Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Why Redistricting Is Important to the Chicano Community in Fort Worth

By Fernando Florez
*Edited and modified by Jesús Manuel Mena Garza for Chicano y Que?
Special to Nuestra Voz de Tarrant County
  
        Shortly after the end of World War II one of my friend's father returned home to Fort Worth after his military service. A few days later he and a friend went to a restaurant downtown. They sat down at a table to order and soon a waiter came over and told them: "We don't serve Mexicans." With his great sense of humor, my friend's father replied to the waiter: "We weren't going to order one" and left the restaurant. Being discriminated against and disrespected in other ways was not uncommon for Chicanos in this and other parts of Texas and the Southwest. But in part because of the military contributions of Chicanos and Tejanos to the United States going as far back as the American Revolutionary War, which have not ever been fully recognized to this day, injustices such as this one were catching the public's eye and the winds of change were already blowing.
        I came to work at General Dynamics here in Fort Worth as an electronics technician/ technical writer after my Army discharge in 1968. There has been some change here since that time, but what is still prevalent is the same attitude that those with the political power in the Rio Grande Valley had when I was growing up: Maintain the status quo by keeping the same people or those of their ilk, who opposed sharing political power with Chicanos, in control. I never thought that was right then nor that it's right now--no matter how it's spinned, it's simply wrong to keep Chicanos or any other group from having their voice heard-- and it's the reason I am involved in redistricting.  
        Redistricting involves drawing electoral districts' boundaries. Because of a long history of discrimination, especially in the South, Texas and the Southwest, and to comply with the Voting Rights Act, boundaries must be drawn in a manner that will protect the voting rights of minorities. Here in Texas, there is redistricting of U. S. Congressional districts and of state Senate and House of Representative districts, by the legislature. (Briefly, in the North Texas area, the legislature has drawn districts that minimize the chances for Chicanos to be elected to office, by diluting the impact of their votes, and some lawsuits are pending.)
        There is other information associated with redistricting that is significant: A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling has gutted part of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) and as a result the Texas Voter I.D. law that was passed in the last session of the legislature (when there is no evidence that it was needed) will be implemented. The latter, an anti-minority voter suppression scheme, is being challenged in court by several Chicano groups and the U.S. Justice Department.
        I am focusing my discussion on Fort Worth redistricting, which is what I've been involved in for nearly twenty-five years. I am briefly reviewing what we've done in regards to both Fort Worth City Council and Fort Worth Independent School District (FWISD) redistricting the last couple of years and what it looks like for the future as the battles continues.
        Fort Worth City Council redistricting: Fort Worth adopted an 8-1 single-member city council-mayor electoral system in 1977. Prior to that, in a typical election, the top nine votegetters--all of them usually lived in two of the most affluent areas of the city--were elected. They in turn selected the mayor. At that time the population of Fort Worth was approximately half of what it was in the 2010 census count. The Chicano population of Fort Worth was not very high then, but in the 2010 census the total population of the city was 742,765, with 34% of it Chicano; the Anglo-White population was 42, African-American 18% and other 6%. Between the last two census cycles, the only group that showed a percentage increase in population was Chicanos.
        Because Fort Worth prides itself as being a diverse city, we have been trying to convince the city council to change its electoral system to be more inclusive by drawing more than one district in which a Chicano has a chance of being elected.  
        Sure, we know that the Chicano population is somewhat scattered, and that it includes non-citizens in it, but if district lines are drawn properly it can be done. Two strong majority Chicano functional districts can easily be created by converting to a 10-1 electoral system and that was the focus of our redistricting effort early on, right after the 2010 census data came out. But it was an uphill battle from the start because the majority of city council members' main focus was to protect their self-interest, their turf, and the best way to do that was by keeping the same system in place. Any change to the electoral system would have to be first approved by the city council itself, or forced on them by collecting enough signatures on a petition, before it would go to the voters to decide the issue and amend the city's charter. Our petition drive campaign's rallying cry to force the city council to call an election was "Let the People Decide," but we couldn't muster enough public support. Very few people seem to care whether Chicanos have fair representation--except Chicanos.
        After that, we redrew new maps for an 8-1 electoral plan, focusing on creating a second strong functional majority Chicano district, in the city's south side (district 9). After some negotiation, some slight changes were made to the city's map, but not enough. Still left in the district were five precincts west of 8th Avenue; those precincts are 90% plus Anglo-White, Republican, (except Mistletoe Heights, Precinct 1076, which is more liberal and the vote is usually split between Democrats and Republicans in major elections), much more affluent, with a higher educational level and household income (at the middle to upper middle class level), and with higher property values. By contrast those precincts east of 8th Avenue, such as South Hemphill Heights, Worth Heights, and Rosemont, are majority Chicano in population; people there have a much lower educational level and household income and they vote for Democrats in major elections; the two areas have no "Communities of Interest." In other words, these two areas have nothing in common and should not be in the same council district. More affluent people, with more education and higher income, vote at higher rates, and in Fort Worth as a bloc for White-Anglo candidates, overwhelming minority candidates from the rest of the district. The precincts west of 8th Avenue have won every competitive election in District 9 since Fort Worth went to single-member districts in 1977. This is not conjecture, but based on the research we've done. We fought hard for our plans (three of them were submitted for consideration), but, unfortunately, lost that battle. Over our objection, the city adopted their plan on July 24, 2012 and submitted it to the U.S. Department of Justice for pre-clearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.
        (In the city's plan, the total population in City Council District 9 was 91,140, with 57.72% of it Chicano. The total Chicano population percentage looks good on paper, but a clearer picture of City Council District 9 emerges after looking at the map more closely: The total estimated citizen population for the district using American Community Survey (ACS) data was 69,060; the estimated citizen population for non-Chicanos was 36,775. The total estimated Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) for the district was 46,540; the estimated non-Chicano CVAP was 31,360 and the estimated Chicano CVAP was 15,180. From this data, it can be seen that the Chicano population is young and some of it is non-citizen. Approximately two thirds of its voting age population is non-Chicano. Throw in the polarized, bloc voting west of 8th Avenue in the mix and it's no wonder that every contested election in the district has been won by an Anglo.)
        We objected to the city's plan with the Federal Justice Department, but without going into too much detail here, we knew our chances of prevailing were slim. On October 1, 2012, we and the city's attorney were notified that their plan was pre-cleared.
        So was putting up the fight we did worth it? Without a doubt, absolutely. First, Section 5 of the VRA is mainly about retrogression--not about a population that is increasing, such as Chicanos--and the maps we submitted show that if the city council had adopted one of them we would have created a second Chicano district in the south side. That leads us to Section 2 of the VRA, which places much stricter standards for the city to meet, but the burden of proof is ours. (Again, I couldn't possibly cover all of that in this short space.) As I write this, let’s just say that a lawsuit against the city is a strong possibility. Stay tuned.       
        Fort Worth Independent School District (FWISD) redistricting: With respect to FWISD redistricting, we have also been fighting a tough and contentious battle for the same reason as city council redistricting: fair representation, commensurate to the Chicano population. With an approximately 62% Chicano student population in the district (the African-Americans student population was 23.28%, and Anglo-Whites nearly 12% out of approximately 82,000 students in the district during the last school year), we sought a third seat out of nine when the position of school board president elected-at-large was eliminated last year and an additional single-member district was created. Looking at the treatment of minority students historically here in Fort Worth, in other parts of the Texas, in the Deep South and in the Southwest and with the vast majority of school children in the district being Chicano, what was so unreasonable about drawing an additional Chicano majority district? We simply must have a stronger voice on the school board where policy affecting the future of our children is made. We are not racists as some of us have been called, but instead, we tried to right a wrong--having an unequal voice on the school board. After months of battling, a third Chicano leaning district was created and a Chicano was appointed to it; but neither District 8 nor District 9, the two Chicanos leaning districts which were newly redrawn were as strong as they should have been.
        The establishment fought us hard and helping them was our major daily newspaper, which unfairly took their side; we were badmouthed for "seeking more political power," as if that wasn't justified. With the increased xenophobia being directed against Chicanos everywhere we are seeing a higher level of polarized voting. That, and the nitpicking by one of the newspaper's writers and the editorial board over a period of time, and the money pumped into the race by the special interests against him, Juan Rangel, the incumbent, lost the runoff election by 23 votes on June 15, 2013. In my opinion, in District 8 the threat of having to raise large sums of money to mount viable campaigns dissuaded two genuine Chicano candidates from staying in the race for that seat. 

        The establishment is fighting us hard to keep Chicanos off the school board. Today, we have essentially one Chicano on the FWISD Board of Education. But the last chapter in this saga has not been written yet. Again, stay tuned.

-30-

*What changes did Jesús Garza make? He shortened the article by removing several paragraphs detailing segregation and disenfranchisement of the Chicano and Black community. Garza also replaced the word Hispanic or Spanish with Chicano. There was also a map of Fort Worth that was deleted.

No comments:

My Wife Had A Book Signing In San Antonio

  My wife Ann Marie Leimer had a book signing and lecture in San Antonio this past weekend. We had an opportunity to see friends and also go...