No More Partisan Theatrics
To the Editor:
The letter in 22-Aug edition of the FCR which criticized Texas House Democrats for their quorum-breaking walkout misrepresents both the facts and the constitutional role of dissent in a representative democracy.
First, the assertion that these legislators abandoned their constituents ignores the reality that they were acting in defense of those very constituents, particularly communities whose voting power has been diluted through gerrymandered district maps. Walking out to block a vote is not dereliction; it’s a legal and historical form of protest used by both parties. As Rep. Gene Wu stated, “We will take whatever measures are necessary to protect our communities and protect the state”.
Second, while the Census Bureau did acknowledge an undercount in Texas (about 1.9%, or roughly 559,000 residents) this does not automatically justify mid-decade redistricting. The Supreme Court has ruled that statistical sampling cannot be used to alter congressional apportionment (U.S. Dept. of Commerce v. U.S. House of Representatives, 1999), and the Census Bureau confirmed that post-enumeration data cannot retroactively change seat allocation.
Third, the claim that the Department of Justice “ordered” Governor Abbott to redraw maps is inaccurate at best and deceiving at worst. The DOJ issued a legal advisory challenging four Texas districts as unconstitutional “coalition districts,” but legal scholars have disputed this interpretation. As Professor Ellen Katz of the University of Michigan Law School testified, “Nothing in this decision suggests, much less holds, that the VRA prohibits the very existence of coalition districts”.
Fourth, the Texas Supreme Court has not found quorumbreaking to be illegal. In fact, when Governor Abbott and Attorney General Ken Paxton petitioned the court to expel Democratic lawmakers for leaving the state, the court declined to act swiftly and instead set a full briefing schedule. As reported by the Texas Tribune, “No Texas lawmaker has ever been removed from office solely for breaking quorum. Never in U.S. history has a governor gotten the courts to remove a member of a legislature for refusing to show up in protest of legislation”. This affirms that quorum-breaking, while politically contentious, is not a violation of law.
Finally, the use of inflammatory rhetoric like Trump Derangement Syndrome undermines serious policy debate. Redistricting is a complex legal and demographic issue. Reducing it to partisan name-calling distracts from the real concerns: racial equity, voter representation, and constitutional compliance.
How about elevating the conversation? Texans deserve a redistricting process rooted in transparency, equity, and constitutional integrity, not one driven by misinformation and partisan theatrics.
Eric Green La Grange