So, more than a dozen groups offered maps last week to redraw the district and those around it, including some that would distinctly hamper the re-election prospects of some Democratic and Republican congressmen. A three-judge panel in Austin will now have to decide what to do in time for the midterm elections in November.
[. . .]
Then there is the question of timing. The three-judge panel has set oral arguments for Aug. 3. The Texas secretary of state said a map was needed by Aug. 8 for ballots and precinct maps to be ready for the November voting.
Will there be time for a primary before the general election, or will there be an "open primary" in November, a kind of free-for-all of candidates followed by special general election in the affected districts soon after? Is there even time for a Supreme Court appeal before November, or will the voting take place under whatever map emerges from the three-judge panel?
"What? What!" you cry as you read Rick Lyman's "Ruling Has Texans Puzzling Over Districts" in this morning's New York Times.
Well not if you read "Redistricting right up to the election?" here last week. In that feature, we took a look at what Lyman's report ("Texas Rivals Offer Competing Redistricting Plan") on the officials back-and-forth might actually mean for the people, you know the ones who will be voting? This time, Lyman's headline writer gets the issue, even if Lyman's not as concerned with the actual voters. Well, there's always next week for Lyman. Or maybe they can let the headline writer write the article next week since there seems to be a grasp of what's at stake beyond two political parties and the courts -- you know, the people. The ones who need to be making an informed decision on how to vote and, to do that, they kind of need to know what district their in so they'll know who their candidates actually are.