Hacker News Reader

Comment by marcinzm | Hacker News Reader

I wonder if that's a partial goal of this law. Keep the state red and have those who are more liberal leave. Ensures a nice voting block for national elections and ensures local officials do not get voted out in the future.

View on HN

Yes. I literally drew the Texas congressional lines in 2000 that set all this in motion and the primary goal of everything the state party does is to purge the state of people that don't vote Republican.

The Texas lines can be made so much more efficiently Republican: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq-Y7crQo44

Whooo! Hold my beer! You literally were part of the group to draw the lines. Imagine looking back and seeing the damage it has caused in the long run. I couldn’t even imagine.

Yes. I was an intern for the ranking republican in the Texas state house (Tom craddick) at the time. I was the only person who knew how to use a computer at more than a basic level so I had my hand on the mouse as we used a brand new map program loaded with voter data. Others in the room at various points included Tom Delay, Mike Baselice (disgraced Trump consultant) Governor George W Bush, Ted Deleese, and some guy named Scott. But I'm being literal: I had my hand on the mouse and drew the map.

What software did you use back then? How did the process change when they started using software as a tool to gerrymander?

Woah woah woah hold up. You're the person who actually drew the lines?

Sorry if this is rude, but what the hell were you thinking?

I was a 22 year old republican given something important to do. I had no idea at the time that we were setting the country on an irredeemable path. It was as exciting at the time as it is shameful now.

Thanks for being so honest and being willing to reevaluate your stance given life experience.

I've told many people 5hat for all the good and bad I've done in life, the one thing that worries me if there actually is St Peter is my work on the congressional maps. Not to self agrandize (sp) and what's done is done, but the impact continues to be awful for the state and the country as a whole.

Wait what -- is this for real?

Afraid so.

I’m life long Texan and Yes that is one purpose. It’s excessively conservative to keep hold of the state. But also a reminder that our GOP state politicians are horrible Trump humpers and morally corrupt while believing they are righteous by enacting these laws. They are the worst people but unfortunately this is the reality of Texas. It’s like pockets of high diversity and rational thinkers surrounded by hoards of wackos.

I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve. - apocryphally credited to Admiral Yamamoto

With such laws in place, if I would live in US there would be no place for people like me, not blue and not red (and partly blue and partly red on various topics). This is because none of the 2 sides are perfect and many people do not fall in one side. So what is the point?

That's a failing of democracy isn't it. One optimum is to make it so the only people in your jurisdiction are those that all want the same thing. This is an argument for a strong constitution and court system and against direct democracy.

It's certainly a failing of the flawed US democracy, but fortunately there are much better ways to implement democracies.

They all have their flaws. Parliamentary democracies, for example, are susceptible to minority extreme views having massive weight if they are needed to keep a coalition in power. Direct democracies are the opposite with minority views being ignored.

edit: Also, one needs to separate the impact of the democratic system from that of the social/cultural system. A country with a very homogenous population tends to have less issues under any system of government.

Yes, but "no perfect option" doesn't imply "no better option".

I could also counter that the extra weight to "minority extreme views" is much less of an issue than most votes in most US states being meaningless because of the first past the post system on a state basis. But I don't really see this as a meaningful discussion, it's undebatable that the US system is flawed to the point where it can't be called a real democracy.

This is a law in one state out of 50 so you have a decent choice of other options.

You don't seem to understand "precedent"

You are the non-voting majority here

Reply on news.ycombinator.com