History

This is just an example and you should not copy any parts of it in your initial post.  Doing so will result in an automatic 0. 

Your initial post  does not need to be this long, but you have to follow the same format.  Avoid being tempted to copy this written argument; the author has made little mistakes and there are some errors in stated data.

Question 1

My Texas state House representative is Representative Thresa "Terry" Meza. She is female, and her party affiliation is Democrat. Her race is unknown, but her district number is 105 (Texas House of Representatives). My Texas state senator is Senator Kelly Hancock. He is male, and his party affiliation is Republican. His race is also unknown. His district number is 9 (The Texas Tribune).

Question 2

It looks like the legislature is unrepresentative of the people of Texas. Before I begin, I would like to share the research I found about my Representative and Senator of my district. Representative Thresa Meza from District 105 looks like she represents the Hispanic communities. In a way, she is also representing the minority group. In the “Biography” section, it says that “she also worked as a nonprofit director overseeing programs in small & minority business assistance” (Texas House of Representatives). It may not sound like it, but we see some representation towards the minority groups. I clicked on the “District Profile Reports”. In that link, it showed a profile of the district, titled “Texas House District 105: ACS 2014-2018 Estimates”. According to the report, the population of District 105 is about 189,119. There are 49,738 non-Hispanic Anglos or Caucasians out of the total population. As for non-Anglo groups, there are 139,381 (Texas Legislative Council). Here, we can see larger numbers of minorities than the majority in this district. I mentioned that she might be representing the Hispanic communities. According to the analysis, there are 96,503 Hispanics in that district (Texas Legislative Council). At the same time, she is a minority, so she is also representing the non-Anglos community. Next would be the Texas Senate. Senator Kelly Hancock is from District 9. According to the District Profile, titled “Texas Senate District 9: ACS 2014-2018 Estimates”, the population of District 9 totaled up to about 902,387. There are about 388,926 non-Hispanic Anglos and 513,461 non-Anglos in District 9 of Texas (Texas Legislative Council). Looking at the non-Anglos race separately, we see that the majority of the population in this district are Caucasians. Therefore, Senator Kelly Hancock is representing them. By comparison, we can see that Representative Thresa Meza is more representative of the people of Texas than Senator Kelly Hancock based on race. Simultaneously, the Senate and House of Representatives represent the whole population of their district and not a specific racial group. As I mentioned earlier, I feel the legislature is not representative of the people of Texas. There are different district analyses to each of the districts than what I shared. We will find out why, using the population size of Texas of 2019, along with the population of each race and gender of Texas.

A presentation from Texas Demographic Center, titled Demographic Trends and Population Projections for Texas and the North Texas Region, presented to Leadership North Texas, provided a chart, titled “Population Growth of Select States, 2000-2019”. The chart shows that the population was 25,145,561 in the year 2010. In 2019, the population increased to a total of 28,995,881. The presentation also pointed out, “As Texas grows, it ages and continues to diversify” (Texas Demographic Center). They provided another chart, titled “Race/Ethnicity Composition, Texas, 2010-2019”. The chart revealed that non-Hispanic White is the largest estimated population of 2019. The Hispanic race is the second-largest population, and they are also the largest minority group. The remaining groups were non-Hispanic (NH) African-American, Asian, American Indian and Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander. They also included “NH Two or More Races”. The population of the remaining groups was 3.5 million or below (Texas Demographic Center). This result shows that there are smaller populations in the minority groups, excluding the Hispanics.

Another piece of information I want to point out is gender. Legislative consists of two bodies, which are the Senate and the House of Representatives. According to The State of Texas: Government, Politics, and Policy, written by Sherri Mora, she provided a table chart, titled “Background of Members of the Texas Legislature, 2018” (Mora). According to the chart, the members of the house consist of 121 males and 29 females. As for the senate, there are 23 males and eight females (Mora). Mora also wrote that “cultural changes in the state over recent decades have increased the diversity of the Texas legislature” (Mora). "The number of officeholders who are members of ethnic minority groups has grown, both in Texas and across the nation” (Mora). The reason was partly due to "reapportionment and redistricting" (Mora). Still, “women and people of color are underrepresented in the Texas legislature when compared with their proportions of the state population” (Mora). In the 85th Texas Legislature of the year 2017, the people of color formed 57.1 percent of the population of Texas. However, they only accounted for “35.9 percent of the legislative seats” (Mora). The same situation applies to women. While women accounted for 50.4 percent of Texas's population, “women hold only 20.4 percent of the seats in the Texas legislature” (Mora). As of now, we have 112 males and 38 females in the House of Representatives. There are also various members of different races. However, a majority of the members are Caucasians and males. If we were counting members of a particular race, there would be fewer of them. Instead, we would count the members based on how many minorities there are in the House. From the list, there are about 20-25 female members. There are more males than females in the House. However, looking at the female members, there are more minority females than Caucasian females. As for the males, we see mostly Caucasians. Then again, it seems like more minorities are participating in state politics (Texas House of Representatives). As for the Texas Senate, there are about eight minorities out of 31 members. Of the 31 members, there are nine female members in total. Not only that, only one female representative is not Caucasian (The Texas Senate). Even though there are more Caucasians in both the Senate and House of Representatives, that does not mean we should start adding more females and people of color. This information shows that each minority race has a fewer population than the other. Once you have more representatives who are either females or minorities, each district population will not feel underrepresented.

Based on the statistics that each one has provided, we can see how the legislature is not representative of the people of Texas. Not only that, Mora pointed out that women and people of color are underrepresented, which means they did not provide enough representation to the people of Texas.

Representation can be defined by what the U.S. Supreme Court stated when they “rejected the analogy to the U.S. Senate, which is based on geographic units'' (Mora). They explained, “Legislators represent people, not trees or acres. Legislators are elected by voters, not farms or cities or economic interests'' (Mora). Not only that, “legislative apportionment most often resulted in equity” of representation during most of the 19th century (Mora). What this means is that each representative represents an equal number of citizens. With that information provided, we can define representation as legislators fairly representing an equal number of citizens of Texas. Mora also provided other information that supports what I said: “In April 2016, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected this challenge, asserting that ‘total-population apportionment promotes equitable and effective representation'” (Mora). By “this challenge”, she was referring to a case in Evenwel v. Abbott. The plaintiffs of the case argued that the “one person, one vote” rule would become violated if the practice of making legislative districts were to become equal in terms of total populations (Mora). Instead, they argued that there should be “an equal number of eligible voters in each district” (Mora). This challenge got rejected, and they stated that “total-population apportionment” encourages fair representation.

I suppose the only reform necessary to make the legislature more representative would be to add more seats to the House of Representatives of Texas. This way, we will likely have more females and people of color representing each citizen of Texas. There are large numbers of representatives who are Caucasians and male, according to the statistics. With the increase of females and people of color, it might make the legislature more representative. In Texas, there are 31 state senators. Therefore, there are 31 single-member state senate districts. There are also 150 members in the House of Representatives. Hence, there are 150 single-member, state house districts (Mora). The only reform that would be necessary and acceptable would be the Texas House of Representatives. In Texas, the constitution prohibits any county from having more than one senator, no matter how large the population is (Mora). With that information in mind, we can see why increasing the House of Representatives of Texas would be an alternate solution in making the legislature more representative. 

There is another piece of information I would like to share. Mora wrote, “From 1876 until the 1920s, the Texas legislature made an effort to reapportion the seats after each census. This process was made easier by the addition of one seat for each increase of 50,000 in the population” (Mora). However, there were no seats added because the legislature failed “to reapportion legislative seats” (Mora). By 1948, “Texas legislative seats had not changed since 1921” even though a large population shifted from rural to urban areas. Because of this, “most urban counties were vastly underrepresented” (Mora). The creation of the Legislative Redistricting Board forced the legislature to act in 1951 and 1961. Representation shifted from rural to urban areas, but large urban counties were still underrepresented. Part of this was because of the 1936 amendment to the Texas Constitution. It limited “the number of representatives any county could have to seven until the population reached 700,000” (Mora). 

The county could add one extra representative for each 100,000 population. The problem with this is that each county would have more representatives. Which means each county would not have an equal number of representatives. It may not work well if we try to add a seat to each district since each county has a different population size. If we use the method from 1876-1920s, where one seat gets added for every increase of 50,000, we can see that we would have had about 579 representatives total in 2019, with a population of 28,995,881. It may not be accurate, but it is the estimation of what it would be if they began to add seats for every population increase of 50,000. We see it has more than 150 members, including the Texas counties. There are 254 counties in Texas. However, they can change it to where two representatives will represent a county. The problem with this solution is that there will be additional members, which would be 71. For that reason, instead of 579, it should be 508. That way, each county would have two representatives representing their county. Another issue with this would be having 508 state house districts, which sounds impossible since we have 254 counties. Also, representatives are representing an equal number of populations in each district and not each county. Redistricting the state to 508 house districts would be ridiculous, and it will be small in size. Another reform I thought of was keeping the 150 state house districts but doubling the members of the House of Representatives. Again, the issue with this would be to change the Texas Constitution, which is not happening. There is only one solution that might work: 300 Texas House members and 300 state house districts. It might be a better solution to the legislature. With a total number of 300 members in the House, there might be an increase in females and people of color who will represent the citizens of their district. With 150 members of the Texas House, they each represented about 193,306 people. However, with 300 members, it will reduce it down to 96,653 people. Each citizen might become delighted to see diversity in the legislature. Some citizens may feel relieved to see a member of the same color representing their race, including women representing the female community. Each member of the representatives may have a small district size, but the point is to see the legislatures being more representative of the people of Texas. Not only that, each representative needs to represent an equal number of citizens of the total population. For that reason, increasing the number of members of the House of Representatives in Texas by a double would make sense. Increasing the number of members and districts would also mean redistricting the state. 

Of course, that idea may have drawbacks in some ways. Sherri Mora explained that “the size of legislatures raises several issues” (Mora). One reason is “statewide interests might go unrepresented” (Mora). Another reason is that “they can become inefficient at decision making or, in part because of that inefficiency, be dominated by a few members, especially legislative leaders” (Mora). These are just possibilities of what would happen if we have larger legislatures. Again, the benefit would be to become more representative of Texas. After all, when you look at the members of the House of Texas, a large number of them are male and Caucasians. Doubling the seats and districts might be a way of keeping the citizens at ease and content. Hopefully, the drawbacks do not become too severe.

Question 3

I believe smaller constituencies might allow a large number of people to participate in state politics. The reason for this is because I previously mentioned that the solution to making the legislature more representative is to add more seats, which means doubling the members of the Texas House of Representatives to 300 members. In The State of Texas: Government, Politics, and Policy, Sherri Mora wrote that “…larger bodies would ensure that the senate and especially the house would be more democratic and closer to the people because each state legislator would represent fewer constituents and a smaller geographic area” (Mora). For that reason, we can see why larger bodies, meaning more members for the Texas House of Representatives, may become a better solution to not only become more representative but also have fewer constituencies for each member to represent. In 2010, the population was 25,145,561, and each House member represents 167,637 people. Not only that, there are 167,637 constituents per legislative district (Mora). I mentioned before that we should double the members of representatives to 300. With that idea, we would be able to reduce that number down to about 83,818 people. This number would apply only in the year 2010. However, this idea shows that there will be fewer constituencies when we add more members to the Texas House of Representatives. This reform will allow larger bodies to ensure that the Senate and the House are closer to the people they represent. 

Mora also pointed out, “one member of the United States’ founding generation noted, smaller constituencies might also allow a wider array of people to participate in state politics, rather than just the ‘rich’ or ‘well born’” (Mora). It may be outdated since they said this around the 1700s, and they did not have as many populations as we currently do. However, they are still members of the United States’ founding generation, and one member agrees that smaller constituencies might allow a wide variety of people to participate in state politics. Who knows, with fewer constituencies, we might have someone participating in state politics who is not “rich” or “well-born”. I feel like the reason why the “rich” or “well-born” participate in state politics is that they have enough funds for traveling, campaigning, and advertising. As for those who may not have enough funds, they may still participate in state politics with the help of their supporters, who would be considered their campaign team. With enough funds, the person participating in state politics will run well and possibly win. It all depends on how they plan it. 

There is also another reason why larger bodies would be a better idea. Mora said that “large bodies might better promote the representation of local concerns and diverse interests within the state” (Mora). This statement reveals that this might encourage the Representatives to become more representative towards local concerns. Not only that, there will be a variety of interests within the state, which would also include state politics.

Question 4

I feel like race should be taken into consideration whenever they redistrict Texas. Looking back at the presentation from Texas Demographic Center, there is a chart, titled “Race/Ethnicity Composition, Texas, 2010-2019”. There, we see a big difference in the number of races/ethnicities of each population group. In the year 2019, the estimated population of non-Hispanic (NH) Whites was 11,950,774. As I mentioned before, Hispanics are the largest minority population of Texas, totaling 11,525,578. As we go on, we see that NH African-American is 3,501,610, which is about 8 million less than what whites and Hispanics have. We also see that NH Asians are at a population of 1,457,549. The chart also included “NH Two or More Races”, which is at 425,866. Lastly, we see that NH American Indian and Alaska Native and NH Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander are at about 94,000 or less for population size (Texas Demographic Center). Based on the estimated population size of 2019, we see that certain races/ethnicities are far less than the others. The minority groups are underrepresented because of this issue. For this reason, they should take race/ethnicity into consideration for redistricting. It will help in not only representing the minority but also gaining trust and support from them.

I want to point out information about redistricting and gerrymandering. According to an article from The Texas Tribune, written by Yasmeen Khalifa, the census is a way to count every resident in the United States every ten years (Khalifa). "After that, state and local governments use the new population data to draw new congressional and state legislative maps” (Khalifa). She said, “the point is to draw roughly equally populated districts to reflect population growth and guarantee equal voter representation” (Khalifa). Even though they are drawn “roughly equally” for each representative to represent, the people of color might feel as if they are not receiving enough representation. Gerrymandering might be the reason behind this issue. According to a video from KSAT Explains, titled “Episode 23: Redrawing the Maps”, Nina Perales, who works for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund organization, said that “Gerrymandering is a term that people came up with to describe when district lines are drawn in a way that somebody considers to be unfair” (KSAT Explains).

According to what Sherri Mora wrote in The State of Texas: Government, Politics, and Policy, she said that in the case of Bush v. Vera, the Supreme Court “did not object to states’ considering race when drawing district lines or to their intentionally creating majority-minority districts; however, using race as the predominant factor in drawing districts, while subordinating other considerations, was found to be unconstitutional” (Mora). This means that using gerrymandering tactics only for racial matters would be wrong and unconstitutional. She also wrote that “the U.S. Supreme Court, in Hunt v. Cromartie, allowed the use of political gerrymandering in drawing legislative districts in April 1999” (Mora). The Court discovered that “drawing district boundaries based on political affiliation or partisan makeup was justifiable and constitutional. Therefore, creating a ‘safe’ Democratic or Republican seat was permissible” (Mora). Mora also said that creating legislative districts based only on “racial considerations” is prohibited, even though “political party affiliation and race” are often matched up (Mora). Using gerrymandering only towards race is unconstitutional. However, we also found out what Mora wrote. She wrote that the Supreme Court did not oppose the states’ consideration of race when they drew district lines or intentionally created majority-minority districts. It looks like they will find ways to use gerrymandering for not only political party advantage but for racial matters as well. 

Another piece of information I found in the KSAT Explain video was from a UTSA Associate Professor of Political Science named Walter Wilson, PhD. He said, “In an ideal world, I think that we would see congressional districts that attempt to represent communities of interest and the idea that regions and cities would all be represented by a voice in Congress. But instead, what we frequently see is an effort to either group certain kinds of voters together or divide them” (KSAT Explain). Even though they divided them into groups based on political party advantage, there is a possibility that race is also a factor in this tactic. In the same video, Nina Perales explains the issue with unfair redistricting: “When you have unfair redistricting, anybody can be hurt by that. It could be that lines are drawn to disadvantage rural voters or disadvantage urban voters. Sometimes lines can be drawn to disadvantage racial minorities” (KSAT Explain). That last statement reveals how minorities are at a disadvantage for this tactic. For that reason, they are underrepresented. 

Going back to The Texas Tribune article, Khalifa also mentioned another piece of information involving the people of color for voting. She said, “the state has been dealing with the legal implications of the 2011 redistricting maps that ended up being rejected by the federal government. Following explosive population growth in Texas, particularly among Hispanic residents, the state gained four seats in Congress that cycle” (Khalifa). Instead of creating a district with “a Black and Hispanic majority that could have made their seats safer in a Democratic wave election”, the Republicans chose to keep “their numbers in Dallas County and purposefully diluted the voting strength of voters of color in the Texas House map and in several congressional districts” (Khalifa). This temporarily sparked. The replacement maps were considered "discriminatory" in some ways (Khalifa). She also said that the state Republicans positioned themselves to establish their power further because "they held onto their 20-year majority in the recent election” (Khalifa). However, the voting rights groups will likely raise concerns “that the cost of the retrenchment will be the continued disenfranchisement of voters of color” (Khalifa). As we can see, this issue has led to the denial of the rights that the voters of color have, which would be the right to vote. Overall, I feel like race needs consideration when redistricting because it would be fair to the people of color, especially their voting rights. Furthermore, it would allow the legislatures to become more representative of the people of Texas.

After reading and providing the evidence to support my view, I believe that redistricting is an appropriate tool in representing the minority or underserved populations, only if gerrymandering is unused against minorities. As I mentioned before, even though gerrymandering is effective for political party advantages, there is a possibility that the people of color will not be taken into consideration and represented. We see the concerns that the voting rights groups have for what the Republicans have done. Nina Perales mentioned that lines can sometimes be drawn to disadvantage racial minorities. In the Bush v. Vera case, Sherri Mora said that the Supreme Court did not oppose the states’ consideration of race when they drew district lines or intentionally created majority-minority districts. The Court said it was unconstitutional to use race as a primary factor in drawing the districts. Then again, they can still use gerrymandering for not only political party advantage but for racial advantage. It may get approved for drawing districts that are at a political party advantage. However, each house district has a different population for certain minorities. That is why I agree redistricting is an appropriate tool to provide representations for minority or underserved populations. Minorities have worked hard in having equal rights, which means they also deserve to have equal representation. However, if gerrymandering is involved, especially when it goes against minorities, then redistricting will become an issue for that matter. I should also point out that it is considered unfair for some citizens since gerrymandering will always lead to a political party over another. If that is the case, then gerrymandering should not be used or involved in the redistricting process.