06.29.06

The Voting Rights Act, John Carter & Redistricting

Posted in Around The Nation, Around The State, Commentary at 10:16 pm by wcnews

Last week, as the Austin Chronicle reminds us, Rep. John Carter made “jumbled” statements about his reasons for wanting to delay the renewal of the Voting Rights Act. It seems like just yesterday he made those remarks but since then he’s been doing he’s best to clarify his position. He, and his press secretary, have been saying he was “misquoted” and “taken out of context”. He also stated that there was a need to delay the renewal in order to wait and see how the Supreme Court rules on the Texas redistricting case.
But with a new week comes more time for John Carter to speak on the issues. With the Supreme Court ruling on the redistricting case this week, and with it the only problem being an issue with the VRA, I’m sure Rep. Carter will have something to say about that. Well, let’s just say one man’s “troubling blend of politics and race” is another man’s “slight caveat”. What’s meant by that is that what Rep. John Carter called a slight caveat was a ruling by the Supreme Court that Congressional District 23 in South Texas violated the VRA. Here’s what he said:

“The Supreme Court ruling is a huge victory for the people of Texas as well as the Republican Party,” said Rep. John Carter, R-Round Rock. “We won on every major point of contention.”

“Today’s decision exonerates the Republicans of any wrongdoing. The majority opinion was that the current district map is a fair plan,” said Carter, who represents District 31, which includes Bell County. “In short, the Supreme Court ruled that the new map is an improvement over the old gerrymandered map that was drafted by Democrats.

“The only slight caveat to this victory is that the Supreme Court felt the Hispanic population in District 25 was not sufficiently compact and therefore not an acceptable majority-minority replacement for District 23.

“At this point, it is unclear what action the three judge panel will take in terms of a remedy to affect me or the other districts surrounding mine in Central Texas,” Carter said. “I believe, however, that the court should allow the Texas Legislature to exercise its constitutional authority in coming up with any necessary remedy.”

I’ll give him that it’s a victory for the Republican Party but the people of Texas? As long as you’re not one of the voters who happened to live in the illegal district. He’s basically saying that a violation of the voting rights of minorities in Texas is not a major point of contention and that the Supreme Court was just throwing a bone to those Texans down there.

This ruling affirms the need for the Voting Rights Act and preclearance in Texas because if a “right-wing” Supreme Court can still rule that it was violated then obviously there is still racism in Texas. John Carter should now do his best to quickly renew the VRA.

Read more on the VRA and Redistricting at Just Another Blog, Texas Redistricting Shows Importance of Voting Rights Act.

4 Comments »

  1. Eye on Williamson » said,

    August 24, 2006 at 10:46 am

    [...] Picture and the link to the story via Capitol Annex. John Carter in this story from the TDP again shows why his handlers will not let him on stage with Mary Beth Harrell. He again has to clarify what he originally said – like the VRA/racism comments he made over the summer. As you can see via the Capitol Annex link above he’s now clarifying comments he made in the AAS last week, Carter unsure about forum.  Let’s be clear about this though.  This is not John Carter’s decision although he probably is going along with it but his handlers are telling that there’s no way he will ever debate Mary Beth Harrell.  But you never know, as incompetent as his campaign has looked so far, it just might happen. [...]

  2. Eye on Williamson » John Carter, You’re Congressional Seat Is Not A Lifetime Appointment said,

    September 15, 2006 at 9:53 am

    [...] John Carter thinks he has a lifetime appointment to Congress. Now that he’s in a nice comfy “DeLay drawn district” he thinks he not longer has to present himself to his constituents at election time. That is an affront to what the founders intended, which is the Republicans main platform these days. It would be nice to see Mr. Carter show up to a debate so he couldfurther explain some of what he has said and done over his last term in office. Referring to Tom DeLay as being like a WW I lieutenant should disqualify him, not to mention his idiotic defense for delaying the renewal of the Voting Rights Act , what he said about racism in Texas , and his comments on Social Security and abortion. His lack of rhetorical skills being another reason he won’t debate. [...]

  3. Eye on Williamson » AAS Fluffs Up Carter and McCaul - [UPDATED] said,

    October 10, 2006 at 4:31 pm

    [...] She then tries to explain away John Carter’s bumbling remarks by calling him blunt. He’s not blunt he just makes mistakes. He speaks his mind, and what’s on his mind is what is quoted. It would be funny if he wasn’t in Congress, maybe if he was running for governor, but he is running for Congress and it’s just sad. Also the fact that he’s carrying a recorder to act as a buffer – let’s assume to tape what he says so he can refute being misquoted. This too would be funny, but then it turns sad as well. Where McCaul handles the political discomforts of the pre- and post-Tom DeLay era in the House with the smoothness of a popular student body president, Carter can sometimes be gruff. Recent run-ins with the news media have prompted Carter to carry a digital recorder with him as a buffer against reporters who press him for answers. [...]

  4. Eye on Williamson » More Disaster Ahead For Republicans In Congress said,

    November 15, 2006 at 9:00 am

    [...] John “Foot-In-Mouth” Carter, it appears, is in-line for a leadership post in the new GOP minority in the US House.  Having the man who lead the charge against the renewal of the Voting Rights Act will go along way to moving the party forward, NOT!.  It looks like the GOP is ready to embrace it’s segregationist past in the Senate too. [...]

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.