00:00Does the gentleman yield?
00:01Gentleman yield for questions?
00:02Yes.
00:03Gentleman yields for questions.
00:04Mr. Chairman, who decided that these should be changes made from the introduction version of this bill?
00:15Who decided the plan?
00:18Who decided that there should be changes made from the introduction version of the bill?
00:25I do not know who decided, but it had been discussed since April that congressional redistricting could be an issue, especially with the new case law and the new population trends, and I made the decision that I would file this bill.
00:47Mr. Chairman, when the first call session, special session, the committee produced a bill where they had indicated there would be five new congressional districts for Republicans.
01:05Subsequently, thereto, a second special session was called.
01:11Upon meeting of the committee, there was a vote taken on an amended part of a bill that had been previously voted out on the first special session of this year.
01:25Who made a decision to amend the bill from the first call session, special session?
01:35Me and the lawyers.
01:37Pardon me?
01:38Me and the lawyers.
01:40And what was the rationale for the changes of you and the lawyers?
01:46Well, if what we're talking about is there was a committee substitute that was adopted on Monday, it increased Republican political performance.
01:56Legally, I was told that it would follow the case law, and nobody was here for 18 days.
02:05And so my view is we're given every opportunity we can.
02:09And nobody met with me.
02:10Nobody came in.
02:12And so I talked to the lawyers, and we increased Republican political performance, and we increased the map from where it was.
02:19So I would say me and the lawyers.
02:21So you had to go in and look at precincts to do this, correct?
02:25You had to go in and look at precincts in order to make those changes.
02:30I would say, Dean, that I visited with counsel, and they and their resources looked at the specifics.
02:41And who made a decision on what precincts would go into that amended map?
02:50I think it was, what, 2333?
02:53Counsel.
02:54Counsel.
02:55Counsel and counsel of law.
02:56There was no input by you?
02:57That's the, well, I mean, I told them I wanted to increase Republican political performance, and I'm not involved in the specifics.
03:05And I ask, as everybody in here does when you hire a lawyer, this is my goal.
03:09Can you accomplish it?
03:10And they did it, and I ask them to follow the law, follow Rucho, follow Petaway, and this was the map that was developed.
03:19So what you're telling the House is that you and you alone made a decision to make those changes.
03:26No.
03:26As I just said, I made the decision to look at this map.
03:30Can we increase Republican performance since nobody was around and that we had a walkout?
03:37They then went to work, came up, and increased the Republican performance.
03:42So when did you make a decision that you needed to make a change in the map from the first special session to the second special session?
03:48The walkout occurred August 3rd.
03:50It was probably a couple of days after that.
03:53On August 3rd, subsequently to that, didn't we have hearings?
03:59No, nobody was here.
04:00It was a quorum break.
04:01We couldn't do anything.
04:02Couldn't meet.
04:02Couldn't let the public have hearings.
04:04Nobody could meet with me.
04:05Nobody could provide an amendment.
04:07So we had to just do things on our own?
04:10So there were no input.
04:14I think what you're telling me is there was no input by the speaker.
04:17There was no input by the lieutenant governor.
04:20There was only input by you and the person that you indicated helped you draw the changes.
04:26And you alone made a decision that there should be some changes to the map that was a part of the first special session.
04:37That's not what I said.
04:38That's not what I said.
04:40I said.
04:40Oh, I'm so sorry.
04:41What did you say then?
04:42I said exactly what you know I said.
04:45No, I don't know what you said.
04:46Yes, I did.
04:46If you'd been here for 18 days, you would have known.
04:48Number one, I decided to take a look at this map to see if we could increase Republican performance.
04:57I can tell you a lot of people wanted to increase Republican performance.
05:02I can't tell you everybody that has raised that issue.
05:06I went to the lawyer, said we have a plan.
05:09Can we increase it and would it be legal?
05:11They said they would look at it, came back and told me this plan is legal.
05:16Well, based upon the testimony that I think the committee held, the three hearings, based upon the testimony that we heard,
05:27based upon what was supposed to have been submitted as written testimony,
05:31it is my understanding that there was a 100-to-1 not to make changes in the maps.
05:38Am I missing something?
05:40Yeah, you missed 88 Republican members that didn't get an opportunity as well either.
05:46Why do you held public hearings, Dean, that were not required?
05:52The chairman of the committee decided to include the public.
05:57I'm glad he did.
05:58But just because certain groups come in, and if you remember, there was certainly a lot of publicity
06:05that I can't remember the source yet, but I think it'd be checked,
06:09that there were certain third-party organizations paying and getting field advisors
06:14to come into these hearings to take a political stance.
06:17So if they're going to use the political under Rucho, so can we.
06:23But were the 88 members who are members of this body denied the right to come and testify before that committee?
06:30No, but they've been here the whole time, and they have been wanting to move this.
06:35I'm just glad I'm able to get this particular plan, because it may get reviewed again.
06:42Were their constituents denied the right to come and participate in the hearings?
06:46Were their constituents denied the right to participate in those hearings?
06:52That I don't know, because I just presented the bill. I don't know.
06:55Were their constituents denied the right to submit their opinion or testimony to the committee?
07:05I don't think so, but again, I was just presenting the bill. That was not my function.
07:10But you made the statement that they were not a part of it.
07:14I didn't say they were not important. In fact, in the hearing, as you recall, I made a big statement that I thought they were important.
07:22And even though there was opposition, I was glad they came.
07:26And some of the information in this map came from those hearings.
07:30So I disagree with you 100%.
07:31I'm glad we did the hearings. I'm glad we got the input.
07:36And I'm glad that a lot of people submitted it in writing.
07:40So absolutely it was taken in.
07:42Just because somebody agrees or disagrees with me doesn't mean that I'm not going to listen.
07:47And in fact, I offered at the hearing for members to come visit with me and members to come talk with me.
07:54And if they needed to bring somebody in that they could, I did hear from some Republicans.
08:00Well, to agree and disagree is a part of our democratic process.
08:04Absolutely.
08:05Okay. And they did have an opportunity if they wanted to come.
08:11Yes, I do agree that they had an opportunity.
08:12Mr. Chairman, let me draw your attention to Congressional District No. 9.
08:16I noticed in the Congressional District No. 9, in your amendment 2333, you discussed in the committee that your map draws this to be a Hispanic majority district.
08:31Is that correct?
08:33Are you talking about the bill that is right here today?
08:36Yeah, I'm talking about that amendment that was voted out of committee.
08:41Well, we didn't do an amendment. We did a committee substitute.
08:44Well, a substitute.
08:45Okay.
08:45And I think the number was 2333?
08:50I think that's the map number is Plan C 2333.
08:55Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.
08:58And you indicated today that you all reconfigurated that to be a Hispanic majority district, correct?
09:08We said that Hispanic CVAP under the committee substitute would be 50.15%.
09:16And you have said in your brief that the Latino population in Texas support Republicans.
09:24That said that the Latinos seem tend to report Republicans.
09:35Well, not me, but I certainly welcome all of them being a South Texan.
09:40And I do think political performance and trend is going that direction to support Republicans, absolutely.
09:46But I don't know what you mean.
09:47Well, I don't know what you mean.
09:48I don't think I said somebody preferred.
09:51I think there is a political performance that's showing preference to certain Republicans in different regions of the state based on everybody.
10:01And are you talking about the racial polarization analysis?
10:05Well, I don't know what you mean by racial polarization analysis.
10:10I know about data that was done by HCVAP, HVAP, Black CVAP, and Black VAP, which is a little bit different.
10:20That's what I'm relying on.
10:22Well, this is an analysis that is normally utilized when they're drawing to see what is the performance of different races.
10:30They're looking at dilution and inclusions and things of this nature, and they show that in CD9, the person that you pull in have more of a tendency to vote Democratic than Republican.
10:44And pulling in that percentage of Latinos in Congressional District 9 and new configurated District 9 will show that if they are a part of that Congressional District,
10:56that their voting power may be diluted.
10:59Are you aware of that?
11:01I'm not real clear on that.
11:05I don't think there's a dilution.
11:08Political performance is what this is.
11:11CD9, the Hispanic CVAP, is 50.15%.
11:15It's a new Hispanic CVAP.
11:19Liberty County is now in CD9.
11:22There does show in this CD Republican partisan performance.
11:27Previously, though, CD9 was not a majority of a single group.
11:32So now they are.
11:35The gentleman's time has expired.
11:37Mr. Speaker.
11:38I move that the time be extended.
11:41Mayor, do you hear the motion?
11:41The motion is or objection, chairs?
11:42That's all.
11:44There is a.
11:44There is a.
Comments