MY email to: Honorable members of House/Senate Committee on Redistricting, Select,
I am so grateful for the opportunity to be able to watch my state government in action from the comfort of my home, which is 220 miles and a 3 & ½ hour drive from the Capitol. Streaming the committee hearings live and also the archived meetings is extremely educational and informative.
I have watched the senate and house redistricting committee hearings these last 2 days and I want to attempt to summarize my opinion in as few words as possible. Please answer these questions:
1.) What does the color of skin or nation of origin have to do with voting rights?
2.) How are my rights different from everyone else’s? Racial profiling is against the law, you know?
3.) How does my skin color predict my responsibility for my actions, and ability to vote, work and provide for myself, my family, and my community?
4.) Who grants government the authority to show me preference over another?
5.) How does the color of my skin predict my political party affiliation?
6.) Which party is committed to protecting my responsibility for my actions?
I will submit that no political party represents all of my interests, but rather God granted all men with equal inherent interests and that government is created to protect those few inherent rights with preference to none.
I will submit that districts and precincts shall be drawn so that voters are as closely geographically located as possible, and that district lines shall resemble as closely as possible a geometrical shape that has a similar measurement in diameter to all sides (circle, square, or small variance of same). Voters are disenfranchised when required to spend an entire day to travel to and from their district office if they so wish.
Please disregard race or nationality in drawing district maps.
I know that federal law exercises racial profiling in their rulings, which on its face is repugnant to our constitutions!
I charge my state legislature with the moral duty to stand for all voters in Texas. Pushing back against men granted authority to rule is morally correct when those men have erred in their judgment.