02.01.12
Abbott is in a tough spot over redistricting mess he created
A settlement in the Texas redistricting litigation, at least for interim maps, that seemed possible over the weekend, now appears to be on hold. From what it looks like the only one willing to deal on the GOP side is Attorney General Greg Abbott. Of course it’s his legal decisions and wrangling that’s drawn the process out this far, already postponing the 2012 Primary in Texas once. And he’ll be the one bearing the political responsibility for the extra cost if it’s postponed again or there’s a split primary.
Here’s an excerpt from Kuff’s great run down of the latest happenings, Redistricting settlement deal looking unlikely.
If that [the state is very likely to lose] really is the case, then there’s little incentive for the plaintiffs to settle. The primary date was more of an issue for Republicans, who want to have a say in their Presidential race and whose financial exposure for the state conventions is greater. And the previous talk about settlements, which sounded very favorable from a Democratic perspective, have apparently ruffled some feathers on that side of the aisle. Michael Li quotes from a post by RPT Chair Steve Munisteri, whose backside is clearly seeking some concealment:
It is important to note, that the talks between the Democratic and Republican parties deal solely with the deadlines and scheduling of the primary election, not with the boundaries of state legislative or Congressional districts. Only the Attorney General’s office’s attorneys are involved in those discussions. Thus, the email chains that have gone out accusing the Republican Party of Texas of trying to save a convention deposit in exchange for district lines, are blatantly false.
Emphasis mine. Translation: Don’t blame me if the pooch gets screwed.
[…]
That doesn’t necessarily mean anything, but it’s often a sign of how the judges are thinking. If my reading is correct, that would be one reason why the state was interested in settling. By the same token, of course, that would be a disincentive for the plaintiffs to cut a deal. At this point, I’d say we’re waiting for the DC court to rule before anything else happens. We’ll know soon enough, though whether it’s soon enough to keep an April primary is question #1 and highly dependent on how soon we know. Campos has more
It’s not surprising that the only one who has something to lose by a long drawn out process is the only one willing to compromise. Everyone else seems willing to let the process run it’s course unless they can get what they want. Oh, and Burka reminds us that we could be going this all over again after the next legislative session, GOP looks to 2013 for redistricting.