A una profesora de matemáticas de Texas que estudia la redistribución de distritos no le sorprende que un grupo de vigilancia electoral no partidista haya calificado el proceso de redistribución del estado con una calificación de D-menos.

Andrea Barreiro, de la Universidad Metodista del Sur, afirma que las conclusiones de Common Cause coinciden con las suyas y muestran una clara inclinación de los legisladores hacia los republicanos. Para el proyecto "Matemáticas para mapas imparciales", los investigadores de SMU crearon un millón y medio de posibles mapas de redistribución de distritos.

Barreiro afirma que el mapa aprobado por los legisladores superaba con creces el mapa más tendencioso de su grupo.

"El proceso no respondía realmente a las necesidades de los electores, hasta donde yo sé," explica Barreiro. "En realidad, no parecía que lo que el público decía sobre los mapas tuviera mucho impacto en el proceso de toma de decisiones."

Múltiples casos están en curso en los tribunales federales que impugnan los nuevos mapas del Congreso de Texas por considerarlos racialmente discriminatorios. La semana pasada, un juez de distrito de Estados Unidos ordenó al condado de Galveston que redibujara su mapa del Tribunal de Comisionados antes de este viernes (20/10) tras considerar que violaba la Ley federal del Derecho al Voto.

Dan Vicuña, director de redistribución de distritos y representación de Common Cause, dice que la solución a la manipulación extrema es el establecimiento de un sistema no partidista o una comisión con amplia representación para trazar distritos, algo que sólo existe en un puñado de estados.

"Los ciudadanos entienden que mantenerse en un distrito con una comunidad que comparte preocupaciones de todo tipo puede marcar la diferencia entre tener un defensor en los pasillos del poder... o no tenerlo," explica Vicuña.

Según datos recientes del censo, los hispanos constituyen oficialmente la mayor parte de la población de Texas -aproximadamente el 40%, pero Barreiro afirma que su influencia como votantes es escasa.

"Seguimos teniendo un voto racialmente polarizado en Texas, los votantes blancos tienden a votar de una manera y los votantes no blancos tienden al otro lado del pasillo," dice Vicuña. "Y así, los votantes no blancos tienen menos posibilidades de elegir a un candidato de su preferencia cuando están esencialmente divididos y agrupados en un número menor de distritos."

Sólo California y Massachusetts obtuvieron una A en el estudio, mientras que 17 estados se situaron en la categoría D o F.

El apoyo para este informe fue proporcionado por The Carnegie Corporation of New York.



"Los ciudadanos entienden que mantenerse en un distrito con una comunidad que comparte preocupaciones de todo tipo puede marcar la diferencia entre tener un defensor en los pasillos del poder... o no tenerlo."

Según datos recientes del censo, los hispanos constituyen oficialmente la mayor parte de la población de Texas -aproximadamente el 40 por ciento-, pero Barreiro afirma que su influencia como votantes es escasa.

"Seguimos teniendo un voto racialmente polarizado en Texas, los votantes blancos tienden a votar de una manera y los votantes no blancos tienden al otro lado del pasillo. Y asi, los votantes no blancos tienen menos posibilidades de elegir a un candidato de su preferencia cuando estan esencialmente divididos y agrupados en un numero menor de distritos."

Sólo California y Massachusetts obtuvieron una A en el estudio, mientras que 17 estados se situaron en la categoría D o F.

A una profesora de matematicas de Texas que estudia la redistribucion de distritos no le sorprende que un grupo de vigilancia electoral no partidista haya calificado el proceso de redistribucion de distritos del estado con una calificacion de D-menos. Tania Gomezdaza tiene mas informacion.

Soy Tania Gomezdaza

Contactar con Barreiro en abarreiro@mail.smu.edu y con Vicuna en el 571-218-6135. Este reportaje cuenta con el apoyo de Carnegie Corporation de Nueva York. Informe: https://www.commoncause.org/resource/charge-texas/. Matematicas para mapas imparciales: https://shorturl.at/hzBKR




get more stories like this via email

Recent Supreme Court rulings on air pollution are affecting Virginia and the nation.

Climate advocates said the court overstepped its bounds in ruling the Environmental Protection Agency's Good Neighbor Rule was improperly enacted and repealing the so-called "Chevron deference." Without it, judges have to rule on ambiguous regulatory laws with no agency expertise.

Craig Segall, vice president of the advocacy group Evergreen Action, said the court is diminishing the capacity of Virginia's federal climate partners like the EPA.

"By creating room to attack, for instance, carbon standards for power plants federally, that Virginia might want to implement," Segall outlined. "Or by making it harder for U.S. EPA to move us toward electric vehicles that would create jobs in Virginia and that would, you know, clean up the air, especially in Northern Virginia where it's so congested."

He added it creates an opportunity for states to lead on climate action. But partisan opinions on climate change vary across the country. In Virginia, it means mixed efforts from utility companies and lawmakers. Dominion Energy is developing offshore wind, but it is also pressing on with a natural gas plant residents vehemently oppose.

The rulings, coupled with decisions on presidential immunity and what constitutes bribery have eroded the Supreme Court's perception of impartiality. Polls show most Americans across party lines feel the Court puts political ideology first.

Quentin Scott, federal policy director for the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said it opens the floodgates to government corruption.

"We can't have this blatant, open corruption or it will diminish our effectiveness of government and enforcement of some very important rules related to pollution," Scott asserted.

He stressed climate action will be a top ballot priority along with preserving democracy. Some of his group's top issues for the next presidency will be improving grid interconnection of clean energy projects and approving certain reforms for the Supreme Court.

Vice President Kamala Harris, now the presumptive Democratic nominee for president, delivered a powerful message in Indianapolis.

Speaking at a Zeta Phi Beta Sorority event, just days after President Joe Biden dropped out of the race and endorsed her candidacy, Harris emphasized her dedication to affordable healthcare, student debt relief, and gun control measures, including universal background checks and an assault weapons ban.

She also hammered home that, if she is elected president, she would restore a woman's right to choose an abortion.

"When I am President of the United States and when Congress passes a law to restore those freedoms, I will sign it into law," Harris said. "We are not playing around."

Harris expressed her belief that the current administration has made progress toward a better future by implementing such initiatives as capping insulin prices for more affordable healthcare, passing the Child Tax Credit, and forgiving student loan debt for millions of Americans.

GOP Vice-Presidential nominee J.D. Vance was also in Indiana Wednesday. He spoke at a private event in Ft. Wayne.

Criticizing Project 2025, a conservative plan drafted by the Heritage Foundation, Harris warned it would take the country backward in the areas of medical freedom and education.

"This represents an outright attack on our children, our family, and our future. These extremists want to take us back, but we are not going back. We are not going back," she said.

Harris called for unity in defending freedom and stated there are two different visions for the country. Her vision, she said, looks to the future; the other, she said, looks to the past. Harris urged the community to mobilize and vote, stressing the significance of this moment in shaping the nation's future.


get more stories like this via email

A sweeping conservative plan to shape a possible second Donald Trump presidency is making headlines, even as the GOP candidate claims to know little about it.

"Project 2025" from the conservative Heritage Foundation includes standard conservative ideas, such as slashing regulations, but also firing thousands of civil servants, dismantling the Department of Education and giving more power to the states.

David Nevins, co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder of the Bridge Alliance, a network of organizations working to promote healthy self-governance, has enlisted experts to share their thoughts on each of Project 2025's 30 sections.

"The cross-partisan approach that we believe in is, in some cases, the federal government can do certain things more effectively - in some cases not as effectively - and that's the discussion we need to have as a nation," Nevins said.

Alarming to New Mexico conservationists, Project 2025 proposes slashing federal money for research and investment in renewable energy, and replacing carbon-reduction goals with efforts to increase energy production and energy security.

Nevins believes many on the far right want to "turn back the clock" and erase societal changes that have occurred in the last 20 to 30 years. He said people can be afraid of change - especially when things are moving fast - but thinks Project 2025 represents a lack of open-mindedness rather than seeking common ground to take democracy to its next level.

"The reality of America is that we are a diverse country, in terms of racial, ethnic, sexual preferences, religion - that is the reality. And if we're going to live into the pluralistic dream of our founding fathers and mothers, we have to learn to make that work," he explained.

While Trump has denied knowing much about Project 2025, nearly two-thirds of the authors behind the plan served in his former administration.


get more stories like this via email