political parties are all about, which in my opinion is representing the people.
ReplyDeleteSelina Terrazas
Period 2
The growth in Latinos in Texas calls for a greater representation of their beliefs. I am not saying that greater representation should be based off their race but on their ideology. Their representative does not necessarily have to have the same racial characteristics as these people but should display the beliefs of these people. It would be unfair to ignore the values and beliefs of a particular group that makes up a significant percentage of the population. Reading the article, it already seems like Republicans gerrymander to ensure their own spots anyway. The whole system seems pretty rigged.
ReplyDeleteKaren Sun
Per. 2
I don't see the issue in gerrymandering in order to give the Latinos the representations they want. Everyone's voice should be heard and even though i don't feel the Latino needs to represent the fellow community, the people want what the people want. The state is fearing the decrease of the republican majority, but with so many state legislatures being present, whats an added one or two Latino democratic legislatures going to harm? this will end up being beneficial with the Latinos (making up a large amount of the states pop) being happy and the state having less problems within its state.
ReplyDeleteBrandie Lomas
Per. 2
Gerrymandering for "good" or selfish benefit is still gerrymandering. The fact that Hispanics in Texas are calling for gerrymandering in their favor, while denouncing it when it is not in their favor makes them hypocrites. If they want gerrymandering to occur, it will most likely occur either for or against them. Therefore, if it were to be against them, they cannot complain, because they advocated it to occur in their favor. I simply do not agree with the method of trying to use the same dirty tactics to "even the playing field." They should instead pursue legal assistance through the courts to end gerrymandering that renders them disenfranchised.
ReplyDeleteVictor Aguilar
Per. 3
I think Gerrymandering shouldnt be done at all because its unfair. True, the latinos dont NEED a latino representative and can have a person of another race as long as the lean democratic (because most of us do lean democratic). But what Latinos want to see is a person who looks like them and thinks like them, because they feel this person might have gone through the same needs they want and will understand them. Texas gained 4 seats because of these Latinos so it's only fair to give in and let them have there 2 seats, so they feel like they're are been acknowledged and not ignored.
ReplyDeleteAlexis Kakish
Period: 2
I don't think legislatures should gerrymander Texas, first its unfair and unjust to gerrymander just by race and secondly to be representated you don't need someone of the same race to represent you, its dumb to think it is right for them to ask that in their favor to elect a latino to represent their district. Each representative is suppose to do their job and hear from each person of that district if not they should be fired and the people should find someone new. The people have a role to vote and to be heard its more on who can make a bigger influence than just trying to have a latino representative.
ReplyDeleteChristian De Silva
period 3
If the growing Latino community is responsible for Texas gaining 4 new seats, then the Latinos deserve to be granted at least 2 of these seats. Texas is predominantly a Republican state; however, the Latinos voting habits usually favor the Democrats. If the new districts are redrawn to favor the Republican party through gerrymandering, then the Latinos' vote could be worthless if a Republican always wins. In order to prevent their vote from being disenfranchised, these districts should be redrawn to ensure that the Latino community is represented fairly in Congress with a representative who knows how to improve or benefit the Latino community. America learned from its past that the African American votes were disenfranchised in the South, but districts were eventually redrawn to guarantee that heavily dense areas populated by African Americans were represented by a politician who could address the needs of his/her people. The issue does not involve race, instead the focus is on allowing a group of people to be represented by an official that can act as their voice in government. Texas has an obligation to ensure those seats to the Latinos because obtaining the new seats would not even be possible without a population boost from the Latinos.
ReplyDeleteKristine Lew
Period 3
I believe it would not hurt anyone gerrymandering for the latino community in the state of Texas. Sure, gerrymandering is looked down upon, but in this case it is for good. The 4 seats were given because of the uprise of Latino's in Texas. What's wrong with having at least 1 or 2 Latino's in a seat. They just want to be represented and heard. Who wouldnt want that?
ReplyDeleteMichael Muinos
Period 3
I don't think that people need a Latino representative to relate to. I feel that this is more of a pride thing that they have, I feel like they just want to be able to say, "My representative is a Latino like me." Bottom line is that Latinos do not need a Latino representative to feel that their needs are met, if they're needs are met then why should it matter if their representative is white or black? What makes a Latino representative different from a white democratic one? they both have they same views on government and both are getting what needs to be done, done. And gerrymandering based on race to get a Latino into the House is illegal and if people want a Latino in the House then they're going to have to get them in the legal way just like the rest of the country. No exceptions.
ReplyDeleteErica Medina
Period 3
I do not believe that the districts should be redrawn for Latinos. Clearly, when they say they want representation by a Latino, we are talking ethnicity, not political ideology. Political ideology is just the shield that people hide behind so they don't break the law. Of course no one can say that they want to gerrymander the area due to ethnicity, since it is against the law.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that there shouldn't be any exceptions to this law. If Latinos was representation, then they should vote on someone with their same ideology, whether his background is from Mexico or Spain or South America. Just to redraw the districts so they can elect a Latino is sort of, excuse me for being so harsh, bull to me. It is bull because of the clearly stated law that no redrawing shall be done for ethnic purposes.
I can understand ideological purposes and since the whole system is pretty messed up and it puts alot of us at a disadvantage, I'd agree with Latinos being put into more liberal districts, since most of them vote liberal. Beyond that, however, the law makes it clear, no matter how ridiculousness and stupid, what can and what cannot be done.
Veronica Nakla p.2
I believe gerrymandering on race in this case is okay, it just shouldn't be the sole factor. The districts are already gerrymandered into unfair districts. Latinos are being discriminated against if they represent a large part of the population they should be allowed to have a representative they desire. However, I believe gerrymandering in general is wrong for our democracy.
ReplyDeleteRyan Ristow
Per 3
Substantively, adding more "Latino districts" won't make a difference; that is, policy will be no different if Texans place a white Democrat in office or a Latino Democrat. But descriptively, as Selina pointed out above, it makes a difference emotionally for the Latino community. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Latino's get two districts that help them elect a fellow Latino, since they are responsible for Texas' "Texas-sized" growth, but drawing districts solely for this reason bothers me. Then again, how is it any worse than drawing a district solely to elect a Republican or Democrat?
ReplyDeleteTexas should not redraw its districts in a way that favors hispanics. Although Texas' four new seat in the house can be credited to hispanics, they are still only 38%of the state's population as the article pointed out. A representatives' job is to reflect the opinions of their constituents, not the race. Someone who isn't of hispanic descent can just as easily represent the opinions of the hispanic community as someone who is. Electing someone because of a particular race doesn't make them better qualified. In the end, its who is going to better represent their district/state as a whole and not base their decisions solely off of one factor.
ReplyDeleteLina Casillas
P.3
(ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*:･ﾟ✧ Kaitlyn Vallance, period 3
ReplyDeleteI feel that by gerrymandering the districts in favor of one race over another, we continue to purport the idea that these racial minorities are still statistic minorities and must protect themselves from oppression and unfair circumstances when that is not the case. You don't deserve a face in government just because the representative looks like your Uncle Richard and you feel like you could see them at your dinner table - maybe your Uncle Richard is not competent enough to be in government and Uncle Drew (who happens to appear more like the other 97%) would better serve the needs of the district. It said in our book (I think, don't quote me on that) that, when polled, white, liberal representatives held many of the same ideals and beliefs as the African-American citizens they serve and would fight to protect these interests - even though they don't look a thing like these people. Adding these districts won't make much of a difference vote-wise if gerrymandered in favor of Latinos, but that isn't the point - the point is that the government is condoning this behavior (as we have seen from the South Carolina example) when it is blatantly wrong. If we are going to do it for one minority, when is a line really drawn? We could have other groups who feel oppressed or/and underrepresented (the LGBT community, a certain religious group) who demand gerrymandering to give them a face in government as well. If we make one exception, we must be fair and apply those rules to all groups, or we must get rid of the gerrymandering as a whole.
(I am just trying to make an argument, so it might come off a little non-linear since I was just throwing ideas around and seeing if they made sense. I, frankly, don't feel uncomfortable with the idea of gerrymandering. Like everything else in politics, it's a game of underhandedness and whatnot, so I wasn't shocked and appalled when we read about it. But then there's that whole "oppressing races" thing going on when we think about gerrymandering, so I don't want to look like I'm all about it since I am very much against looking like some racist. Which is also why I'd rather this not be read aloud! I don't want to be presumptuous and think that you are going to be reading my comment, if you are thinking about it (since I am so very thoughtful and insightful of course) just don't say the parenthetical aside, please!)
I believe that the Latinos should be represented. As a country, we started out as mostly white, but the times have changed. While almost every part of our country has changed with the times, representation really hasn't. When it comes to gerrymandering, I think that the problem could be stopped before it even starts. Instead of just letting the problem happen, we should provide some representation for Latinos before people feel the gerrymandering even need to begin. If the government was really created for the people and by the people, shouldn't it represent the people and their customs?
ReplyDeleteSarah Meltreger
Period three
I agree with Sarah Meltreger that Latinos should be represented. If there was a 20% increase in mostly Latinos and Texas gained 4 seats I think it's only fair that they get at least 2 of those seats. Also, nobody has a problem that in North Carolina (like we saw in the video today in class) was gerrymandered to represent African Americans. So the African Americans are the exception? I don't think thats right, if there so against gerrymandering then they should get rid of all of it and not just focus on one race. Maybe if the Latinos actually get some representation that they are comfortable with, and can relate too, that might lead to increased voter turnout for that race. Who knows?
ReplyDeleteCarlos Espinal
per. 2
shaquin tutt aka August per 2
ReplyDeletei want to make a shout out to crystal, princess, and katlyin
- well i dont see a problem with gerrymandrering to get latinos some seats but after they do no more gerrymdering because its cheating
I believe that if Latinos want a brown face in their legislature then they should be able to vote for one. If redrawing the districts jeopardizes the GOP, then a compromise must be made. Texas gained four seats so why not give one or two of them to the Latinos? Or maybe like Karen Sun suggested race should not be a factor. Just draw the districts like there wasnt anything at stake just to be fair.
ReplyDeleteSydney Ferreira
period 2
Well if Texas recieved its 4 new seats from the growing latino community, then latinos deserve a seat in the house; but doing this will require the districts to be redrawn, because more latinos favor democratic in a republican state. If gerrymandering occurs then their vote is worthless. In order to prevent this the districts must be redrawn to ensure that the latino community is represented equally in the congress, that will improve or help the latino community.
ReplyDeleteDante Brinoccoli per2
I dont understand August i mean in my perspective Gerrymandering is a violation of a "one vote one man" concept that this republic was supposibly founded on
ReplyDeleteDante Brinoccoli
per2
I do not believe that the state should gerrymander the districts. But because the state of Texas is made up of a lot of Latinos it is only fair that they should be represnted. the Latino grow is the reason that they are gaining 4 more seats in the house. The government should take into concideration the thoughts and concerns that the hispancic population has. That could be done by having more Latinos is the House that can relate to the majority of the population and their culture.
ReplyDeletebrittney brown
per 2
Im pretty indifferent towards this topic. On one side it is unfair and unjust to gerrymander solely on race to allow more hispanic legislators into office, more should contribute to how a district is drawn besides ethnicity. On another note I kind of see it as fair because hispanics are a main factor to Texas's population increase and they could do a "You scratch my back, I scratch your back" and draw a district or two in a way that lean more Hispanic (Liberal/Democrat) and allow them maybe 2 or 3 districts but there has to be a limit so they don't get crazy.
ReplyDeleteOther than that I don't see a big problem with this, maybe because it doesn't effect me personally but still.
Princess Egbule
Per. 3 :D
Haha shout out to August!
If Hispanics in Texas want Hispanic representatives, why should'nt they get them?, they're basically the reason Texas got the seats in the first place. I don't believe they want a Hispanic representative just for pride because the bottom line is that no matter what, a Hispanic representative would "watchtout" for their fellow Hispanic citizens more than any other race of representative would. Its just like how students would'nt talk negatively about their own school but might talk negatively towards another school. We're all in the same district but the connection between a student and their own school is more intimate and guarding than any other relationship. Republicans need to stop trying to win all the seats and making the Texas government unequal and unfair. Bottom line.
ReplyDeleteAngel Baquero
p.3
I think they should just split their seats. If there's a 20% increase in the Latino Community then they need a voice of opinion in the house. They ARE human beings and they DO deserve a voice. The 4 seats can't all go to the Latinos there's no way that's just because of them. To gerrymander districts in such a way to prevent a voice, it should be considered unconstitutional. It is robbing the voice of the people and that is a right.
ReplyDeleteKrishna Aditya
P.3
I honestly feel that gerrymandering the districts just for the lationos' emotional needs is unecessary. If they have more of their race represented there may be a higer voter turnout, but their vote will most likely be determined on what they see rather than who is best in office. I feel this will cause other minorities to feel that there race should be represented if they are highly populated in certain areas. They shouldn't need a someone of their ethnicity to feel they have a voice. The representation should be centered around their ideology rather than the color of their skin.
ReplyDeleteMoniqueJolivette p2
I believe that Latinos should be represented in our government.As stated in the article the Latino population is responsible for the growth of Texas, as well as the addition of 4 chairs to the House of Representatives. I think that we should have a representative that will speak on our behalf, but not if it means gerrymandering. Texas should not redistrict itself, if it means that they will try to get all Latinos into one district group. This as we learned in Mr.C's class is something that the SCOTUS will not allow a state to do. We are the United States of America we are supposed to be founded on equal opportunity for all, but when do we really start this practice.
ReplyDeletePer.3 Shane Valenzuela
I agree with Kaitlyn Vallance and totally disagree with Sarah. Don't give them a seat just because they gave texas four more seats. Yes they should get represented, If its fair and just and people like them. These guys are all elected so vote for him if you like him. Kaitlyn made a great point that if your going to gerrymander then do it for all the "oppressed feel sorry for me people" Otherwise stop whining. They didn't redistrict for Obama when he won election so the blacks could have a "voice" in office. He won the way your supposed to win. If in fact most latinos are liberals which is a total generalization then why are they moving to a racist bigot estate like Texas anyhow!( No offense to Texans, it was more for shock value then anything else. And i want Mr. C to read my blog:) Texas is predominantly republican conservative no income tax do-it-yourself state. Thats where im going into Mr. C's blog where he was saying to gerrymander a district solely to elect say a Dem or GOP. I like the analogy and it also bothers me that we now share a district with Rialto, and san Bernardino. I enjoy Upland, Montclair, etc just a little bit more
ReplyDeleteDylan Bennett aka Night Hawk p.2
Shane Valenzuela go Ham bro! Basically i dido everything he said as well as my aforementioned comment.
ReplyDeleteDylan bennett p.2
To intentionally redistrict so the the Hispanics can get more seats is absolutely wrong. I believe gerrymandering is wrong and the redistricting process should be controlled by a non partisan committee, making sure that there are no weird shapes in which i believe that districts should be shaped as close as possible to squares. Since Texas does have a increasing and already high population of Hispanics it is more than reasonable to believe they will get their fair share of reps in the house and if they don't I would believe it would be because of their low turnout and have no one to blame but themselves. Politics focuses on point of view of the candidate not on race. A white Democratic and a Latino one will mostly or perfectly have the same policy so Hispanics have a voice they just rather want that voice coming from another Hispanic.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Hidalgo
per.2
I do not think it is okay to gerrymander the districts so that the Latinos get more representation in the House. There are so many Latinos in Texas that they should be able to get a Latino in office without legislatures redrawing the lines. The reason they do not is because they have low voter turnout. Why should we “give” them something, when historically they have not even actively participated? If they want representation, they should work for it rather than looking for a free ride to Congress.
ReplyDeleteKatie Yuhas
period 3
I think that the districts shouldnt be set up to accommidate for the new latino population. If the latino population wants their voice heard then they should make it heard. Gerrymandering shouldnt occur to help them have their voice heard. I though gerrymandering was wrong? Whether it helps the majority or minority, it shouldnt be allowed. I think that if the latino population has grown, that will affect the outcome in some way. Just because their representative doesnt look like them doesnt mean that they arent represented. If they agree with the Democratic party their beliefs will be acknowledged.
ReplyDeleteRebecca Galindo
period 3
i believe that latinos should have more of a face in our government and i think its okay to gerrymander in such a way that the latinos are ensured at least one or 2 seats. a fact from the article says that latinos will make up 1/3 of america by 2050 and own california long before that. we are no longer the minority that is being oppressed by this white, money based government...no no no..we need to let america know that we are starting to come together, be more organized, and realize that as the latino population grows, which it forever will, we need to have a say in our government or we will end up like the blacks less than 100 years ago...plenty of them, but none of them took a stand until farther down the road. now look where the blacks have gone; from slavery to pesidents. it is our turn now. we are becoming stronger in knowledge and coming together in unity. the most powerful latino is an educated latino. thats a fact. My cousin roger hernandez is an assemblymember up in sacremento and everyday he tries to bring the latino community together and educate them on our goverment. he works very hard and deserves his place and if we get 4 more brown faces in those empty seats, that will make the latino population stronger and more knowledgable, making america even more powerful.
ReplyDeletebut im not a rapper
eric dominguez
per. 3
I do think we should give latinos representation in our government because like the article stated latinos are an incredibly rapidly growing race and to not give them representation now would deteriorate their society as a whole. I agree with what Selina said about the possibility that giving latinos would increase participation with the acknowledgement that their vote will matter. The district makers seem to be contradicting themselves when they don't plan on excluding on district and giving them a representative based on their race when in fact it is actually a district based on their party profile seeing how latinos lean democrat. This is simply a hypocritical state of mind that will only belittle the opinions of minorities
ReplyDeleteSarah Shin
Period 2
Shaquin, are you Rick Perry’s campaign advisor or something?
ReplyDeleteCarlos makes a good point in equating this situation to the scenario in North Carolina we saw in that clip with Wolf Blitzer on gerrymandering (though after having watched extensive amounts of The Daily Show I take everything he says with a grain of salt). If those sorts of concessions are being made for black people, why not Latinos? If two thirds of that 20% growth in the population of Texas can be attributed to Latinos, then they probably should get at least half of the new representation, that only makes sense. However, as the article states, Latinos are still only making up 38% of the population. As a growing demographic group, their representation should be by all means fair, but not disproportionate.
One part of the article that caught my eye was when it said, “State party officials say it is simplistic to assume Latinos are all Democrats and that their voting pattern won't change…” It is definitely not safe to assume that this observation is true and redistrict based on it. It goes on to say that this surge in the Latino population threatens the GOP’s dominance in Texas. That in mind, it will be interesting to see how this effects the next few redistricting cycles or whatever they are called (Whether or not the GOP will make an effort to corral the Latinos, “crack” their geographic concentration, etc.)
Taras McKey
Period 2
I feel as if gerrymandering the districts in a way that would favor the latino community would be for the most part unfair. I understand why the latino community would want all 4 seats in the house, but I don't think it is very reasonable to want ALL 4 of those seats. I think they should have at most 2, that way it may be split evenly. If latinos feel as if their race is being represented unequally, then I do not think they are taking other races into consideration too. African Americans make up a good piece (11%) of the Texan population, yet they only have three seats as representatives in Texas. Same thing goes for Asian Americans, except they have NO members in the House of Representatives for Texas. Basically, I feel as if the redistricting on the basis of race, which in this case is latino, is largely unfair; i would prefer a third party to draw districts.
ReplyDeleteHere is my Texas census source:
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48000.html
And here is my source for minorities in the House of Representatives:
http://www.ethnicmajority.com/congress.htm
Kevin Mailangkay P. 3
My view on this subjects tends to go both ways. Do I believe that officials should gerrymander districts solely on race? No I don't. In my opinion, it's not right to draw lines based on race and what could be prejudice. However, being a Republic in a Democratic state, I do like the idea of having districts drawn to where more Republicans are put into office. However, that is, as Blake said, redistricting based on political ideology, not race. I know this is contradictory to what I said earlier, but I would still like to say this. Many people in this blog are saying that one shouldn't gerrymander based on race, but have they even thought about it from a different point of view? I mean yes, we hear in class that one might gerrymander to give a minority a voice, but do they even think about what that means? As part of a majority, one tends to disregard what the minority think/believe. But what if they were the minority? What if you were those people in Texas. Most likely, you would be on their side and want that representation. I also believe that giving them two or three seats in congress would benefit the state/federal government in the end. Instead of spending so much time on this issue, we could give them the seats, have this matter resolved quickly, and then focus our time and efforts on more important things like how to get out of gridlock. But that's just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteChristine Fisher
Per 3
I don't feel that the latinos should worry too much about this issue, if our system is anywhere near as just as it would have us believe then they have nothing to fear. By adding two thirds of texas' new growth they should, unless republicans weasal their way around it, recieve more representation. To demand an election to be bent to enforce their political beliefs is hypocritical, since it is deriven from fear that their political opponents will do the same.
ReplyDeleteBrian Gilland
Period 2
I understand how Hispanics want to be represented in the House because of their importance in the population increase, but I do not believe a Hispanic representative is needed. If Texas were to gerrymander districts in order to assist in Hispanics gaining representation, I agree with Kaitlyn that this would only belittle the minority that Hispanics still are, nevertheless their population increase. Gerrymandering is not fair to other minorities that will not be represented in their district, like Kaitlyn mentioned as well. Even if there was a Hispanic representative in the House, the chance of that representative getting any votes passed will most likely be stomped on by the overwhelming number of majority White representatives that Texas has. I believe in equal representation for all, but in this case Hispanics do not need to gerrymander their districts in order to gain a representative. If they are listened to by a different incumbent in the House, they are more likely to be represented than have a Hispanic member in the House.
ReplyDeleteBecca Lynch :)
Per. 2
I absolutely disagree with the idea of them gerrymandering just to get a Latino a seat so what if they helped. Race should not matter the only thing that should matter is that the person who gets elected should be qualified and share your views. I hate the idea of gerrymandering its freaking stupid, people need to stop manipulating things to get it there way everything should be divided equally. But obviously it’s not going to happen so I don’t think that gerrymandering should be used based on only the Latinos race. Latinos in Texas shouldn’t be pushing for someone of their race to get a seat or two they should just go for someone that shares their views regardless if they are brown blue white black green or orange!
ReplyDelete<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
_______________________________________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Jessica Rodriguez~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Period Three~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_______________________________________________
If half the population is Latino, and you're thinking about drawing a district that puts it in favor for your own white "Republican" population,..how logical does that sound? It's not the fact that the Latinos want some illiterate "uncle" that looks like them, they want a strong Latin representative that will be able to see things more in an emotional perspective.I don't see the problem with allowing a huge chunk of the population have a representative, it's not going to kill the state and it sure isn't going to make the large group of Latinos hate their government in the future elections of these incumbents.
ReplyDeleteJovanna Franco Period 2 (: ----------------- ^^^^^^^
ReplyDeleteokay, first off i do believe that if hispanics want a hispanic representative, they should be able to get one. second, gerrymandering is going to occur regardless of the moraliy of the concept itself. so why not use it to your advantage? i know it may seem selfish, but hey it has been working for many of these politicians. hispanics have the power to significantly change the future of America. so why not harness that power and direct it to a more positive focus. get the brown people involved in politics, get them educated in this line, and to do this we HAVE to get them involved.
ReplyDeleteRonika Singh
Period 2
Well after reading some of these posts I'm a little intimidated but here I go. In my opinion, I can uderstand where the Latinos are coming from with wanting descriptive representation because if it wasn't for their herds of mass immigration Texas would have to worry about filling extra seats. Honestly I think that they should gerrymander the districts because it's gonna shake things up a little. I mean WHY NOT if there's new seats, why not make new districts, right?
ReplyDeleteThe one thing that kind of upset me really is the other side of the argument coming from the Republicans within Texas. The only reason why they are against gerrymandering is because Latinos are more likely to vote democrat than republican 2:1 apparently. Their fear is not that Hispanics are gonna occupy their seats, but that they will go against the conservative grain of Texas. I think that it complete bullcrap and is selfish. These representative are obviously not looking out for the wants and needs of the people if their fear that a new Hispanic representative will not likely be a Republican. I think Texas needs to suck it up and pu on their big boy pants and let the Hispanics have some seats because if they don't there are gonna be statewide riots like in LosAngeles after they lost the playoffs a couple years back. just sayin.
michelle nkemere period 3
p.s. idk if it would be inappropriate to include a movie quote from "An Officer and a Gentleman" but here I go anyways "The only things that come from Texas are steers and queers." favorite quote...not trying to offend anyone either <3
hispanics are growning in size in america, and there is no doubt about that. America can either use this to their advantage by letting them be represented, where the situation would work out for the better because the majority race is happy, or america could just let them go unrepresented by a hispanic, which could later on lead into a gap between politics and the fastest growing population. and where gerrymandering is concerned, all i am saying is: do what you gotta do!
ReplyDeleteCrystal Gonzalez
per. 3
Gerrymandering to specifically benefit or hurt a racial group is illegal. However, my opinions on this issue tend to go both ways. Although this practice can be seen as wrong and unjust, everyone should have a voice in politics. If there were another way to do this then we should take those appropriate actions. However, the Hispanics are not getting their voices heard even though they make up a large portion of Texas. But despite the reasons for gerrymandering, it can definitely be seen as wrong. One love.
ReplyDeleteDanny Muhlbach
Per. 2
Ok so to be honest i wanted to do a long post but im crashing right now and only have a few things to say...here it goes...gerrymandering due to race? seriously thats never ok and speaking as 110% hispanic here i know for a fact that will just piss a bunch of ppl off....however, gerrymandering is a shady practice and honestly i know that if they want to "aid" in latinos gaining a district by means of fair vote and stuff by all means GO! seriously its not even that big of a deal to allow latinos to gain a couple of districts, make us feel proud ese! we love America and hello? uhhh if u didnt know were taking over the map more and more each year and we can and will make a difference. YOURE WELCOME TEXAS! but seriously yes latinos lean more democratic and that could in fact be a bit more threatening but for now allowing them a couple districts in Texas wont necessarily harm so much the republicans in there already because its more just for pride and bragging rights that we made something happen cuz we like making lots of babies its not taking away from te Republicans mostly just empowering the latinos here i mean come on whats wrong with that? much love see you tomorrow im out
ReplyDeleteFernando Arellano
Per. 3
Arellano and Cavanaugh President and Vice President 2036 VOTE NOW!
gerrymandering to allow more Latinos in the house and senate is a necessity in order to please the growing Latino population. in order for people to feel like their voice is heard in congress usually means they would like to see a seat member of the same ethnicity of them. although some say this is unfair history shows the us government has always been tailored to favor whites and now that Latinos will become the largest percentage of our population, they need to be represented.
ReplyDeleteper. 2
brandon long
I think that since Latinos make up 2/3 of the population of Texas, that they deserve a seat in congress, so that they have a representative. Many people suggest gerrymandering the state to put more Latinos in congress. In most cases this would be unconventional, but it is needed for an equitable solution. No other state has higher percentage of Latinos in their population as Texas, or congressional representation. However congress shouldn't redistrict solely base the redistricting on race because it would only desecrate SCOTUS rules. Congress and the people of Texas need to come up with a consensus that will allow Latinos to be personified.
ReplyDeleteMackenzie Beaty
Period: 3
p.s. Fernando, you guys have my vote!!! Cavanaugh for Prez!!!
Latinos have always been a minority that is rapidly growing throughout the U.S. but even then, they are treated unequally. Two thirds of Texas' population is currently made up of Latinos but Texas representatives eschew the fact that they want representation. Texas is dominated by Republicans and because Latinos tend to lean Democratic, Latinos are not going to be granted this representation. All they covet for is to have "someone to lean on and relate to, and to speak for us". No agreement appears to be coming forth soon, so the Latinos of Texas will just have to keep fighting, until this dispute is settled.
ReplyDeleteDaniela Suasnabar
pd.2
I do not understand how it is justifiable to gerrymander to help minorities when gerrymandering isn't when trying to help oneself or his or her party. However, I do agree that if the population increase in Texas is due mainly to Hispanics, then they should be represented fairly. It's clear that there is a flaw in the system if people have to gerrymander districts just to represent a minority in Congress. My suggestion is to draw districts based on region the fair way with no exceptions. But this seems like it will encourage ethnic grouping; for example, Hispanics will group to certain districts. Honestly I can not think of a fair solution to this problem, but the author is correct, there certainly is one.
ReplyDeleteGerard Bahri Per. 3
I agree with many of the students that gerrymandering is wrong and shouldn't be used to influence the Latino's vote in Texas but if they aren't getting equal representation and make up a third of Texas' population then something must be done. If gerrymandering is the solution then personally as a moderate Democrat I don't see why not. The Republicans are doing as much as they can to stay in power and to have the upper hand than why not let the Democrats do whatever they see fit to get a fair share of power. It is quite obvious our government plays dirty so adding to the pile doesn't seem like such a big deal though it is unfair and unjust to those who get stuck in the middle and don't really give a care about the constant struggle between Democrats and Republicans to have power in government.
ReplyDeleteAleena M.
Per. 3
I do not think that state legislatures should gerrymander the districts to improve latino turnout. Gerrymandering based on race is illegal and has been proven harmful. Although the latino vote has contributed to about 80% of texas' growth in population, that dies not make gerrymandering based on race right. I agree something should be done however i do not think gerrymandering based on race is the right way to go.
ReplyDeleteBrandon Carter
per3
I think the idea that Latinos need a Latino representative to serve their interests just shows how little they actually know about politics. You can have a liberal white, OR a conservative Latino. Race shouldn't mean anything when you're voting for a candidate, and if you're voting for someone just because they look like you, you don't deserve to be voting at all (ok maybe that's a little harsh).
ReplyDeleteMy point is, I don't think we need to readjust the districts specifically so that Latinos can elect a couple Latino representatives. I think we should just re-draw them in a sensible way, and let the views and policies of the candidate determine whether they get elected, not their race.
Marc Groves
Per. 2
I personally think this is crazy. Parties shouldn't be gerrymandering districts for anybody for any reason. Districts should simply be mapped out based on making the population equal and the candidates will just have to compete more intensely to make sure they keep their seat. I understand Latinos want a voice but it just doesn't make sense to be picking an choosing when it is okay to gerrymander a district based off of race or party. Were just going to say oh here you guys can have these two seats and blacks can have this seat and the democrats this seat...? No, its supposed to be a competition between runners to win their district by doing the best job not because their Latino or Black or White or based off of party. Gerrymandering needs to just end completely.
ReplyDeleteAmber Fussell
per 3
I do not think districts in Texas should be gerrymandered to favor Latinos. They make a valid argument with their cry for representation, however, gerrymandering based on only race is not allowed. I believe there are other ways the Latino population can be represented without "cheating" by drawing peculiar shaped districts. This also would not be fair to the other races who might not get the same opportunity.
ReplyDeleteAlexis Oyetibo
Period 3
I think that gerrymandering is wrong because it's completely unfair to manipulate the bounderies just to benefit a party. However, if the latinos want to be represented with seats, I think that they should be given it especially considering they are the main reason for a rise in population in Texas. Everyone should be heard and represented. Giving the latinos what they want would not only satisfy them but it wouldn't make much of a difference in the vote anyways.
ReplyDeleteCarley Ozaeta
Period 2
Well, Michelle Nkemere did an excellent job describing how she felt!! And I actually completely agree. I think districts in Texas SHOULD gerrymander for the specific group of Latinos. It's important to understand the fact that Latinos do make a difference in the population of Texas. They should feel as though they have a connection with the government and that their kind is being represented. Yeah, I know that race is an issue, that it is not fair. But it is about their ideology at the end of the day as well as possible high turnout from the Latino community.
ReplyDeleteAmber Shah
period 2
As smart as it would be to gerrymander districts for the latino community,I feel it will be nearly impossible for this to occur. White males will not sacrifice their seats, especially to that of the opposite party and they are creating the districts. Its hard for any human being to resist the urges of power and since gerrymanding has been corrupt for so long, i don't see this going anywhere nice anytime soon especially in the state of Texas, where everything is bigger including intolerance.
ReplyDeleteCelina Phillipson
per. 2
While it's true that gerrymandering is unjust in the redistricting process, it's been done before (as we saw in yesterdays lesson) and with little upset it seems. If things like that can be dusted under the mat with ease, then I surely believe that the Latinos can have their voice and have someone represent who they are as an ethnicity. However, on the other side of my opinion, I truly don't think that having a Latino representative fully represents the Latinos outlook on politics as a whole and simply acts as a familiar face in the House. For an example, I (being white) don't feel entitled to having a white face in the House to represent me dependent on the fact that he/she is indeed white. If their politics are aligned with mine and others, that should be the first step in being a good representation of many.
ReplyDeleteIt's quite obvious they are growing in numbers and intend to have their voice somewhere in the mix, which is completely justified in my eyes, but having that voice solely on the idea that they are Latino seems to just be making ethnicity the only issue and not really their political sense the true factor in deciding who should represent them. The only thing they really discuss in terms of their politics is that they lean Democratic and outlandishly state that it's safe to assume that all Latinos are Democratic? What kind of claim is that? The GOP just seems to blowing smoke up everyone and their rears just to get a reaction of sorts. If it means that much to them to hold their role in Texas, they will do so by any means, and if they feel threatened by becoming more Democratic, the likelihood of that won't be from having more Latino representatives in the House, it will be by several different factors or one very detrimental one.
In the end, they need to be represented in the House, but I just hope that they find a fair way of doing so as to not upset the masses or sneakily favor different masses.
Avery Kilgour
Per. 2
i agree with marc, if most latinos in texas vote for a representative, that holds different political beliefs than the voters themselves, just because he/she is a latino, then whats the point??!! why bother voting for someone that has opposite views?? the article said that most latinos lean democrats, but the author also pointed out that republican is trying so hard to find a rep that is latino so that more latinos would vote for them. i think this is nonsense, it's like saying "we need latino teachers to teach latino students that made up the majority of the student population"
ReplyDeleteNicholas Kaunang
per 2
Like many have said before me, redrawing the districts in order to encourage a Latino representative seems just like another Gerrymanendering scheme. If it takes a few years to accept those new districts and it almost always leads to a Supreme Court decision, it makes me wonder if this time is really worth it. Yes, more and more Hispanics are moving to Texas and want representation, but Texas appears to be a blantantly Republican state, would a Democratic representative there really be effective? Personally, I don't believe so, so therefore I say no to giving them this Democratic representation. If it were a matter of just getting represented, wouldn't having a Latino Republican representative suffice? It makes sense to have a Democratic one seems Hispanics lean more liberal, but would it really spur them to vote? Maybe it would, but political efficacy is low across the board, so they would make a decision based solely on their "race representative" and not make an informed decision.
ReplyDeleteKayla Villamater
Period 2
What i did not know was that texas had this problem before and was such a big hassle. the latinos of TEXas are right on what they are trying to do, if the seats consist of reps. , then they do need to fight for their place in there.The state would not only consider more of the latino race if they were in there but it would be able to deal and help the growth of texas. if a race has to fight for something multiple times then there must be something that clicks that says we need to give them a fair chance
ReplyDelete-gabriel largaespada
period 3
How can parties gerrymandate districts like this?! districts should be based on population and voter turnout not race or party. By doing so gives the winning party an advantage. we have been losing representations for years and some people are standing up but not enough we need to have a strong representation for the people and the peoples voice of opinion not some candidate who only wants whats best for him. gerrymandering in the stupid ways we have been makes it difficult for voters to feel like their votes count i think if we make their vote count more wed see different districts and higher voter turnout.
ReplyDeleteDean Ambrozich
Per.2
While I believe that Hispanics should be represented in Congress for Texas, I don't think gerrymandering to ensure Hispanic representatives to get those new seats isn't the right thing to do. I don't think one's race or ethnicity has anything to do with politics- the representatives are meant to represent their constituents. I understand why the Latinos will feel safer if Hispanics represented them, but I don't think being Hispanic means one will be loyal to the Hispanics.
ReplyDeleteJunsu Park
Period 3
I do not agree with gerrymandering based on race. A person's race has nothing to do with their political view, if they want representation they cannot simply vote based on the color of a candidates skin which is what they are trying to do. Political campaigns are about listening and doing research to further your own knowledge so you can pick the candidate who's values mirror your own. I understand that yeah we feel safer when we are around people who look like us but that does not qualify them to act like us. If we vote for a person based on race or the shade of their skin we are profiling, something that government tries hard to prevent in the first place so why condone it? I believe any person has the right to run for office but the people have to listen to who is best fro the job; who cares what color they are! The only way to get rid of a discriminatory mindset is to stop treating the races like strangers, blend them all together and then show me who's best.
ReplyDeleteMiranda Myers
Period 2