JOE STRAUS: The House will come to order. Members please register. Have all registered? The quorum is present. Chair recognizes Representative Hunter to introduce our pastor of the day.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, members, I'd like to introduce the pastor of the day Mr. Bob King from the Hill Country Bible Church in Austin, Texas and we are glad to have you here today.

PASTOR BOB KING: Gracious God. We come before you today seeking your wisdom, your direction, your insight into the governess of the State of Texas. Most of all, Lord, we seek you. You have entrusted this body of the men and women with the privilege and responsibility to lead this state well. We know that, Father, this task is beyond anyone individuals capacity to handle. It is even beyond all the collective wisdom and experience in this room. The magnitude of the calling upon these men and women requires to call upon the intervention of our God whose thoughts are higher than our thoughts and our ways -- higher than our ways. Thank you God that you don't leave us on our own devices and require us to operate in the dark. You have given us access to you 24/7, an open door to come before you seeking wisdom and direction. Your word tells us if we seek you with all our heart, we will find you. God this body is earnestly seeking you. Give them the glimpse today of the way you think. Open their eyes to see into the wisdom of your ways. Help them make their priorities your priorities. Give them the courage to confront challenges and the perseverance to find solutions. Help them to continue in humanity and have peace with each other so that they can be efficient and effective leaders. As they trust you, Father, make their paths straight so they can see you clearly on where you want them to go and lead as well the people of this state as they follow you. And, Father, we thank you for these men and women who have dedicated themselves to serve the people of this great state. I pray that you bring them a sense of fulfillment, accomplishment, and confidence as they lead under your guidance. Lord, thank you for not being just our guide but our God. There is none like you. We give you this day, Father, may it be to your glory and to the glory of your son, Jesus Christ. Amen.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Madden to lead us in the pledge.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Thank you, members, will you join me. Pledge allegiance to United States and Texas flag.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Beck to introduce our doctor of the day.

REPRESENTATIVE MARVA BECK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. It's my pleasure to again bring to you Dr. Mary Helen Morrow from Madison County. She lives in North Zulch and practices in Madisonville. This is her second time this session she really wants to take care of you-all and she's going to be especially interested in those of you who did not get your carotid arteries checked yesterday. Help me welcome Dr. Morrow.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Beck moves the House dispense with the reading and referral of bills until the end of today's business. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Hopson for an introduction.

REPRESENTATIVE CHUCK HOPSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. It's a great pleasure for me today and not only to represent these fine people, to have them visit our Capitol. And in the east gallery we have the delegation from Rusk County. Rusk county judges, mayors of cities, school board members and all sorts of dignitaries. And if you people would, please, rise and let us welcome you to your Capitol. Thank y'all for coming.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheets. Chair recognizes Representative Sheets for a motion.

REP. KENNETH SHEETS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I move to suspend all rules to take up and consider House Resolution 1259.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out HR 1259. The clerk read the resolution.

CLERK: HR 1259 by Sheets. WHEREAS, 2011 marks the 100th anniversary of the creation of White Rock Lake in Dallas, and area residents are celebrating the centennial of this treasured landmark; and WHEREAS, City officials began to acquire land in the White Rock Creek valley in 1907 in anticipation of creating a reservoir to meet growing water supply needs in Dallas; water shortages in 1910 prompted the city to move forward with their plans to build a dam on the creek, and by 1911 the work was finished; the first water from the lake was pumped into Dallas mains in 1913 and the lake was determined to be at capacity the following year; and WHEREAS, After Lake Lewisville in Denton County was completed in 1929, White Rock Lake and the land surrounding it became a city park, and sand was brought in to make a bathing beach; Dallas residents soon discovered that the lake was an ideal place for outdoor sports; and WHEREAS, During the Depression, a Civilian Conservation Corps unit was established at the lake, and the men stationed there were responsible for planting many of the trees that line its shores today; during World War II, the Army Air Corps used the CCC barracks as an induction center and boot camp, and later it served as a prisoner-of-war camp for German noncombatants captured in North Africa; it was subsequently used to house an overflow of Southern Methodist University students when many former soldiers were attending college on the GI Bill after the war; and WHEREAS, a drought in 1953 forced city officials to put the lake back into service as a water supply, and it was never reopened to swimmers; although the lake entered a period of decline in the following years, a resurgence of interest took place in the 1970s when the first "Run the Rock" marathon was held and a hike and bike trail was built; the abandoned bathhouse was converted into a community center for the visual and performing arts in 1981; and WHEREAS, Further improving White Rock's future prospects, a collection of Dallas citizens formed For the Love of the Lake in 1995, and by 2001 the organization had 3,500 volunteers who did much to clean and restore the area; a new leash-free dog park has been added, and the lake today offers sailing, rowing, bird-watching and fishing opportunities as well as picnic areas, playgrounds, and athletic facilities to more than two million visitors each year; and WHEREAS, District 9 City Councilmember, Sheffield Kadane has appointed a committee of Dallas citizens and lake stakeholders co-chaired by Darren Boruff and Reena Morris, to plan, coordinate and oversee more than 20 different events and activities related to the Comerica White Rock Lake Centennial Celebration through the cooperation of 20 different groups including the City of Dallas Park and Recreation Department, the Dallas Water Utilities, Dallas Police Department; and WHEREAS, The 2011 Comerica White Rock Lake Centennial Celebration from March through June; serving as honorary chair of the celebration is iconic city realtor and former Park and recreation board member Ebby Halliday, who in 2011 also turned 100; a golf tournament, a bike ride, a half marathon, a bass fishing tournament, rowing sprint championships, and family fun weekends are just a few of the many ways organizers are marking the occasion; and WHEREAS, For a century, White Rock Lake has contributed to the quality of life in the city of Dallas and beyond, as an Important water source and a beloved destination for leisure Solace, and recreation, and it is indeed fitting to commemorate the rich history of this urban oasis; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives of the 82nd Texas Legislature hereby commemorate the 100th anniversary of the Creation of White Rock Lake in Dallas.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Sheets.

REP. KENNETH SHEETS: Mr. Speaker. Thank you, members. It is my pleasure to offer this resolution in honoring the centennial of White Rock Lake. Throughout this year the White Rock Lake centennial committee and the city of Dallas will be hosting events to celebrate the lake and it's impact on our community. I am proud to be joined by Darren Boruff, chairman of the centennial celebration and Jay Barksdale with the Dallas Regional Chamber. White Rock Lake was originally constructed as a water source for the city of Dallas in 1911 and it has become the center point of the east Dallas community. Today the lake and the surrounding land serve as the premiere park in Dallas. It is also the focal point for the yearly White Rock Lake Marathon. White Rock Lake is a Dallas landmark and we are proud to have it as a prized jewel of east Dallas. Members, with that I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. Representative Taylor moves to add all members' names. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Harless.

REP. PATRICIA HARLESS: Mr. Speaker, members, I'd like to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider HR 1361.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR 1361 by Harless. WHEREAS, Comcast Cares Day is taking place in Houston on April 30, 2011; and WHEREAS, Comcast, a major provider of cable services, is an active and engaged member of the Bayou City community, supporting the area's growth and success through partnerships, grants, and organized volunteer efforts; and WHEREAS, Comcast Cares Day is a celebration of service that brings together Comcast employees, their families, and their friends for a common purpose; through the years, participants have contributed thousands of hours to local organizations and made a positive difference in countless neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, Nationwide, the company and its staff have donated two million hours of service, and Comcast has awarded more than $10 million in grants to worthy endeavors; and WHEREAS, Comcast Cares Day serves as an outstanding example of corporate responsibility, and all those involved in this significant initiative are indeed deserving of special commendation; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives of the 82nd Texas Legislature hereby recognize April 30, 2011, as Comcast Cares Day and extend to all those involved sincere best wishes for a meaningful and memorable experience.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Harless.

REP. PATRICIA HARLESS: Members, this resolution recognizes April 30th as Comcast Cares Day in the greater Houston area. Representative Legler told me that his son works for Comcast as well. So, he joins me up here. I move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Representative moves to add all members' names. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Larson for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Yeah, Mr. Speaker, members, I request that House Bill 1547 be recommitted to the Natural Resources Committee.

JOE STRAUS: Members, this is a motion to recommit House Bill 1547 -- motion to recommit House Bill 1547 back to the Natural Resource Committee. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing representative Larson voting aye, showing Representative Legler voting aye. Have all voted? Being 139 ayes and 0 nays motion is adopted. Mr. Gooden? Members, we're about to go on the calendar. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage SB 646. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB 646 by Nichols. Relating to continuation and functions of the Texas Forest Service.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Cook.

REPRESENTATIVE BYRON COOK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the sunset forest service bill we passed yesterday. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against SB 646. Question occurs on final passage of SB 646. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Being 140 ayes 0 nays, SB 646 finally passes. Chair lays out 3rd reading and final passage SB 692. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: SB 692 by Estes. Relating to exemptions from groundwater conservation district permit requirements.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against SB 692. Question occurs on final passage of SB 692. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? 146 ayes and 0 nays SB 692 has finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage HB 1451. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 1451 by Thompson. Relating to licensing and regulation of certain commercial dog and cat breeders; providing penalty.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Dutton.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Thank you, members. This is the bill we passed yesterday regulating puppy films and I move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1451. Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1451. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all members voted? Being 98 ayes and 43 nays House Bill 1451 final passes. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 1933. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 1933 by Smith of Harris. Relating to regulation of metal recycling entities; provide penalties.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Smith.

REPRESENTATIVE WAYNE SMITH: Members, this is the scrap metal bill from yesterday and I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1933? Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1933. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Being 125 ayes and 19 nays, House Bill 1933 finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 2342. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2342 by Truitt. Relating to certain violation of and offense in Securities Act; providing penalties.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Truitt -- chair recognizes Representative Miller.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Members, this is the bill that you heard yesterday by Representative Truitt. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2342. Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2342. It's a records vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Being 146 ayes and 1 nay House Bill 2342 finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 2495. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2495 by Hernandez Luna. Regarding the cemeteries and perpetual care cemetery corporations.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Walle.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move to postpone HB 2495 to a time certain 8:00 a.m. tomorrow, April 28th.

JOE STRAUS: Members. You heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Ritter for a recognition.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, today is Texas Water Conservation Day here at the Capitol and I hope you'll take the time sometime during our busy day to look at the exhibits displayed in the extension that showcase the education program. The organizations across the State that are doing -- what they're doing to promote water conservation. Members, I would also like to recognize the Texas Water Foundation board of director who are here in the gallery today. Would you, please, stand. I see our former Senator Kip Averitt. Thank you for the work that you do and thank you for being here at the Capitol.

JOE STRAUS: Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 2133. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2133 by Solomons. Relating to the Public Utility Commission of Texas' authority to disgorge revenue obtained as a result of certain violations; providing an administrative penalty.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomon.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the bill we passed yesterday that clarifies the PUC's authority involving inappropriately received excess revenues and I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2133? Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2133. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all vote? There being 123 ayes, 20 nays, House Bill 2133 finally passes. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 127. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 127 by Alvarado. Relating to the types of beverages that may be sold to students on public school campuses.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the bill we passed yesterday. I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 127? Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 127. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? There being 93 ayes and 54 nays, House Bill 127 has finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading, final passage House Bill 2575. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2575 by Phillips. Relating to the use of electronic lien system established by Texas Department of Motor Vehicle.

JOE STRAUS: Chair --

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is the electronic lien bill we had yesterday. Move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2575? Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2575. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? There being 145 ayes and 0 nays, House Bill 2575 finally passes. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 2624. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2624 by Sheffield. . Relating to procedures applicable in circumstances involving family violence or other criminal conduct and military personnel.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, this is the bill that we passed out yesterday but I do have an amendment to add that we need to lay out.

JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Sheffield.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: The amendment basically adds that the commanding officer will be notified as well. So, it is acceptable to author.

JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheffield sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. Amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield. Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2624? Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 2624. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Being 147 ayes, 0 nays, House Bill 2624 has finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 38. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 38 by Menendez. Relating to the punishment of the offense of graffiti.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Menendez.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. There was some confusion on House Bill 38. I think I clarified that. This does not change other than the driver's license suspension. It does not effect the discretion of the judge to impose punishment deemed to be the most effective for any children and I move passage.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 38. Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 38. It's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? There being 94 ayes and 52 nays, House Bill 38 finally passes. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 273. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 273 by Zerwas. Relating to creation of a study committee for the Interstate Health Care Compact.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes representative Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is the bill that creates the advisory committee for the Interstate Health Care Compact and I move adoption.

JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 273. Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 273. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? There being 133 ayes, 15 nays, House Bill 273 finally passes. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 598. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 598 by Jackson. Relating to requiring certain applicants for motor vehicle registration to provide proof that the applicant holds a valid driver's license.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Jackson.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: This bill was passed yesterday requiring valid driver's license to register a personal automobile. Move to passage.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo to speak in opposition.

REP. ROBERTO R. ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, members, I am here to oppose 598. Let me tell you the main argument on this. Part of our debate yesterday was Mr. Jackson is trying to do is get people to have a license and insurance to register the car. This bill has nothing to do with driving, it has to do with registering the car. And if you look at that time House resource organization report it talks about all the problems that are going to happen. Members, this has nothing to do with driving, it just has to do with registering the car. If there's an overwhelming problem we would have heard about it. The problem is not there. We mentioned yesterday I ask that you vote no on this bill.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Jackson to close.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: It's got everything to do with driving. And, members, I'm tired of people coming up to me and saying I just got run into by somebody that had neither a driver's license nor insurance. And I'm trying to cure part of that problem. So I ask that you vote yes. Move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 598. This is record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? All voted? There being 106 ayes, 40 nays, two present not voting, house Bill 598 has finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 736 on 3rd reading. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 736 by Patrick. Relating to online information regarding public institutions of higher education.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Patrick.

REPRESENTATVIE DIANE PATRICK: Mr. Chair, members, House Bill 736 is the bill we passed on 2nd reading. It simply enhances the current online information for institutions of higher education. That's four-year universities only I move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 736. Question occurs on passage of House Bill 736. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. All voted? Representative Gooden voting aye. All voted? There being 146 ayes, 1 nay, two present not voting, House Bill 736 finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 1029 on 3rd reading, final passage. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 1029 by Carter. Relating to the conditions of release on bond for certain defendants charged with the offense of burglary.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Carter.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. This is the bill we passed yesterday that relates to conditions of relief on bond for twice convicted felonies to commit the offense of burglary.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Anyone wishing to speak for or against. The question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1029. It's a record vote. Clerk will please ring the bell. All voted? All voted? There being 143 ayes, no nays, two present not voting, House Bill 1029 is finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading final passage House Bill 1648. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 1648 by Smith. Relating to the purchase of plastic bulk merchandise containers by businesses; providing civil penalty.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Mr. Smith of Harris.

REP. WAYNE SMITH: Members, this is THE bill regarding bulk plastic. I move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1648. Question occurs on final passage. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? All voted? There being 133 ayes, 13 nays, three present not voting House Bill 1648 finally passes. Chair lays out on 3rd reading final passage House Bill 1812. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 1812 by Phillips. Relating to the type of newspaper required for publication of notice in certain counties.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Phillips.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: This is the bill we passed yesterday regarding the notice in certain counties.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 1812. This is a final passage. So, it's a record vote. The clerk will ring the bell. All voted? All voted? Showing Mr. Quintanilla voting aye. There being a 148 ayes, no nays, two present not voting, House Bill 1812 finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading final passage House Bill 2403. And clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2403 by Otto. Relating to retailers engaged in business in this state.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Mr. Otto? Chair recognizes Representative Harless.

REP. PATRICIA HARLESS: Members, this is the bill we passed yesterday. I move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against. This is a record vote. Clerk will, please, ring the bell. Have all voted? All voted? There being 126 ayes -- I'm sorry, 125 ayes, 20 nays, three present not voting House Bill 2403 has finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading and final passage House Bill 2476. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2476 by Harless. Relating to the appraisals for ad valorem tax purposes of certain Dealer's heavy equipment inventory; providing penalties.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Harless.

REP. PATRICIA HARLESS: HB 2476 seeks to clarify law on property tax appraisals for businesses that rent or lease heavy equipment. I move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2476. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. All voted? All voted? There being 148 ayes, 0 nays, two present not voting, House Bill 2476 finally passed. Chair lays out House Bill 2482 on 3rd reading and final passage. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2482 by Pena. Relating to the offense of retail organized theft.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Pena.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: The bill from yesterday regarding organized retail theft. I ask you to pass.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2482. This is final passage. Clerk will ring the bell. It's a record vote. All voted? There being 148 ayes, 0 nays, two present not voting, House Bill 2482 finally passed. Chair lays out 2623 on 3rd reading and final passage. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2623 by Beck. Relating to certain energy security technologies for critical Governmental facilities.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Beck.

REPRESENTATIVE MARVA BECK: Mr. Speaker, members, this is the bill we passed yesterday on energy security technologies. I move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against House Bill 2623. This is question occurs on final passage. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 147 ayes 1 no, two present not voting, House Bill 2623 finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading final passage House Bill 3272. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 3272 by Burnam. Relating to the low-income vehicle repair assistance, retrofit, and accelerated vehicle retirement program.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Burnam.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, members, this is the bill we passed yesterday modifying the program. Move this adoption.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Anyone wishing to speak for or against. Record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? All voted? There being 132 ayes, 15 noes, two present not voting, House Bill 3272 is finally passed. Excuse Representative Pickett because of important business on a motion by Representative Menendez. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Bill 1146 on 3rd reading and final passage. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 1146 by Kuempel. Relating to registration regulation of appraisals companies providing administrative penalties.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Kuempel.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN KUEMPEL: Members, HB 1146 is a bill we voted on yesterday; establishes framework for appraisal management companies.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Anyone wishing to speak for or against. Question occurs on final passage of House Bill 1146. This is a record vote. Clerk will, please, ring the bell. Have all voted? There being 124 ayes, 17 nays, two present not voting, House Bill 1146 is finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading final passage House Bill 1853. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 1853 by Hamilton. Relating to a licensing and regulation of fire protection sprinkler technicians; providing a penalty.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Hamilton.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE HAMILTON: Members, this is the bill we passed yesterday --

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. All voted? Have all voted? There being 121 ayes, 25 nays, two present not voting, two absent. Representative Hamilton's House Bill 1853 finally passes. Chair lays out on final -- on 3rd reading final passage House Bill 2004. The clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2004 by Bonnen. Relating to the sale of certain real estate property by a county by the Texas Board of Criminal Justice.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Flynn.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN FLYNN: This property was in discussion yesterday and I move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against. This is a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? There being 147 ayes, no nays, two present not voting, one absent, House Bill 2004 is finally passed. Chair lays out on 3rd reading final passage House Bill 2229. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 2229 by Coleman. Relating to the HIV medication program advisory committee.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REP. GARNET F. COLEMAN: Mr. Speaker, members, this is the bill we passed yesterday and thank you very much for your support.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Anyone wishing to speak for or against. This final record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Have all voted? Showing Mr. Coleman voting aye, showing Mr. Geren voting aye. There being 88 ayes, 57 noes, two present not voting, three absent the motion passes. As a matter of postponed business House Bill 956 is laid out on 2nd reading. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 956 by Marquez. Relating to the State fire marshals investigation of a death of a firefighter who dies in the line of duty or in connection of an on duty incident.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Marquez.

REP. MARISA MARQUEZ: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to postpone House Bill 956 until sometime certain Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011 at 8:00 a.m.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Members, you heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out House Resolution 1578. The clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR 1578 by Thompson. Recognizing April 27th, 2011 as Anti-Human Trafficking Day at the State capitol.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Mrs. Thompson.

REP. SENFRONIA THOMPSON: Mr. Speaker, members, I have a resolution. This resolution recognized today Anti-Trafficking Day at the Capitol. As you know, the House has already passed four main anti-human trafficking bills this session. And we have some anti-human trafficking activist here in the gallery. I would like to recognize them for their hard work in fighting human trafficking and if they are in the gallery would you, please, stand and be recognized. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Question occurs on passing of HR 1578. All in favor say aye, all opposed say no, House Resolution 1578 is finally passed. Chair recognizes Representative Gooden. Representative Gooden.

REPRESENTATVIE LANCE GOODEN: Members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider House Resolution 1520.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR 1520 by Gooden. Congratulating Rebecca Leigh Rowe of Wills Point has completed the rigorous requirements necessary to earn the Girl Scout Gold Award.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Gooden.

REPRESENTATVIE LANCE GOODEN: I move passage.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Representative Gooden moves passage. Any objection? Chair hears none. So order. Chair recognizes Representative Dutton.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to take up and consider House Resolution 1579 which is a memorial resolution --

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Members, this is a memorial resolution. You've heard the motion. Is there any objection to taking up Representative Dutton's memorial resolution? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, please, take your seats and be respectful to this memorial resolution. Clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: HR 1579 by Dutton. In memory of Laura Nell Oliver Curtis of Houston --

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Clerk, one moment. Members, you can register your votes in a moment. We are doing memorial resolution. If you would, please, kindly take your seats so we can be respectful to this memorial resolution. Clerk, please, read the resolution.

CLERK: HR 1579 by Dutton. In memory of Laura Nell Oliver Curtis of Houston.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Chair recognizes Representative Dutton.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker, members, some of you may remember Laura Curtis her husband (*inaudible) in Houston who heard as a staffer down here some 30 years ago and she passed at the funeral on Friday and so I move adoption of the motion.

REP. DENNIS BONNEN: Members, this is a memorial resolution all rise in favor of the resolution. The ayes have it. Thank you Mr. Dutton.

JOE STRAUS: Members, we're about to start on the redistricting bill. Representatives of alleged counsel are available to help you drafting the amendments to amendment. Members, when the maps appear on your screens there's -- there's a box in the upper right-hand corner. It will say view map and you will click on that and you will see the map. Members, we're about to start on the redistricting bill. Representatives of alleged counsel are available to help you drafting amendments to the amendments. Amendments for the counties we'll call members from those counties up to talk about it. Representative Howard, for what purpose?

REP. CHARLIE HOWARD: Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: Please, state your inquiry.

REP. CHARLIE HOWARD: Has anyone thanked you for the wonderful four day Easter recess that we had.

JOE STRAUS: Thank you, Mr. Howard. Chair lays out on 2nd reading House Bill 150. Clerk will read the bill.

CLERK: HB 150 by Solomons. Relating to the composition of the districts for the election of members of the Texas House of Representatives.

JOE STRAUS: Representative King, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Since this is a little different than we usually do these, Mr. Speaker, could you kind of walk through for all the members what the order of events will be today with regard to amendments to the bill and then floor substitutes, just so it may actually be possible if we can withdraw some things and streamline some things.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. King, for starters Mr. Solomons is going to lay out his bill. Then we're going to go through by counties in alphabetical order.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: And that will be presentations of what those counties are on the map, not amendments at that point.

JOE STRAUS: That's correct. We're going to start with Bexar County. Purely coincidence.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Purely coincidence. I understand, it's alphabetical. But then after Mr. Solomons finishes laying out his bill then the first thing to occur would be a -- the full force substitutes.

JOE STRAUS: No, that's not, correct. The next thing that will occur are amendments to Mr. Solomons bill, based on the county in alphabetical order.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Okay. Make sure I understand that then. So, they'll go county by county in alphabetical order. And then will those be framed as perfecting amendments, author perfecting amendments or will those be independent amendments?

JOE STRAUS: If they're framed amendments to the amendments.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Okay. I'm sorry -- I'm sorry, I'm not asking it very clearly forgive me. Are these Mr. Solomons amendments or are these amendments at large from the body?

JOE STRAUS: The amendments at large from the body.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Has that been traditionally how we've done restricting maps. I think on normal -- on regular bills, now I understand this is different, but on regular bills is it not the process for there to be author perfecting amendments and then full floor substitutes and then once those are completed if not adopted then you're back on the Solomons bill at that point and there are amendments to that bill.

JOE STRAUS: Yes, Mr. King, this is way it's been done the last time we did redistricting.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Okay. So last time in 2003 when we did congressional redistricting that's how we did it.

JOE STRAUS: In 2001 in the journals here. If you would like to take a look.

REPRESENTATIVE PHIL KING: Okay. No, I have full confidence in what these parliamentarians said. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Is it necessary for us today to suspend the rules regarding time limits on either the author or on either people sponsoring amendments?

JOE STRAUS: Could you restate the question, please.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, if I understand correctly, Mr. Speaker, there are time limits that we have for an author speaking, that I'm right to inquire as to whether or not we need suspend that rule today given the fact that this is a different bill or kind of situation.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, we understand the importance of the bill before us and we'll take up suspensions as they come.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I'm sorry. I didn't hear you.

JOE STRAUS: I said we understand the importance of the discussion over the bill and the amendments today and we'll take up the suspensions as they come.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I understand that. I was talking about the time constraints that are built into our rules regarding speaking at the front mike and whether or not we need to suspend those.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, it's 20 minutes to lay out and 10 minutes to talk.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I understand and that's why I'm asking, do we need to suspend that? I know what the rules say but do we need suspend that at this point, so, we don't have to keep going back and redo this all over and over again all day.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton the chair's intention is to take up each suspension as they come along.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Each suspension of the rules in regards to speaking.

JOE STRAUS: Suspension of time.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay. And I guess my question is Mr. Speaker I'm sure you're answering me and I don't get it but is that a rule that we can suspend at the moment, so we don't have to keep taking it up as we go through it? Because I would imagine for us to lay out hundred -- all of the counties that -- that would exceed the 20 minute rule, so, we would have to start by having a suspension of that rule for Mr. Solomons actually to lay out the bill.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, it's our intention to take the suspension as we normally do on a bill and if we need to suspend we can entertain that at that time.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay. All right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. This is an historic day. I'm sure members want to get this over with today and I really have some things I need to say initially. We have a number of amendments. We'll deal with those as they come up. We have some maps up front showing the plan as the committee proposed. The plan actually is a proposed new districts for the Texas House of Representatives. I need to lay out some things that I need to do with the plan and then we'll go ahead and then I'll, you know, be happy to take questions. In order to meet the equal representation requirements under the U.S. Constitution we need to apportion a 23 percent growth in the states among 150 districts. We also need to comply with the county line rule under Article 3, Section 26 of the Texas Constitution which forbids us from breaking county lines. And by the way there is something like 44 states that have a county line rule of some sort. The smallest district, District 90, is 4.9 percent below the ideal district size of 167,637 and the largest district, District 103, is 5.00 percent above the ideal size. The committee substitute before you has a total deviation of 9.90 percent with a mean point of order 2.68 percent deviation. Now, members, throughout the process the committee appreciated the feedback that we all received from most of the members of this body and all -- not everybody can be happy with everything that is going on. In particular some people may have some changes they may want to try to make for their districts. But for the most part, we didn't have all our colleagues produce what they wanted in proposed maps for their districts or for the rest of the State. With that said, we have taken everything -- we as a committee received and put together a full state map as best we could. This is a map that directly represents the input that was provided to our offices and committee office for the members of this House and members of the public throughout the interim hearings throughout the State. And three hearings during this session. I recognize that some members are not going to be pleased with the results of the map. Like I said they may want to make adjudgments, that's why we have an amendment process. This is a difficult process for the committee members including myself and it's very personal to the committee members and myself and to everyone here about what we're going to do. This is very historic. We only do this once every ten years or so and, quite frankly, I'm grateful for all the support we've received so far. With the shifts in population across the State there's a clear need for several pairing. It was my intent to limit the pairing as much as possible. And the committee agreed and this is the map that has been proposed to you. The pairings are as follows: Representatives Glen, Cain, Ritter, Hamilton, Landtroop, Perry, Chisum, Hardcastle, Driver, Burkett, Harper-Brown, and Anderson. Representative Scott and Torres and Representative Hochberg. We seem to have some amendments involving that so we'll deal with that later. In each of the pairings it was my goal and the committees goal to give each member the opportunity to win their district and, therefore, we purposely did not pair any republicans with democrats but at the end of the day we think the map is very reflective of the House as a whole. As a result of those pairings there was a need to reincorporate eight districts into a full state map. These eight new districts are predominately anchored in the suburban counties across the State that experienced the largest growth. They include districts in Montgomery, Brazos, Mclennan, Collins, Fort Bend, Wise, Tarrant, Denton, and Williamson Counties. Recognizing the growth of the Hispanic population in this state we tried to create a new Hispanic opportunity district and strengthen other Hispanic districts. First, statewide the map increases the number of districts with Spanish voter registration name exceeding 50 percent from 29 to 30. Specifically we increased the SSR -- SSDR in District 90 in Tarrant County and District 148 in Harris County. Both of these changes were made at the request of *Malta. Second, we created a new strong Hispanic seat in Nueces County. On a whole Nueces has an SSDR of 49 percent. So, it would not have been possible to create two Hispanic seats within Nueces County. Third, we created a new coalition minority opportunity district in Tarrant County and at the end of the day for those keeping track I believe that we are presenting you a map that's still a work in progress that's why we have -- it was a very member driven map from the ground up. And my goal continues to be -- is to pass a fair and legal map which represents to people of Texas. I wish I could just move passage and everybody was happy but apparently we have a number of amendments and we'll have to deal with those. I think that the map based on some of the amendments I saw I think we can improve the map. I think the committee agrees we probably could improve the map and so that what we'll try to do today. With that being said you know my job today I believe is to help direct the process and will try to do my best job in doing it and I'm sure all the members will try to do the best jobs they can to improve the map. And with that said I'd be happy to yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your leadership on this and the hard work and dedication behind it. I just have a few questions in regard to this. The first one was, I remember at the beginning when we started the proceedings and you were going to have your committee meet about the drawing of the lines. You did mention that this was a member driven map, am I correct?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: We tried to do that. Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: But your statements were that it was a member driven map and the problems that I have is the fact that a lot of amendments that some of the members, especially some of the ones from the valley, have were not taken into account or adopted by the committee. So my other question is who exactly is Geraldo.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm sorry, what?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Oh, excuse me. Geraldo, what is his job with the map.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Geraldo is with the Speaker's office and was helping coordinate this with Ryan *Doughton who is general counsel for the committee and we're trying to do it -- you know, it's hard to do it by yourself. Like my good friend Tommy Merit once said at the end of the last 2001, to try and do it all by himself along the with help of others. Well, at the end of the day, you know, you try to do the best job you can and we had staff. Bonnie Bruce is our committee clerk also my chief of staff, we had Ryan *Doughton and we had Geraldo to help us, the guy with the beard. And we had Audie Cummings in -- trying to help our committee staff. We were just trying to take as much input as we could and I know that some of the members maps that were submitted were not approved by the committee but it is a process and that's what we're here to do today.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: And my question on Geraldo -- is Geraldo -- does he work for the House or does he work for only the Speaker or only the committee? How does that work? Is he the members person to go to or is he only a certain individuals person to go to?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: He is working out of the Speaker's office but at my direction to help us put this together. He has some experience obviously in all of this as well as Ryan Doughton down in the committee office helping draw a map. And, you know, it's something you have to have some people help. And the whole process is trying to get input from everyone and I needed some help to do it. He's actually working at my direction although he's out of the Speaker's office.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Okay. So he doesn't work for the House of Representatives. He doesn't work for the members.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, he's here to help the members because he's working with me trying to help the members do what they need to do.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: How much experience does he have in drawing maps? How many years of experience does he have?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't know. I'd have to ask him. He's got a lot of experience in it. He tells me that he has over a thousand hours working in red apple.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Okay. And that's just this session or is that in prior sessions? Has he ever done it before?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I mean, you would have to ask him. He is familiar with the redistricting law and he is spent a thousand or more hours on red apple. He understands how to draw maps. He understand the dynamics and he was of great assistance to me in the committee.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: I'm sure if we would have gotten some of my staff members who have over a thousand hours in drawing maps on red apple they could have done a much better job with the Valley. But with that in place with the Rio Grande Valley, do you remember Representative Gonzalez and myself and Representative Munoz testifying in your committee about the Valley delegation map.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yes, I'm aware of that.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: And we were very upset with the Valley delegation map because of the way the lines were drawn and it was confusion by Representative Pena about *El Cochousa being in the mid-Valley and we had to clarify that's call the delta area not the mid-Valley. And we had that discussion between him and I, are you aware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yes, I guess.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Okay. So the three of us did testify in that committee and I believe there were several other members that did testify in that committee in regard to the map and the problem with the map that they had.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Right. Remember, with all due respect, I had -- as a chairman I had to propose aversion. We went through the process of getting -- a lot of people liked it, a lot of people didn't like it or had suggestions to fix it. We held a hearings, y'all testified as well as others and the committee has 17 members and this is the map that was voted out of the committee. There were opportunities to have amendments in that committee and whatever was done -- I wasn't telling members what to do. It was the committee. And for all practical purposes and I've made this statement before. It maybe the Solomons plan in a since that you have to put a name in red apple. But at the end of day the map is here on the floor today for consideration, is the House Redistricting Committees plan -- proposed plan for the members to consider.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: Right, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO MARTINEZ: I raise point of order against further consideration of committee substitute House Bill 150 that it violates rule 4, Section 18 of the Texas House rules.

JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. The House is standing at ease.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Oh, I just had a parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I didn't know if that was a public meeting y'all had down there.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Harper Brown for an announcement. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I wanted to be sure that you are aware that HB 2675 the TXDOT sunset bill is scheduled for debate on the House floor for Friday, pursuant to House rules. All amendments for sunset bills must be filed 24 hours in advance. Members, this means that all amendments for TXDOT sunset are due by Thursday morning. And just keep in mind too there were only two amendments on the Senate bill. If you want to use that as your inspiration. Thank you, members.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I was going to ask Mr. Solomon a question when -- if he returns.

JOE STRAUS: Members, Mr. Martinez raises a point of order pursuant to Rule 4, Section 18. Chair has reviewed the minutes of the proceedings and it is thankful for the input provided by Mr. Martinez. It's the chair's opinion that Rule 4, Section 18 has been complied with. The point of order has been respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Solomons. Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: There are some of us who couldn't hear you back here. I didn't know if it was --

JOE STRAUS: Point of order was overruled.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: It was overruled? It was overruled -- parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: As I understand Mr. Martinez's challenge based on the rule it was that two or three members of a legislature who testified were not included in the amendments is that, correct.

JOE STRAUS: That's correct. That was basis for the point of the order.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right. And I assume the exception in that rule which relates to not having legislators is the basis of the parliamentarian's ruling.

JOE STRAUS: That's correct.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose?

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

JOE STRAUS: Solomons, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I do, thank you.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Thank you, Chairman. The reason we do redistricting is based on the constitutional requirement one man, one vote. Is that your understanding also?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: We do redistricting because the constitution requires us to do redistricting every ten years.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And that requirement is based around the U.S. Constitution requirement based on one man, one vote. Is that your understanding?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: For congressional it does, one man, one vote it does. But it requires a state to do apportionate and redistricting -- there's a proportionate process based on the U.S. Census data and it requires states to do redistricting. That's why we do it every ten years.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right. Let me ask you about the U.S. Census data. I assume you just took census data as it was given to us as it was transmitted to us based on the different precincts, the ETD.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: If you recall the U.S. Census Bureau sent us their official numbers in two or three parts and that's what we are required to us.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And when you say, "required to use," you are aware that the -- that states are allowed to do certain adjustments to the census data but -- I guess, my question is, you didn't make any adjustments to that data, did you?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't believe we did. We use the U.S. Census Bureau data as provided to us.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And so, if that's the case; for example -- let me give you an example. That means wherever the population that was counted for the census wherever they resided based on that census data is incorporated into our redistricting plans.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: The census data we use is as they gave it to us.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: All right. And you are aware that in Texas there are about 157,000 people in Texas prisons, are you not?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yes, I am. I think you were very kind about giving me some information about all of that.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right and part of -- in that information it talks about how to treat people in prisons. And the census information I gave you indicated there were one of three ways you could treat that. You could either count them in the prisons where they are. You could not count them at all, or you could count them at their preincarceration address. And in terms of your map which one of those did you use.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, since we had not adopted any changes we used the census data as to where they -- the data they had as to where they had been prior to incarceration, I think.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You used the data -- say again.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: No wait -- hold on. I'm sorry. That was my fault where they actually are.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You counted them for example in the prisons where they are; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yeah, I apologize. That's right.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And if you think along with me in terms of the one man, one vote rule.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: We didn't adopt -- this state's never adopted anything other than that. If the State has adopted something other than that I would have used it but we never had adopted anything different than to use it where the census data says they are, where they are located.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: You are aware that I have a bill that would of change that though, right?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, no -- well, this session or last session.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Both.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: It didn't pass, did it? If it would have passed then it was the law, then that's what I would have had to use.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay. But even failing to have it even considered or passed you, didn't see any reason not to take a look at counting inmates at their preincarceration address you just assumed that you would count them based on the way the census had them, which is counting them in the prisons where they.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Tried to follow the law that we currently have. Same thing with the constitution. We have a number of members who want to cut county lines but we have a constitution -- a constitutional article that says, we can't. So I'm just trying to follow the law but I didn't use discretion to try and do something different. I stuck with what I believe and what I was told was the law and in effect now for us to do this.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But there's no law requiring that we count them in the prisons where they are is there.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: There's no law adopting something other than that. That's where the data is and we used the U.S. Census data. We didn't do anything to adjust it. This body and legislature has never done anything different Mr. Dutton. I know you were trying to get me -- you wanted me to be aware of the issue and I appreciate that. And you wanted me to consider that and when you look at numbers, yes, I understand what you are getting to but when trying to use it for legal concerns I tried to use what the law is now. The committee -- the committee basically proposed this map based on what the current law is.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: But there is no current law requiring -- you did it based on tradition or history, as I understand it, because you can't point me to any law requiring me to count them in the prisons where they are.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: The only thing I can get to at this point to respond to your question is, I used what I'm required to use which is U.S. Census data. U.S. Census data and that is where they were incarcerated.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Now, let me move on then because you are aware of that 60,000 of those 157,000 inmates come from Harris County.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I guess.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Yeah, and if those 60,000 inmates who you now have counted someplace other than Harris County, had we used those numbers for Harris County numbers it's more likely that we would be at 25 representatives as opposed to 24. Are you aware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: It probably would have changed the dynamics for Harris County. Yes, sir.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right. And so, to the extent that we don't use them -- count inmates at their preincarceration address you essentially create districts that happen to be far more powerful in terms of the way this one man, one vote rule. Let me explain to you what I mean. For example, if we had a hundred members in each district; for example, and yet ten of those -- ten people in one district were inmates that means that 90 people now would have the same force and effect as a hundred people in another district. And is it your understanding that that would violate the one man, one vote rule.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I am just trying to do what is legal and what we have done in the past and I was told and, quite frankly, it seems to me to be the legal thing to do is use the census bureau data as it exists and as they say where the people are not anything different. And you know what in my opinion if you actually -- as Mr. Geren points out the Texas constitution requires us to use U.S. Census data. Be that as it may, it maybe something that, you know, you or others want to take to the court and change if we don't adopt something differently. But I don't have a statute, I don't have anything to guide me other than to use the U.S. census data as it's provided.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Are you aware that the states of New York and Delaware and Maryland have all now used for counted inmates their preincarceration address, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: That may have been in the reading material you gave me.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: It is. I think one of them just did it here recently.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I mean, I read that early on but it may have been in the data -- in the articles you provided me.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right. And my question though has to do with -- with the sort of the violation of this one man, one vote rule which is a constitutional requirement, a U.S. constitutional requirement. And I guess my question is when the U.S. Constitution conflicts with the Texas Constitution I'm aware -- at least my understanding is that the supremacy clause over takes any state constitution or statutory challenges that may be in conflict; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: So, what are you asking me?

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, I'm asking you; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I think it's for the courts to decide on just like the county line rule. If I think some other groups Hispanic groups think the county line is incorrect then the federal law should preempt it. But the courts need to decide that, not me.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, you raise a county line rule but to the extent that the county line rule conflicts with the U.S. Constitution it's your understanding and I think is mine at least that the U.S. Constitution would prevail.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: If the court -- if the U.S. Supreme Court wants to decide your issue about the inmates or the county line rule and we'll deal with those issues as they come up but I'm not going to do it. I'm going to go by what I'm told that I need to do to comply with the current existing law. And that's what I tried to do. And that's what the committee proposed that's what this map is proposed to. This map is proposed to the House for consideration based on what the current law is today.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And is it your understanding that every jurisdiction in Texas would have to comply with what you say the current law is. For example, all the counties, for example, even counties drawing line would have to use the same data that you use.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: We're required to abide by the Texas Constitution and the laws as we know it today.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Are you aware that some Texas counties actually exclude inmates when looking at county commissioner precincts, for example.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: No. Let me tell you, Mr. Dutton, I greatly respect you and I know you're a very bright lawyer and one of the institutions around here but at the end of the day I didn't keep up with county redistricting. I didn't keep up with anything but trying to keep my head above water for the Texas House, now.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I understand. I'm not asking that based on you be kept up, Burt. You keep saying based on current law you had to use census data as it was given to you and I'm just trying to point out to you that that is not the case. When it comes to certain counties, for example, Anderson County, Bee County, Brazos County or Bell, Childress, Concho, Dawson, Grimes, Karnes, Madison, Mitchell, Walker, and Wood counties all exclude inmates from their count when it comes to developing or redrawing lines for commissioner's courts. And the reason some of them did that, at least in Anderson and Concho counties, the reason they did that is because excluding inmate population prevented the creation of a precinct that would have consisted entirely of inmates. And so, to the extent that we chose not to do that we basically have now transferred 60,000 potential voters from Harris County, for example, to somewhere else in the state. Wherever the prisons happen to be. And so, I'm just wondering, we didn't factor that in and I appreciate the fact that you sort of answered my question but I guess at the end of the day you're saying that -- and my only question is what law is it that you're using that says we have to use the census data?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Texas Constitution.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Texas Constitution, and can you give me the chapter and verse of the Texas Constitution that requires we use the census data as it's given to us without any adjustments.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't know which article but it's in the Texas Constitution. Article if you need to know but I suspect you already know what that article is.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I know what the article is but I can tell that the article doesn't say what you just said. I do know it but the question I have, Burt, again, relates to the fact that I believe that your map, even given the good intentions that you may have had simply do violence to the U.S. Constitution and to create some reliance on Texas constitutional principles.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Article 3, Section 26 also includes the U.S. -- using the United States census data.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Right. And it doesn't mandate that though does its?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: As we're supposed to use it. It says, quite simply, the members of the House of Representatives shall be apportioned among the several counties according to the number of population and each as nearly as maybe on a ratio obtained by dividing the population of the state as that ascertained by the most recent U.S. census -- United States census by the number of members of which the House is composed provided --

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And in the information I gave you, if you would -- you don't have that with you, do you -- you don't have the data that I submitted to you.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't have the articles no.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Okay. Because I was just going to refer you back to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution which I believe trump the Texas constitution.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Right. And when the United States Supreme Court says it trumps it, then I'll have to use it.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And so, you're inviting a challenge to us then on that basis then I assume.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm sorry, what?

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, you seem to be suggesting that the -- unless the Supreme Court tells you that you can use something other than the census data despite all the evidence to the contrary --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Unless Texas were to adopt something different, right now I think your arguments are for the courthouse and certainly if it's U.S. Supreme Court which we all respect as lawyers and members of this society want to tell us that federal law changes whatever the Texas Constitution or the Arizona Constitution or whatever, then everybody will have to live with that and deal with it. Unless Congress, of course, passes something else.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: I understand. But the reality of it is, Burt, other than what you're suggesting you don't give any respect to the fact that other states have done something different and even counties in Texas are doing something different.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't know why the counties are doing something different and I'm not sure I even talked to the various states that you mentioned. And we have 50 states not all 50 states not 49 and Texas is not but at the end of the day I don't know why they did what they did and the reasons for it. I just don't.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, I'm not asking if you know that. I'm just asking --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I understand what you are saying that there are some other states that have taken a different look and approach and some counties are apparently doing it but I don't know why.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: In Texas. But your basis is to abide by the rigid rule that you say that the Texas Constitution prohibits you from doing anything other than using the census data, as its given to you.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, I am told that other states have passed legislation of which you would like us to consider and you have even carried bills but Texas has never done that. So, unless we have something else to go by, some either law that we've adopted or the U.S. Supreme Court says we have to do something different I'm taking a strict interpretation of what I think we need to do and the committee as well under what the current law is today in Texas. And I'm not sure --

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Well, I happen to disagree with you, Burt, but I'll let somebody else ask questions because I think that one of the obligations that we have is to make sure that representation is adequate throughout the State. And using the census numbers without any respect for the fact that you have got 150 -- you have almost got a whole legislative district in prison in Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I respect your point.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And the fact that you -- the fact that we don't give any consideration to that seems to me to violate at least two if not three of the principles --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: And that's your opinion and I respect your opinion and your viewpoint.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: And I thank you for answering by questions as well.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez Fischer, for what purpose?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And, Mr. Speaker, as you know we had a very robust discussion about the point of order offered by Representative Martinez and there appears at least to some of us to be a conflict in the rules and I would like to have that discussion with you in a series of parliamentary inquires. So, if I -- if I may, Mr. Speaker, under Rule 4, Section 3, subsection 5, subsection 7 it appears to me that the committee chairman has the discretion to prepare all committee reports and to direct and supervise all committee personnel working for the committee chairman. Am I reading Rule 4, Section 3 properly.

JOE STRAUS: Can you state the section again for me, please.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Yes, sir. Mr. Speaker, Rule 4, Section 6 and I'm -- there is eight subsections. I think they are all applicable but you know subsection 5 being applicable to what I just asked and subsection 7 as well. And the essence of my inquiry is that it seems under Rule 4, Section 6 that the committee chair has a standard of authority to control the deliberations and manage and supervise the deliberations of their respective committees. Is that the purpose of Rule 4, Section 6.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez, Rule 4, Section 6 says, determine the necessity for public hearings, scheduled hearings and be responsible for directing the posting of notice of hearings as requested by the rules.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Yes, sir. And I believe it says -- at least the rules I have and they are for the 82nd Legislature. It also says, preside at all meetings of the committee and control its deliberations and activities in accordance with acceptable parliamentary procedure. Under sub 5, direct the preparation of all committee reports. No committee reports shall be official unless signed by the chair of the committee, by the person acting as chair. Also have the authority to employ and discharge the staff and employees authorized for the committee and have supervision and control over all staff and all employees. That indicates to me that this describes all the powers and duties and obligations and responsibilities of each committee chair that conducts committee hearings pursuant to the rules and the powers outlined by the rules. And Rule 4, Section 6 seemed to me to determine the scope of the committee chairman's power and authority; is that correct?

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez, there are also other provisions in Rule 4 that deal with how a committee chairman conducts his proceedings.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And they're all prescribed under the heading and duty of the chair, correct?

JOE STRAUS: Rule 4, Section 6 does describe duty as a chair.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Yes, sir. So, in other words, these aren't optional. These are your duties if you're going to chair a committee. These are your duties as chairman. These are the requirements. These are the obligations. These are your responsibilities, correct?

JOE STRAUS: Yes, sir, that's correct.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And when there seems to be a dispute over the testimony of certain witnesses that I believe have substantial implications, maybe not necessarily for the purpose of discussion at the speaker's rostrum but perhaps in various courts of law, perhaps the department of justice insofar as it relates to districts that are occupied by minority members of the legislature that are protected by the Voting Rights Act. And it appears to me that there are some witnesses who believe that they made themselves available and prevailed themselves to the Committee on Redistricting for the single and sole purpose to register their position on the committee's substitute to House Bill 150. And while the committee held a public hearing it wasn't a requirement that members of the legislature other than the committee members be in attendance. There was no requirement that every member of the legislature, you know, attend these hearings, correct?

JOE STRAUS: Yes, sir. Mr. Martinez Fischer, members, we are always free to attend whatever committee hearings they wish.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And for those that have chosen to go, that have the option to go and felt that they were going for the purpose of registering their sentiments on the proposed House Bill 150 some of them believe that that's -- that that viewpoint would be reflected in the actual minutes prepared by the committee chairman, which is the duty of the committee chairman under Rule 4, Section 6. And it's been explained to the chair by certain members of the legislature who desire to make their intentions known that they were suggested that they weren't required to fill out necessary forms. And I believe that it was determined that the representations that were made to those members were done so by members of the redistricting committee in terms of staff that are supervised and under the employ and under the direction of the chair. And so we have other testimony where that admonishment was not adhered to and those members persisted in having viewpoints registered on paper. And because those members refused the admonishments of the staff of the Committee on Redistricting they were allowed to register their viewpoints not just in live testimony but in the committee amendments that are reflected from the House Committee on Redistricting. And so my question is, if a chair acting under his authority under Rule 4, Section 6 and on the one hand a member who choses to ignore admonishment of committee staff for the purposes of being reflected in the minutes gets the benefit of being recognized as having been there and having registered their sentiment and those that respected the chairman's committees admonishment are now nowhere on the face of the committee report and there's an objection to that. I don't understand how the chair can consistently apply Rule 4, Section 6 and all of its subparts and Rule 4, Section 18 that makes it very clear and express that members of the legislature are accepted from being listed in the committee report and accepted from having to fill out a witness affirmation form, under Rule 4 Section 20. And so can we reconcile those rules, those three rules when it seems to subjectively apply to members who persist and those who abide by the committee's power under Rule 4, Section 6 to abide by the desire of the chair, only to be rewarded by having their testimony not reflected or having their viewpoints not reflected in the committee minutes.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez Fischer, the chair believes that those members appearing before a committee on which they do not sit are exempt from the requirement of completing a sworn statement before testifying in committee under subsection B and the requirements of the names of all persons who testify are listed on witness lists and in the committee minutes under subsection A.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And under subsection B it's very clear, Mr. Speaker, that it says that the minutes for each public hearing of a committee shall also include an attachment listing the names of persons other than members of a legislature. And so why is it -- it's permissible and why is it that House Bill 150 is in order when the committee minutes reflect the names of members of the legislature when Rule 4, Section 18B says that they don't have to be there? And how can House Bill 150 be in order under Rule 4, Section 20 when the committee reports and the witness affirmation forms reflect that a member of the legislature filled out a witness affirmation form and is accepted by the committee if they are not required to do so under those rules, then why were they accepted by the committee chair? And why is this bill in order and why should not this bill be sent back to committee to be in compliance with these rules?

JOE STRAUS: The bill is in order with Section 4 -- Rule 4, Section 18 and I think you'll have to take it up with Mr. Solomons about how the hearings are conducted.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I do if I'm in his committee but I'm on -- but I'm in your committee now and you get to make the decisions now, respectfully. And so while I would love to have this conversation with Burt I feel compelled to have it with you. And so, I want to know the Chair's ruling that how can House Bill 150 be in order when we have two representatives of the house listed in the committee minutes which is a direct violation of Rule 4, Section 18B and we have two members of the House of Representatives who have filled out sworn witness statements which is a direct violation of Rule 4, Section 20. And I realize the point of order was not raised with respect to the committee chair requiring witness affirmation forms of these members when they were excluded but I believe that if I'm going to abide by your prior rulings that the members are exempted. That I believe conversely that if a chairman requires a member of the legislature to submit a witness affirmation form which we can only assume that that was the desire of the chair because it was accepted that I believe that House Bill 150 should fall for violating Rule 4, Section 18B and Rule 4, Section 20. And so, I would like to raise that point of order.

JOE STRAUS: Bring your point of order down front. Mr. Martinez Fischer raises a point of order pursuant to Rule 4, Section 20. The point of order is respectfully overruled. Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm here.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: For what purpose, Ms. Farrar?

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: First, I would like to move that the remarks that Mr. Dutton made earlier between himself and Mr. Solomons be reduced to writing and placed in the record.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: And will the gentleman yield?

JOE STRAUS: Solomons, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yes, I do, of course.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Solomons, 89 percent of Texas population growth --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: It's getting a little hard to hear.

JOE STRAUS: Members, can we have order, please, it's hard to hear.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yeah, go ahead.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Solomons, 89 percent of Texas' population growth in the last decade was non-Anglo, so, can you tell me why this map does not increase the number of effective minority opportunity districts.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: It does improve minority districts. It does. We created let's see, we currently have 29, we now have 30. We tried to include what *malva even suggested in trying to beef up a couple of districts, including yours for Spanish -- SSVR's.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: I'm glad you brought that up actually because I want to get back to that. So, you claim that your plan creates additional Latino districts based on the number of district that are over -- that are 50 percent or more in Spanish surname voter registration.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: We tried to follow a law and tried -- and we used and one of the primary tools we use is SSVR's. So at the end of the day and I have notes, I guess. You know, if -- one of the primary indexes you look at are SSVR's. So we were trying to deal with minority districts and what those populations, you know -- and I've got the notes if you would like me to read it into the record just like y'all from different positions want to read things into the record. I'd be happy to do it. The mapping increases the number of districts to 30 and increases the likelihood that all members in the Hispanic community in those districts would be able to elect representatives of choice. There are two minority majority districts with black age voting age populations of 50 percent and the committee map maintains two district with BVAP's seating 60 percent. The map sort of speaks for itself. You know we didn't create five or six or seven or eight or ten but we did try to beef that up and meet what we need to do under the Voting Rights Act.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: Right. I'm glad you brought up my district because I'm below 50 percent and yet it elects -- not just at the State legislature but in local elections, it elects -- the coalition there elects -- has elected Hispanic representatives. So are you aware that the DOJ guideline says, quote, there is no specific demographic percentage that determines effectiveness. You have to do a functional analysis of the individual district including turn out and election results, end quote. Are you aware of that DOJ guideline?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: You do regression analysis and you do look at the numbers.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: I'm sorry --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: You do look at regression analysis for those done. Alleged counsel does those on a variety of districts. There are -- you know, primarily redistricting is a numbers issue, it seems to me. And that's one of the things I tried to go on is basically what the numbers are. And what I was advised that we needed to do for certain districts to try and ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act as best we could.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: Could you -- of course this applies -- I understand you -- in your first plan you eliminated the, I guess, what you would call protective district mine and Representative Burnam's in Fort Worth. And then in the substitute replaced them. And you've been counting that as new seats. But back to question of the performance of the district. When; for instance, in my area -- in my district where you have bumped the Hispanic number up above 50 percent yet the district is performing electing Hispanics, can you see that you would actually be squandering Hispanic voters that could be used to draw another seat. So, in other words, impacting my district that district's -- that population could have been used to draw another or to boost another seat to become a Hispanic seat.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm not sure what you're wanting me to admit to.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: That it wasn't necessary to increase that number. Do you see that?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I know what the committee put out. Based on what we were told what we needed to do with several different districts to try to ensure better compliance with the Voting Rights Act. You may disagree but that's what the committee is advised to do.

REP. JESSICA FARRAR: Right. But that could have been done in other areas. In other words, the minority population that drew growth that -- that drove the growth in the State was not used in a way that actually promoted minority representation. In fact, it's gone the other way and I've got some colleagues with other questions as well.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, that maybe a disagreement or opinion on how we did it but what we're trying to do was accomplish the goal of having a legal map trying to bring as much compliance as we could to the Voting Rights Act with what we had in a member driven map.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman, please yield.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Solomons, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Of course, I do.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman Solomons. And I heard the dialogue you had with Representative Farrar with relation to the impact of HB 150 to Hispanic, Latino districts. Can you tell us what is the impact on HB 150 as it relates to African American districts?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm sorry which.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: HB 150 on African American districts.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: What?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: The number of districts in HB 150 for African Americans, any idea?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't know the exact number. There are a number of primarily black districts. There are. In Dallas County and Harris County as well and Bexar County I think.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: And know but you gave out a specific number as it relates to Latino districts. Do you not have an exact number in terms of the impact on 150 as it relates to African American districts.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, most of the time you're looking at minority opportunity districts and you look at various districts as you well know, Mr. Turner, that you are trying to ensure that the numbers suggest that they are protected under the Voting Rights Act. And what we tried to do; for example, in your district we know we moved some people over in the version that's before you today.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: But when you look at SSVR's there's a mixture of those. And Hispanics just did not settle in just one area of the state or one particular district. They spread out throughout the process.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: In my district; for example, roughly 78,000 African Americans were taken out of my district. So there are fewer African Americans in my district but the question that I am opposing in general in drawing HB 150 was the focus -- I mean how much time did you or the committee and or the staff take in drawing this map with emphasis on African American districts, if any. If not -- the answer is what it is. If there was no emphasis taken in terms of drawing African American districts I can accept that answer as well.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, one of my valued colleagues on the committee just pointed out that under the current map, under BVAP's, 50 percent were two; 40 percent were 11. Under the new proposed map before you today on the BVAP's for 50 percent were still two but for 40 percent it moved up to 12, so we tried to increase it somewhat.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. Because that's what is important in terms of opportunity districts for African Americans. In terms of the groups that you have met with have you-all met with African Americans groups in drawing up House Bill 150.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Did I meet personally with --

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Did you, the staff, anybody that is connected with drawing HB 150, have any of you met with African American groups.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I personally didn't meet with a lot of groups. I met with a lot of members of this body but I didn't meet with a lot of groups. Now some groups may have proposed or given us information from outside sources but I didn't personally meet -- I can't remember any group that I really met with other than possibly one or one representative of one group.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: I'm sorry.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I think I met with one representative of one group but not black caucus.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: But in terms; for example, NAACP or any groups like that that you may have met with.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: The only person that I remember meeting with in my office about a particular issue that they had was a representative of, I believe *Malta that came to my office.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. And the reason that I'm asking is that in terms of 150 I am sure 150 reflects the input coming of meetings or conversations or dialogue with various members whether it was map whether it was *MALTA, whether it's U.S. chambers of Commerce. You name it.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: You asked me if I met with anyone. I told you who I met with. However, as my staff reminds me that we -- apparently the staff reached out to NAACP as a group, I guess, but we did not receive feedback from them any specifics of any sort.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: As you know, there are several amendments and I know we are going to be getting to them soon but the Texas Legislative Black Caucus has found several amendments in terms of how districts -- opportunity districts for African Americans should be drawn. But just in terms of getting my arms around where we are, I'm just interested in knowing separate and apart from members whether or not there is any input coming from any groups representative of the African American community where that input was included in the drawing of HB 150.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: All I know is we reached out. We got some -- from some folks, I guess, we've gotten input from. Me personally the only person to ever set up an appointment to come to see me was a representative, a lawyer, that looked at the *MALTIV proposed maps. Wanted to come talk to me about those maps and a lot of them had county cuts and all. And we had discussion and that was only one. Our staff apparently reached out and pretty open ended about, hey, if you got anything give it to us and we didn't get a lot of feed back in specifics.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, the staff has never reached out in terms of asking me as chairman of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus for any input at all. No one has asked -- no one asked any input from me. I chair the Texas Legislative Black Caucus. And as far as I know, I'm not aware that the staff has reached out to anybody else. I stand to be corrected.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I respect you highly and you are someone who has known me since I got here. You were here before me. You are a senior member. We office down the hall from each other. Other than us passing in the hallway very easily I could have come down to your office or you could have come down to my office but we never had a conversation. You and I both know with your position we never had a conversation where you expressed anything to me specific about what your group was wanting to do. You know that.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Accept I made it very clear that I was adamantly opposed to 7,000 or 8,000 African Americans being taken out of my district.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, I understand that. That had to do with your district. But as a group of who you represent and what you try to accomplish with that group and I appreciate that but you and I both never had a conversation in your role with the Legislative Black Caucus.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Right. Well, the timeline has been very abbreviated.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I've been pretty available. Everybody on this floor knows I've been pretty available. If somebody wanted to talk to me they certainly could talk to me either for themselves or representative of a group that could have come and seen me.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. Did y'all reach out to other groups.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm sure we had a general reach out. I don't know what that means but we're pretty open. And I know our clerk and Ryan down in the in the redistricting committee and Geraldo, everybody who was working on this trying to accommodate as many people as we could. We were pretty open ended. You could come see us anytime almost. We've been around here working pretty diligently ever since I got the appointment.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Right. So is it fair to assume that the staff did not affirmatively reach out to others but the staff simply waited for people to come to them to talk to them about --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm sure we reached out affirmatively in some cases. I can't give you specifics at this moment but I'm sure we reached out pretty specifically. We had a number of people calling and they were trying to bring their input. Just like, you know, just like anything else, you basically are trying to make yourself available, you try to reach out where you can but you expect people to actually bring you their ideas and their suggestions and their specifics. And you can't hold everybody's hand all you can do is be open and try to receive whatever you're getting for the most part.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: But I am sure everyone is cognizant of the Voting Rights Act and the impact not just on the Latino community but also on African Americans as well. And I will tell you that one of the reasons why I'm standing here is because it seems as though that the conversation is so much one sided. But having said all of that there are maps that are incoming in form of amendments that are presented.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I know that there are amendments. Thank you.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: If I can put two things in one motion. The comments between Representative Solomons and Representative Dutton and the comments between Representative Solomons and myself I would ask be reduced to writing and placed in the record.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Mr. Veasey, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Gentleman yield.

JOE STRAUS: The gentleman is out of time.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I would like to move to extend gentleman's time to twenty minutes, please.

JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. It's the first extension of time. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Parliamentary inquiry.

JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: You would extend it for twenty minutes.

JOE STRAUS: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Okay. Mr. Speaker, does the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I think I -- yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Thank you, Mr. Solomons. I know that you are in addition to chairman of this committee you live in Denton County now but you're from the Dallas area. You're very familiar with Dallas having grown up in north Dallas. And I wanted to ask you, in Dallas County the Anglo population decreased by 198,000 people between 2000 and 2010 that is a negative growth rate of 20.2 percent. The Hispanic population grew by 243,000 plus, the African American population grew by 73,000 plus, and the Asian population grew by 30,000 plus. Anglos now only make up about a third of the city, about 33 percent of Dallas County. And so with these numbers in mind why did you create -- why didn't you create anymore new opportunity districts in Dallas and you still allow Anglo voters to control 68 percent of the district. It doesn't seem like to the numbers are adding up on the Dallas County portion of the map.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: You want to know why we have the map we have for Dallas County.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Not the map that you have but specifically why do Anglo's still control so much of the district when they've move into it sounds like maybe into your area or the other surrounding counties.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, Dallas County had a reduction in population. We had growth in certain districts that were already existing. And this is a member driven map driven by Dallas County and the committee didn't see that they needed to create new districts at this point. We have a number of protected districts under the Voter Rights Act in Dallas County but overall we are having to pair some people in Dallas County but primarily where the growth was, was in a lot of existing protected districts.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Another question that I have for you is, in Tarrant County there's a new coalition district in District 101 but with that in mind in HB 93, why did you retro graph so much in HB 93. It was a majority minority district as well. And so that's one that Representative Nash represents, the lightening bolt district, the very thin shaped district that goes up to the Denton County border.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: In Tarrant County?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Anyway, the Dallas County when I said it dropped, it actually didn't grow in the relative areas. But in Tarrant County you were an integral part in drawing the Tarrant County map along with your colleague in Tarrant County. And the way you-all presented a map that seemed to be agreed to by everyone in the configuration, that's the map that we put in for Tarrant County. So the drop in county and you were very much a part of that entire map drawing.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Absolutely. And we all agreed to our respective districts that have now been changed. Those maps have been changed. My district and Representative Burnam's district in particular were changed and they were not changed with our approval. They were changed by the approval of other people in majority Anglo districts and not our district.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, let me look at my notes. And I know Mr. Geren was integral in with working with you on that. Let's see. So what's your question in particular?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: My question in particular is the 101. The 101 is a new coalition district that is created. And I know the numbers in the new 101 very well --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: The 101 is the one to create.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Right.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: The question about District 90.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Ninety-three in particular. I'm just trying to figure out why that thinly drawn lightening bolt district.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Would you like Mr. Geren to talk to you about that.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I don't mind at all.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Because you guys worked to get on it might as well talk to him about it.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Geren.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Veasey, District 93 was a minority district but that became District 101. As you know excess population in Tarrant County of about 180 -- oh 180 plus thousand -- excuse me, about the 160,000. And that 160,000 a good portion of that is in the new District 93 which does not resemble the old District 93 at all. And *MALNET asked us to -- the Hispanic voting population in one of the districts that's what changed District 90.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Right. And I understand that. But you also understand too, that legally that means nothing. That district was already a Hispanic opportunity district and a what you did by doing that was you had to pull District 90 far into my district and has been a traditional --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I don't think any of us own a district. I think you represent a district, Mr. Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Excuse me.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I don't think that you own a district. I think you represent it.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Absolutely. I think we all represent all 150.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: And I think you do a very good job with it.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Thank you. The district that I represent now, District 90, goes pretty far in to there and both districts were functioning well as an African American opportunity district and a Hispanic opportunity district.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I think that Mr. Solomons and the committee decided that it would be better and *MALTA asked the committee to increase the population to ensure that there's a better turn opportunity for the Hispanic voters to prevail in that district.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: But the district was already an Hispanic opportunity district.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: And it has more Hispanic opportunity than what it was.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: And the one thing about the Voting Rights Act is that you cannot draw the districts so that a particular person can get elected to office.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I don't believe there's any particular person been picked out by Mr. Solomons or anyone on the committee to be elected.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: The Voting Rights Act is about the community being able to pick the person of their choice. And the person of their choice was already -- they were already doing that. You don't get to change the line.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Well, I don't think -- (*inaudible).

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: You don't change it to get rid of somebody or elect somebody.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I don't think -- I don't believe that there was any intention to get rid of somebody or elect anyone in doing that. I just think there was an effort to increase Hispanic population in that district.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Well, the districts were already acting as a Hispanic district.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I'm not arguing that point with you. I'm just telling you what it does now.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Okay. Thank you Mr. Geren.

JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes, Representative Solomons.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield.

JOE STRAUS: Mr. Solomons, do you yield.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Yes, yes.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Chairman Solomons. I was just listening to the exchange with you and then with Representative Geren and Representative Veasey. And so, is it your contention that the two new Hispanic opportunity districts are current District 90 occupied by Representative Burnam and District 148 currently represented by Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Their SSVR numbers were increased slightly. That's why there's a difference from what they turned in because we were -- we were advised basically we needed to do that just for additional protection to make sure that they were where they needed to be. That's the only reason they're in there.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: But are those the two districts that you are saying -- you said in your initial lay out that there was a creation of two Hispanic districts. Did I hear you say that?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: That was not -- I said we created a new opportunity district. I think that's in Nueces County in that regard where we beefed that one up to be a minority protect -- I mean minority majority district. The two that we were talking about before had to do with just increasing SSVR slightly because it was felt by the legal team to, you know, that we should do that. That's why we did it.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: So, with respect to Farrar and Burnam's district, the legal advice that you received to not just have them as a HVAC district but to have them with a higher percentage of SSVR.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: For example, in District 101 -- do we think it's protected by the Voting Rights Act? We may not think so but that's really a legal matter for the courts and as far as 90 concerned with the voting age population includes nonvoters. Although District 90 is not currently a Hispanic district -- a majority district with respect to Spanish surname voter registration. That figure is currently at 45. At *MALTA's request we wanted to increase the Hispanic voting strength of District 9. That's why. That's the only reason we did it.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: That's the only reason -- it's not your contention that District 90 was not performing and that minorities weren't given the opportunity to elect the candidate of their choice. I mean that's not your contention.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: You know as well as I do what we're trying to do is produce a legal map. I mean the only thing the Speaker asked me to do was try to have a map the best interest of the entire state and try to have a legal map in doing so. So when you have the numbers of lawyers that are all involved in the redistricting you get opinions and ideas that on what you need to do. So that's why some adjustments were made. We'll let the Courts decide basically on what they want to do if it's so challenged. If not then it will stay pretty much with what this body decides.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Right. Right. And I know that for some that don't believe in resolving things at the courthouse I know that's hard for them to digest. I think you and I both recognize that this may just be one of the beginning chapters in a long, you know, redistricting litigation book that's being rewritten.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: You know, I was kind of hoping not to have that so much so on the Texas House map. Maybe congressionally but not Texas House map. But you and I both know that there maybe -- whatever we do on this House floor hopefully will be a good strong legal map. However, some groups and some folks may end up being dissatisfied and that's what the courts are there for. And for some independent consideration as to what maybe some changes if any. There maybe no changes. There may be a change here and there. We don't know that. We can't foresee that. All we can try to do is come up with what we think, in this body, and what the committee did was come up with what they thought was a good, strong, legal, fair map. Now the question is, what this body does to it after amendments and however it comes off this floor we'll still try to have a strong legal map, I hope. And whoever is dissatisfied will certainly have a chance to do whatever they do in the process of redistricting. In my opinion it's sort of a shame in a way to all have to spend years and years and years with this litigate when in fact there maybe something that can be something resolved very quickly and shortly thereafter.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Well, maybe we can sit down and look at each others amendments and maybe avoid that all together. I'll meet you halfway and -- but I understand, Chairman Solomons, I understand what your intent was in District 90. I just -- what made my ears perk up was I thought it was being construed that District 90 was given more Latinos so that it could be a Latino district, when I believe that it was performing fine. And now I agree that any district could be enhanced to make it perform better and so I just wanted to make sure there's not credit being taken for District 90 becoming a Latino district when I think it's, you know, at least it's our contention that it was already performing.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, that's your contention but District 90 was not currently a Hispanic majority district with respect to SSVR's. And so, the figure is currently only really at 45 percent. So, we did that and we made that adjudgment at the request of *MALTA so that might not be a situation where we have to get into later. That's why we did it.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Okay. But understanding *MALTA sentiments aside it seems to me that saving except the 2010 election that district seemed to perform pretty consistently. And minorities seem to have the opportunity to elect the candidate of their choice. But can I -- let's digress. Did I hear you say that you believe there's a new minority opportunity district that was to be drawn in Nueces County.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I believe what we did in Nueces County was because the numbers were so close we decided at the end that we probably should do something that was more in line with Hispanic and other. So that's what we did, yes.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Which district is that.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: It's one of those things you can't find when you need to but go ahead.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Well, I guess I'm just trying to see where the new opportunity is because I thought that the Coastal Bend had two performing minority opportunity districts and I see in your map that what used to be District 33 is now been removed from the Coastal Bend and now resides somewhere in Rockwall outside of Dallas.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: What?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: What I said is when I looked at the map --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Oh, here's coastal -- wait a minute, hold on. Oh, here it is. It's not in my little book that's why. All right. Let me put it on the record because we are all about the record apparently. Why did Nueces get the two seats? The apportionment of seats in each county was determined by taking the ideal population size of a district, 167,637, and dividing the total population for each county in the state. And the case in Nueces County when you divided the ideal district size you got 2.03. The Texas Constitution requires a county be apportioned to a number of seats that is nearly as maybe. So even though there are three members that reside in Nueces you can really only have two seats. So why didn't we create two Hispanic majority seats in Nueces County? The overall population in Nueces has an SSVR of 49 percent, as a result it is impossible to draw two Hispanic majority seats within Nueces. We decided to draw only one strongly Hispanic district to allow the Hispanic community in Nueces to elect a representative of their choice and that all three members of the Nueces County representatives agreed to the map. So as far as that goes that's what we did on the record. That's why we did it. Mr. Hunter and his colleagues along there agreed to that.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Okay. And I don't know that but I take you and them at their word.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, that's what we did.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Well, I do know that it appears to me that district had two performing minority opportunity districts and they seemed to be working quite fine and there was opportunities where we cut county lines in your map so that you could add population and I'm just curious why you didn't do that in that area of the state, when you easily could have?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm not sure why because the map doesn't unnecessarily cut any county lines. It's only where -- you know, redistricting, you know, it says you have a county line rule but it's pretty clear that you don't unnecessarily go around cutting county line. Nueces County in how it's located and where it is, is why we did what we did.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I think you -- if I'm not mistaken your map makes about 17 cuts. And I guess what I'm saying is that why couldn't one of those cuts -- I mean is it conceivable that one of those cuts could have been in the Coastal Bend that would have resulted in there being not just one minority opportunity districts but two.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't know. My response is we didn't unnecessarily cut any county line where it didn't absolutely need to be done. Not just to do it to create new districts but it absolutely had to be done in the context of what was being accomplished in that area.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: So, when you took a district in south Texas and you took a member's district out of Webb County and put it in Hidalgo County what was the justification for that.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I'm reminded that we only cut in one area and everything else was spillovers. Spillovers are not cuts in county lines. Spillovers are not.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Well, I think they break a county line.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, they don't cut them intentionally to go -- they're because of the population in numbers. It's not because you're going around to do that.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Right. So why currently in the district that spilled over into Webb didn't continue to go into Webb and make the decision veer into Hidalgo.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: I don't know. The committee -- this is the map the committee proposed based on what we were advised and how we have to abide by the rule law, that's what we did.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: But you and chairman of the committee and you and I have a reasonable discussion about map drawing I think it's hard to deny that it raises a question, at least in my mind, that a district that currently spilled over into Webb County all of a sudden spilled over into another county which somewhat argues results in the prevention of drawing an additional district in south Texas because of that new spillover taken population out of Hidalgo County.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, the MALTA's map didn't do that. As I was reminded the MALTA's map -- there was some physical constraints in what you have to do for that. And we only had cut county lines where it was absolutely necessary, obviously, by the map as it reflects. And the spillovers are just the spillovers and that's what you have to deal with.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And what I would prefer to do and it's true to me but I know that there are several members from the Rio Grande Valley delegation that would probably be more appropriate to have the discussion with you but it just -- it's curious to me that we can spillover into the Hidalgo County and justify it but we can't spillover outside Nueces County and justify it by maintaining two minority opportunity districts that are currently there today. It just sort of flummoxes me that we can do it in the very tip of south Texas but we can't do it in the Coastal Bend. And while I recognize you didn't draw this map by yourself and you don't take credit for the, you know, the over all production I think you would have to acknowledge with me that that is a curious inquiry as to how the committee can be selective in one part of the state and --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT R. SOLOMONS: Well, depending on the amendments today we'll see what happens but at the end of today and somebody can keep track and mention that. But really at the end of the day it will be a matter for -- we think we did the right thing. The committee thinks it did the right thing. We'll see what the committee suggests if that happens today. But it maybe that when you-all -- whoever is dissatisfied. The courts may or may not agree with it but we think we did it the way we needed to do it because of the way the territories are -- the counties are positioned, where the numbers are and how it works together. So we didn't have a disagreement. Redistricting is not a perfect science. You go as much as you can by the numbers but you have spillover areas, you have the way lines are drawn. You know, a lot of it depends on the SSVR's.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Representative Sheets raises a point of order that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Mr. Speaker.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: For what purpose?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I move to extend the gentleman's time.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: There's a motion -- is there objection.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Another twenty minutes, sir.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: There is objection. There is objection.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Mr. Speaker, I provoke.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Members, Mr. Solomons agrees to the extension of twenty minutes of time, request is granted.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: State your inquiry.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Would you, please, explain to me the rules under Rule 5, Section 11; Rule 5, Section 12 with regard to privileges on House floor.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Give us a second. Rule 5, Section 11 sets out people who are entitled to privileges of the floor. Among those people are: Members of the House, and employees of the House when doing their official duties that are determined by the chair, and the Committee on House Administration. Rule 5, Section 12 deals with admittance within the railing and also allows officers and employees of the House to be admitted within rails when those officers and employees are actually engaged in performing their official duties as determined by the Committee on House Administration.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Thank you.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Is the chair advised that the Speaker's counsel is considered to be an employee of the House.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: The chairman of the House administration informs the chair that the employee of the House has been granted admittance to the House.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I appreciate that from the chairman of the house administration. But my question is an employee of the House is he a state employee.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: He receives a check from the comptroller's account as if he is a state employee. Is there any other questions Mr. Martinez Fischer.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Does that constitute that he is an employee of the house because every state employee gets a check from the comptroller, regardless, of whether they work for the House.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: He has been issued a Texas House of Representative badge as an employee of the Texas House of Representatives in the Speaker's office.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Now, an employee who is an employee of the House who has been granted permission by the chairman of the House administration to be on the floor of the House, are there any rules or prohibitions in terms of where that employee locates himself or where that employee engages in debate directly or indirectly with members of the House of Representatives.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Martinez, where would you like the employee to be standing.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Well, I think he can be wherever the chairman of House administration decides him to be but my question is, is he authorized to debate on the floor of the house? Is he authorized to confer and give legal counsel to those proponents of House Bill 150? And if he is, I would like the chair to also recognize the other members of the House who also have counsel under their employee, so if we're going have a legal repartee we should make it uniform and let all parties bring their lawyers to the floor.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons. Keep going. You have ten minutes left. Representative Walle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Mr. Speaker would the gentleman yield for a couple questions?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Do you yield, Mr. Solomons?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, I do.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Gentleman yields, Mr. Walle.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Chairman Solomons, I am going to talk to you -- I don't know if you want to flip to your Harris County section but I want to talk to you about Harris County.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Members, let's have a little order. If you have conversation, can you please move them outside the rail? Thank you, members.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Do you want to talk about the Harris County?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Talk about Harris County.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: All right. Let me find the section and see where to proceed on.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Okay. And in Harris County we actually had the same amount of growth as the State as a percentage and we are still losing one seat. We are removing to 25 five seats to 24 seats. In addition to that are you aware that Harris County lost Anglo population but grew significantly in Latino and African American population?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: If you say so.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I'm asking you this question: Are you aware?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: If you say so. I don't have any reason to disagree with you at this point.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Okay. Let me enlighten you some of the numbers -- with specific numbers that we have for Harris County.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Please do.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Okay. Thank you. And allow me to do that. Harris County decreased by 82,000 people between 2000 and 2010, which was a negative of a 5.7 growth while the Hispanic population grew by about 551,789. African American population grew by 134,564 and the Asian population grew by 76,827. With those numbers in mind why would your bill H.B. 150 create no new minority opportunity districts in Harris County and eliminates an effective coalition district which is represented by my good friend Hubert Vo, in House District 149 while diluting the Latino *Hbat percentages and H.B. 137, by 4.4 percent, represented by Chairman Scott Hochberg.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Mr. Walle, I appreciate you asking those questions and if you will give me some indulgence -- I'll kind of go through what our reasoning or what are my reasoning or the committee's reasoning was in connection with Harris County.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Okay. One of the questions that we sort of anticipated was why did you decrease Harris County to 24 seats? The apportionment of seats to each county was determined by taking the ideal population size of the district, 167,637 and dividing it into the total population of each county in the State. In the case of Harris County, when you divide -- divided the ideal district size you got 24.41. Article 3, I think, of section -- Article 3 Section 26 of the constitution requires that each county maybe apportioned a number of seats that is as nearly as maybe. For Harris County that is 24 districts. But the redistricting map passed by the legislature in 2001 gave Harris County 25 seats even though it should have been rounded to 24. And one of the questions that you and others are concerned about is why can't we do the thing same? Well, actually the map passed by the legislature only gave Harris County 24 seats the last time we did redistricting. At that time Representative Coleman, Dutton, Farrar, Hochberg, Thompson, and Turner all voted for the map that gave Harris County 24 seats. The Legislative Redistricting Board actually changed the seats to 25. And, you know, it's just my preference and I think the purpose of the committee we passed a map that passes the Senate and is signed by the governor. So, y'all did not become involved that but I wasn't on the Legislative Redistricting Board that voted 25 seats. So I can't be sure of how they reached their decision.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Do you know that --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: No. Let me finish.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: That aspect of the plan was never challenged in court so we don't know if it would have survived judicial scrutiny, we don't want to take a risk with this map over that issue. Now, you get into Representative Hochberg, Representative Vo, why did I or why did the committee map as proposed and under consideration now, pair with Representative Hochberg in District 137, and Representative Vo on 149, because there has been some discussion anyway about whether or not they are in protected districts. Apparently our legal team doesn't think they are in represent actually formal protected districts. And if you think they are protected coalition districts they also don't think so. So, when you -- when you also count the Asian community for Representative Vo's district, doesn't that make it protected and we don't think those districts are protected either. So if the minority populations form a cohesive block then are they protected? Well not necessarily. I understand there maybe only one thing that a court looks at but they also look at a lot of other factors. So I don't know the specifics of how they are going to decide all that at the court if that's where this goes but the idea that somehow there was an issue of 24 versus 25 is very clear that the numbers, if you do it according to Texas Constitution you round down, you don't round up based on those numbers.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Where does it exactly say that because according to the LRB it is my understanding that these were protected and they thought that was -- and the conclusion was that they were protected because these are both districts that have communities of interest that have elected their candidate of choice regardless of their race. These are coalition districts that these folks have been given the opportunity to represent them and I think represent them very, very well.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And I understand there's a disagreement. I understand it that people are upset -- and I understand that but the map is before this body right now is based on not just somebody's idea of what we want to do. It's based on what we think the law is. And that's why.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I would say where in the law do you come to that conclusion?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Texas Constitution says that you divide these are -- each county to be apportioned a number of seats as nearly may be. And for Harris County that's 24 districts on 24.41. If you were 24.5 or 24.56 or 24.6 you would normally round up. But you don't round up when it's below 24.5, you would round down. If you want to take that position. I wasn't on LRB. I don't know why that was done. I remember being a House member here and voting for a map and it goes to LRB and comes back differently. So what a lot of members thought that their districts were supposed to look like. That's one of the problems you run into here.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And I'll be happy to yield for question for my good friend Mr. Hochberg.

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you, Mr. Solomons.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: For what purpose, Mr. Hochberg?

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Of course. Yes.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: The gentleman yields.

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: Mr. Chairman. I guess the -- if you've looked at the history and I'm sorry that you weren't at the hearing where I testified or I guess where anybody testified after the map was laid out but if you look at the history in Harris County it was not just the LRB -- I'm sorry. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sorry I was handed a note. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: The testimony that I gave at your committee that you were unable to attend, was that not only did the LRB decide the 25 was an appropriate and legal number based on numbers that are so close to where we currently are that you couldn't possibly tell that the census isn't that accurate. But that prior legislatures had done the same thing. This was not the first time that this was done. It was not the only time that it was done and not in the history of any of that with any of the legal challenges that anybody ever said, oh, no you can't do this map because it rounds Harris County up to 25. We were even further from 25 in an earlier approved redistricting plan that passed muster with the courts. So I don't understand where you get the requirement that it has to go down.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well there was never really a court challenge to all that. I know that at the time that I was told historically that Tarrant County was actually a 10.6 or something and they were thinking of even suing over and decided not to. There's never been a final determination by a court of what you or how you read that and why you have to do what you do. But when the constitution says it's nearly may be that tells me as a lawyer, that's probably the better practice to round down and not round up. I wasn't on LRB. I don't even know who was on LRB in 2001.

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: It doesn't matter whether -- what was in the LRB.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Because they did it.

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: They did it. But also this legislature did it in the previous cycle and the cycle before that at one point was down as low as 24.3.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And that's fine, but you even voted for it in 24 last time. I mean --

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: And I, --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We do we are doing what this House did last time in rounding down --

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: Chairman. Chairman, did I ever make a statement or did any of the people you mentioned there ever make a statement that it had to be 24 because that was the legal requirement.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Didn't say that it had to be 24.

REP. SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Didn't say it had to be 24. In fact that's what happened on the floor of the House.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Do you yield Mr. Solomons?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Of course.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I need to ask some questions with regard to retrogression on your map. And I know you've been talking about specific districts but I just want to talk about the over all need to get some understanding. Is it your understanding that as a part of the count for redistricting that we should not create maps that are retrogressing in terms of limiting or changing or redistrict from minority representation. Is that your understanding?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We don't think this map -- we don't think this map is retrogressing.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I know, but is it your understanding that -- it should not be retrogressing.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We should make every effort not to make it a retrogression map. If you want to have a legal map.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Okay. And in terms of the retrogression map what does it mean in your mind in terms of retrogressing? Is it retrogressing changed the number of districts, we lowered the number of minority districts? Would you explain to me what, the committee considers retrogression?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, a lot of what we do on those kinds of things are based on what people behind the scenes i.e. alleged counsel, lawyers, everybody who goes through those processes. I'm not clear on everything that the lawyers look at but I do know that they analyze the approximately ten elections for the elected offices which we are effecting and determined whether the canidate of choice of the minority majority would have won with the change precincts of the new district. And I can't tell you nor suggest that any of the committee tell you a real detailed explanation of what they do with precincts which were not originally in the district and where that candidate was not an option. But there are several programs that run in the retrogression analysis and that's they do. And they tell us based on those that we get; for example, --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: I'm asking --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- wait a minute, let me respond. For the -- for example, the SBOE map. There was some concern about a particular SBOE district. I forgot which one it was but it was one that it would appear that the initial map or the initial -- the initial proposed view of that map was proposed. After they did retrogression analysis on those they came back and said that they thought that there might be some problems and based on what lawyers and the programs run tell us based on the numbers. That's what we are doing. None of us here probably -- well, I say that. There is probably somebody in this body out of 150 know more than a some of the majority of the members including myself. But it's actually looking at the past elections, how they ran the program and what the data of how they try to determine as best they can what is retrogression or what they think is the retrogression versus what is not. And they think there could be a problem if you want to try to draw a legal map and you were trying to do that and not have retrogression we try to make some adjustments.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Okay. So my question is, based on there not supposed to be retrogression in the Voting Rights Act is to protect from retrogression is that to make sure that we don't inadvertently do any form of discrimination as it relates to voting, and voting patterns?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I don't know about -- I'm not trying to -- I don't know what you mean about discrimination. I just know that when you have protected districts it's about allowing a minority opportunity district to elect their person of choice. It's about making sure that if they were already under some kind of protection of the Voting Rights Act that we need to abide by that as best we can.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: But what were the basis? You have to understand that their basis of Voting Rights Act has a direct relationship to past performances of discrimination and, therefore, those acts were put in place. So you can't ignore that issue. So you've got to have that as part of the discussion. I mean you said you didn't want to.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, I don't think anybody is intentionally trying to discriminate against anybody. It's really pretty much run by the numbers and what the lawyers tell us is what could be retrogression issues under the Voting Rights Act and we're trying to abide by that.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Well, I understand that but you were saying you can't consider that and I don't want us to loose sight --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I didn't say that I wasn't going to consider it. I said I'm not sure what I don't understand in connection of consideration in that context of maybe -- maybe I didn't understand what you were meaning and I apologize.

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: Okay. But retrogression in this incidence means that the voting rights put in place that you would not be retrogressing in the map so that they would have the effect of discriminatory practices in voting patterns that occurred in the past.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: No. We do see an opportunity --

REPRESENTATIVE YVONNE DAVIS: And when we do so -- district -- my question is, your map reduces -- has the reduction of seats to the minority owned seats; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: What we are trying to accomplish in this, Ms. Davis, is that when you look at retrogression you are looking at reducing a minority's opportunity to elect the one of their choice. And that's what you are trying to do. And I looked at it in that light and that's how -- since I have been appointed to the committee that's how I learned it but I can tell you right now -- you know, it's hard to tell exactly other than they give you and they say in the last ten elections here's what happened. They have a modeled computer programs and they are trying to get as close as they can to insure that they can apply with the Voting Rights Act.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: And I appreciate that. My question is: When you take a districting change political relationship to put minorities in districts where they would not have any value in terms of the election process and/or change the cohesive make up of the districts, would that have effect of maybe being retrogressive? Could that be perceived as retrogressive?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, actually you know, one of the first things that happened when I got appointed to this position, I had to try to bone up a little bit at least on some election law. Apparently there's a lot of -- number of standards by which the courts look at, communities of interest, retrogression, a variety of thing that is involved in this. Not just one factor. There is -- it is a combination of things.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: I'm going to get to those others. I just wanted to start with this so that I understand what your parameters were in terms of how you address the issue of retrogression. I will now go and talk about communities interested in the compactness of districts. And I want to understand the things that you consider because I saw some of the maps where the districts were a little squiggly and I remember as a member of the body saw that the sides, or the democrats that are -- so I want to understand what parameters were you all considering when you talked to that -- when you talk about communities of interest and compactness because there is periods that may not have been -- that's not considered the same thing I'm considering.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Sometimes you will have a little squiggly thing that's on the map but it may be because of just the nature of how the land is construed where people live, the SSDR's, voting age populations. There maybe some of that. You can have -- you can talk about the jerrymandering and all of that. But based on what I saw in some of the cases, some of them are pretty darn obvious and some you might think are, really aren't. Because you're looking at trying to abide by the Voting Rights Act.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: And that's why I want to understand what it is that you can consider when you talked about retrogression. I think I heard you indicate you were looking on the voting pattern kind of was the driving factor and whether or not --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And compassion, just what you said, compassion, communities of interest, retrogression issues by modeling and how the SSRD's and a variety of different issues go into the entire package. You're right it does. It is a variety of different things. One of the things that you do look at in retrogression, even though I don't know the specific details, is that you really do look at past elections and who -- and whether or not the particular district has given an opportunity -- minority protected district is given an opportunity and not have a reduced number or an impermissible reduction of what they think is retrogression. And that's what we tried to accomplish with the map.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: And so, when you look at the map do you see fewer minority districts or fewer minority -- possibility of minority districts based on whatever this combination of facts as you consider. Do you find that to be inconsistent with saying that it may have the effect of being retrogressive because the lower number of district -- minority protected districts, based on that?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We have one pairing and we don't even -- one pairing in Harris County in particular between two democrats. We don't think those are protected districts.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Let me ask you with regard to protected districts. Is it your thought that based on the Voting Rights Act if a district is African American today and it becomes a Hispanic district, that in fact that district still is protected? Or would you think that you change one for the other. How does the committee handle the change in the district from African American to Hispanic.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Look at minority opportunity district to elect the person of their choice based on what currently exists and what redistricting and what lawyers want -- that you need to be careful about --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Does the committee consider it retrogression if you have an African American district that becomes a Hispanic district? Does the committee view that as being retrogressive as it relates to an African American district changing over to become a Hispanic district or does the committee treat that as one?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sure I can answer that question properly. I do know that when we are --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Well --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- when we were doing was looking at minority opportunity districts. I know that's what I was --

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Representative Sheets raises the point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. Point of order is well taken and sustained. Members, we are going to begin the process of amendments and we are going to begin with Bexar County. Chair lays out the following amendment. The Clerk will read the amendment. Members, this is plan 160 and it will be in your data base. Again, members, the amendment screen will play. And it's in the upper right-hand corner of your screen. There's an icon which says "view map " and that's what you will enter and should be able to bring up the map that we'll be discussing. Chair recognizes the clerk. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Menendez.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Chair recognizes Representative Menendez.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE MENENDEZ: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and members. Currently our lines between mine and Representative Castro's are along a major arterial street. Whoever drew the map moved it down to a highway and it really just took a little bit of geography and no homes involved, no voters involved. It's been agreed to, it's acceptable to the author and I move passage.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection to the acceptance of the amendment? Amendment is adopted. Chair hears none. Chair lays out the following amendment. Clerk will read amendment. Members, this is plan 182, 182.

CLERK: Amendment by Farias.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Chair recognizes Representative Farias.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Real briefly what Representative Garza and myself have been talking about is a small area in southern Bexar County that I've represented for the last three sessions that I have been here in the House of Representatives. And what it does is, during the process Representative Garza tried to give up fifty thousand constituents and so I took about eight precincts of his or more in trying to help him in the folks you had to release in area he did not want to represent. And so his big concern was that he wanted to keep his percentage of 50.1. There is an area and the southern Bexar County that I was mentioning. It's off of 281 and 1604, if you are familiar with Bexar County. And they are not even full precincts but they are parts of four precincts and the folks that live out there have suffered with bad water, poor water pressure for many years. And they have been my constituents. And I have been working with them for all this time. So we have just made some adjustments to the map where he would keep the percentage of the folks that he needed and I would take back that area that he took in when he redrew his map. And so it's just a rural community in Bexar County. It is one of the poorest communities in Bexar County and there is an organization by name of -- that go by -- they're a volunteer organization. They are emergency rehab units and every year I have been helping these folks with raising funds for their volunteer services and also for the things they do for the children's hospitals in Bexar County in San Antonio. And so the district that I am in without the amendment I could be comfortable with but it wouldn't be just to these folks that I've represented and I would not doing my job as a state Representative if I do not come up here and argue their point because I need them in my district because of who they are and what I represent. It's not about anything else. There's nobody lives out there that I would be worried about challenging me. It's all about these folks that depended on me for the last five years or so that I come up here and argue their point and later on you will, you will hear an argument of debate regarding more issues in Bexar County that effect these folks. And so with that being said, I've visit with Representative Garza. He's not going to oppose my recommendation. I just visited with him. He said he would not oppose it and he could live with the will of the House and if he likes he can come up and say that. But I just visited with him -- I was late coming up having a last minute conversation with the representative. And I do respect him a whole lot. But this is an area that's about the people that I have helped for many, many years. And so, I have accommodated him with what he would like to have in his district and so I'm glad that he said he will leave it to the will of the House. And so, I ask that the members of the House please consider allowing me to have an area that I've had for the last three sessions and that I've represented. It's a rural community. It's in the Whispering Winds area. Like I said it's in a southern Bexar County and these folks will expect me to represent them. And so with that Mr. Chairman --

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Pena, for what purpose?

REP. AARON PENA: Just a few questions.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Will you yield, Mr. Farias?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Yes, I yield.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: The gentleman yields, Mr. Pena.

REP. AARON PENA: Representative, I just wanted to make sure that I understood. Is this a plan that's agreed to by all the people that are effected by your amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: The people in the district or the people that are effected by me moving this --

REP. AARON PENA: Yeah, the other Representatives.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: It doesn't effect, Representative Pena, it doesn't effect, just myself and Representative Garza. It doesn't effect anybody else in Bexar County.

REP. AARON PENA: But isn't it an agreed to amendment. Because we have to decide --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: What he just told me was that he would not -- he would leave it to the will of the House. That was his last comment to me. And so I don't think that as a yes or a no but he's not holding anybody to a position of voting against my amendment. He's letting it go to the will of the House.

REP. AARON PENA: Did you present this to the committee -- these proposals early on?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I proposed it through Mike Villarreal, and I -- through the delegation. I also sent a letter to the speaker and sent a letter to every member of the delegation so they understood where my position was at.

REP. AARON PENA: Very good Representative. Many of us are in a quandary as to how to vote on this. And I'm sure that many of the members want to know whether or not there's an agreement on this. But you are telling me that the representative has simply said that he's not going to agree but he's just going to leave it to the will of the House?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: That is my understanding as I left his desk maybe three minutes ago.

REP. AARON PENA: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Thank you, Mr. Pena.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons. Representative Aliseda, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Will the gentleman yield?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Would you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Yes, I yield.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Mr. Farias, have you done an analysis to how this proposed change effects Mr. Garza' republican numbers.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: We didn't look at republican numbers because the last conversation we had was that his big concern that he did have a minority district and he wanted to keep it without changing the numbers. So we kept it at 50.1 percent that he had. He said he would be happy with that.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: You all see Mr. Garza as a republican; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I believe that's what I heard.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Well, it is something for the body here to consider that Mr. Garza's Republican numbers would actually drop with your proposed amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: We never looked at the Republican numbers but I assure you in the area -- if you want to talk about Democrats and Republicans, in the area that he will be taking from me, I guarantee him that he will be lose those precincts because they are Democratic precincts. But I'm giving him some area around Lackland Air Force Base that we believe to be very military, and they are some Republican vote there. But I assure you that Mr. Garza insists on having these precincts I've worked for three different elections and I can assure you and him that he will lose those precincts. So, I believe I am doing him a favor, representative.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Lose them to who?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Pardon me?

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Lose them to who?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I believe you will have an opponent.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: Okay. I'll -- the only argument I would make and I want the other Republican members in this body to know that these numbers -- going back on historical voting patterns for the particular precincts and blocks involved, they tend to be more Republican those that you are asking to be now amended to your --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I don't know what numbers you are looking at but I can show you that the poll I can show you what I won.

REPRESENTATIVE JOSE ALISEDA: All right. Thank you, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: You are very welcome.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Mr. Speaker.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Walle, for what purpose?

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Would Mr. Farias yield for just a few questions?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Representative Farias, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I yield to my friend -- certainly Walle.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Gentleman yields.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Representative Farias, what -- and I'll be honest with you I don't know all of Bexar County and I don't know the lay of the land but just for my understanding, how long have you been in the legislature?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: This is my third session.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Your third session. And you obviously served those folks very admirably. Do they want you to be their representative?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Well, they have reelected me three times. So, I believe that I have done my due diligence with the folks out there.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: And is it safe to assume that -- that just if we are now talking about Democrat and Republicans -- I'm not going to get into that -- those boxes in that area have supported you; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Yes, they have in that whole area. And I did gave up a lot of the Summer Shed and I gave a lot of the rural community that I represented. And you might not want to talk Democrats and Republicans and I didn't either. I didn't bring that up. But I assure you I know the folks out there and Mr. Garza will probably better off not having those precincts.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: And how many terms did Mr. Garza served?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: He's a freshman.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Villarreal, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Ask the gentleman some questions.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Farias, do you yield? Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Joe I --

REP. JERRY MADDEN: The gentleman yields for ten seconds, Mike.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you. Joe, thank you for bringing your amendment. I know this is not a partisan issue with you. This is about communities of interest; isn't it?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Exactly.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And these are neighborhoods and communities that you have represented for many years and have come up here to Austin and worked on many issues for them.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: For three sessions and I continue to as we speak --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And in fact some of these areas --

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Representative Branch raises the point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. Point of order is well taken and sustained. Is there anyone here to speak on for or against the Farias amendment? Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. Let me just explain what I think are some relevant issues to this. First of all, the amendment -- the Bexar County map was at least initially agreed to and voted on by a majority of the delegation; does not have the agreement of all effected members. The proposed District 117 was drawn to bring together rural and suburban communities and interests in south and West Bexar County. The amendment as proposed creates a jagged and offered line that divides these communities and creates an island along I37 that connects to the west of the district by only a tiny strip of land. And a proposed map cleanly follows the proposed map as it exists today, follows the Medina river, a natural barrier that divides the rural and urban counties -- communities in south Bexar County. The amendment reduces the compactness of both 117 and 118. It increases number of precincts in District 117 from one to seven and in District 118 from nine to fifteen, and decreases the number of split BTB's in District 111 from one to seven and in District 118 from 10 to 15. It does have a negative impact on District 117, Republican numbers. It is a district that -- it goes from -- let's see -- pretty much -- that's pretty much it. I guess the will of the House. I'm going to make a motion to table but it really will become a matter for the will of the House I suppose but I'm going to oppose it because of the reasons stated. It's trying to lay out what I think the amendment does in connection with compactness and increases the split of precincts and increases the number of split BTB's.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Chair recognizes Representative Farias.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Mr. Speaker, members, this is about a neighborhood who is extremely poor. And I would not be a good Representative if I was not up here fighting for those folks that I've represented for the last six years. That's all I'm asking for. I'm not asking for new territory. I'm asking for an area that I represented for the last three terms. And so, as y'all take the vote, please, consider that this is just about a sliver, a sliver of southern Bexar County which doesn't include a lot of houses but I'm here because I won't to go back to those folks and be able to tell them that I stood up at the front mike and argued my point to keep them and be able to represent them. So I ask that you vote on my behalf and on behalf of the people that I represent and I've represented for the last six years is all I'm asking for. This isn't about Democrats to me, it's not about Republicans. It's about the area that I've had for years. And so with that, I ask for your support.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Farias sends up an amendment. Mr. Solomons moves to table. The vote is on the motion to table. It's a record vote. Clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Marquez voting no, show Mr. Perez voting no, show Mr. Solomons voting yes, show Ms. King voting aye. Have all members voted? All members voted? There being 94 ayes and 49 nays, five present not voting, two absent, the motion to table prevails.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Mr. Speaker.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Veasey, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Parliamentary inquiry.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Would you, please, have the comments between Representative Aliseda and Representative Farias placed in the journal and set in the record, please?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. I will move that all comments for the rest of the day be placed in the record. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, we are now going onto Dallas County. Representative Alonzo, Representative Driver, Representative Anderson of Dallas, Representative Harper-Brown and Representative Burkett need to come down to the front.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Mr. Speaker?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Veasey, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Parliamentary inquiry.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Would you just ordered a second ago that all comments between now and the end of the debate --

REP. JERRY MADDEN: I have ordered --

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Is that the entire debate?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: It is the entire debate.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: From the beginning?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Starting from the first lay out of anything that was done by Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Sweet. Thank you.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Thank you. Mr. Solomons, you are needed at the chair. Members, the Dallas district maps No. 188, 213, 211, and 210 have been withdrawn. Members, we're now going to go to plan No. 220. It's the Anderson amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Anderson of Dallas.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Chair recognizes Representative Anderson to explain his amendment.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment to the amendment. Amendment No. 247.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Members, there's an amendment to the amendment. The Chair lays out the following amendment. Members, this is an amendment -- this is a plan No. 247, 247.

CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Mr. Anderson of Dallas.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Chair recognizes Representative Anderson.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you Mr. Speaker, members. This is a difficult day for those of us in Dallas county especially those of us who have been paired. And, quite frankly, I want to say this amendment seeks to amend the lay out of Dallas County but I cannot tell you how appreciative that I am to the committee and to Chairman Solomons for his leadership. But this draws me to a district that pairs with me a very good friend, Linda Harper-Brown. I believe that the district that is as it is currently drawn in the committee map is a fair and legal district that could be won by either Representative Harper-Brown or myself after a very difficult primary contest. But with that being said there's another way to keep the core districts and communities of interest together. It keeps Mesquite, Garland, Richardson, Carrollton, Addison, Irving and Grand Prairie predominantly in tact. It also reflects the diverse neighborhoods that are located within Dallas. And like the committee map it keeps African American and Hispanic communities of interests in tact. Like the committee map it keeps seven Republican districts above fifty two and a half. But the four districts with lowest Republican voting strength in this map --

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Giddings, for what purpose?

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, ma'am.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Anderson, do you yield? He yields, Ms. Giddings.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Anderson -- Representative Anderson if this amendment should go on, what affect does it have, if any, does it have on the rest of the Dallas County.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: It is very similar in lay out for the majority of Dallas County for most of those -- most of the districts on the west and the south. If predominantly -- what this does, it does pair members on the north and east portion of the county. Whereas, right now we have Representative Harper-Brown and myself that are paired this map would pair Representative Sheets with Representative Hartnett would also pair Representative Driver with Representative Button.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. The other question that I have, Representative Anderson. There's only one district in Dallas that had an overage.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: That was yours; correct?

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: That was mine. That is certainly a district that is a community of interest and has demonstrated so in so many ways. What does your map do to District 109?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: District 109 has a deviation of 1.2 percent so the -- it shows a 2047 increase. So, you are still above deviation as well as the percentage of African American and Hispanic voters. It's still very similar.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you. In terms of the district what percentage of District 109 would be left intact. I had a conversation with the member, just a little bit earlier today they said, that you have too many shoes in the closet and you decide to give some away to charity, you don't then intend to go and acquire some new ones. So how much of mine -- how much of the district that I represent would be lost under your plan?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I do not have a specific number, the only -- there are two precincts in Cedar Hill on the west side of highway 67. There are some precincts on the west side of I35 that in order to make all the map fit -- in order to make everything meet Voting Rights Act, etc.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Representative Anderson, I think I well understand what you are trying to do and to some degree I have some sympathy with that. But in terms of representing my district, you probably know that Cedar Hill, Lancaster, DeSoto, Duncanville, consider themselves under a label called "Best Southwest."

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Correct.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: And they are in fact a community of interest. They generally act in concert as it relates and work with the legislature and so forth and so any actions that I take in terms of District 109 will have to keep those communities of interest together and I hope you understand that.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Ms. Giddings,I absolutely understand that and that's why the only adjustment really was that west side of Highway 67 of Cedar Hill that operates a little bit differently than the other side.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you, sir.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a --

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Ms. Harper-Brown. Do you yield, Mr. Anderson?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, ma'am.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Gentleman yields Ms. Harper-Brown. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Mr. Anderson.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, ma'am. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: The amendment that you are drafting, is this still put Irving and the four different districts --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Does it put -- hang on just a minute. I will tell you. No, ma'am, it does not. It's in three different districts. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: And Garland, does it put them in three or four different districts?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Garland is in two -- um, Garland is in three. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Three districts. Mesquite ends up in three districts?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Mesquite ends up basically intact. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: All right. Is still pairs two different sets of Republicans --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, ma'am. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: -- (*inaudible) Button.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, ma'am. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Does it move District 105, which is the district I currently hold right now, it moves into five cities did you realize that?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: It keeps Irving and Coppell predominantly in your district. I do believe it catches a piece of Dallas and catches a small piece of Farmers Branch. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: And of Lewisville. It also picks up Lewisville and part of -- county. So now District 105 is totally within the city of Irving and has a Irving representative which is what they want in Irving will now represent part of Dallas, part of Farmers Branch, part of Lewisville, part of Coppell, and part of Irving.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: But does it keep the majority of Irving intact in your district. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: It does keep a majority of Irving intact but it also creates a large portion of Coppell, it's not all of Coppell now into the same district, whereas, District 105 does not represent any of Coppell right now.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: And, again, what we tried to do in this map is to create the strongest districts that were fair to all concerned. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Which is what mine would do to only it does not effect everyone else in Dallas. It only effects the west side of Dallas.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: It would absolutely affect those of us south of you. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: And then does it decrease the -- does it decrease any of the minority districts in your map?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Not that I'm aware. We took great pains to try and avoid that. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Mr. Speaker?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Driver, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: To discuss the map with the gentleman, please.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Do you yield, Mr. Anderson?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I yield.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Gentleman yields, Mr. Driver.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Can we hear a little bit better, please?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Members, can we have a little bit quiet so that they can hear each other while discussing it. If you have discussions, please, take them outside the rail.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Anderson, I'm sure you know that I've represented northeast Dallas County for some 18 years. And you may have noticed on the map that came up that I lost almost all of my core city. The town that I grew up in, the town that I've worked in, the town that I have represented. Town that I've lived in for over 50 years, the town that I've worked in for almost 40 years and all of a sudden under the new map they thought fit to take my core interest of Garland and cut it into and just leave me, drive me all the way down the right side of Dallas County --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: -- with no explanation, no reason for it. Other than the fact that some people wanted parts of the city of Garland. Some of the members, you may know have gotten a few phone calls. A few phone calls and emails from a city of Garland, representatives from the city counsel, from the different citizens out of Rowlett also. Rowlett has been in my district for almost 18 years. Also a huge core of interest -- community of interest. And under your map it puts these communities of interest back together for those cities to be able to be represented in a better way in your interest, right?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: That is correct. In fact that was one of the things that I was attempting to do, not only for the cities of Garland and Mesquite but also for the city of Irving so that they retain the Representative that had primary responsibility for Irving, one that had primary responsibility for Grand Prairie, the one that had primary responsibility for Richardson, for -- you know these communities, that have been represented for numbers of years that they still have that representation and if they are not cut into numerous different sections.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: I also want to make sure that you know -- do you know --

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Martinez Fischer moves that the gentleman's time is expired. Point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Mr. Martinez Fischer moves that my time is expired? Can I get an increase of time, Mr. Speaker?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears lots but none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's a unique concept. I want to make sure that you knew how much I appreciate you settled down in talking with me about what my community of interest needed. And I want to make sure you realize that that did not happen when the Dallas County map was drawn up.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Well, I can't speak for the committee. I know committee worked incredibly hard to create a fair map that will pass muster. I believe that it does. But I believe that what this map does is this map puts true communities of interest together. It keeps core constituencies together. It doesn't -- in my case, in the proposed map, the city of Grand Prairie winds up with a up to -- between -- we have five -- three in Dallas County, two in Tarrant County, one in Ellis county. So we already have a number of representatives. I saw maps early on that put it in as many as nine different districts. And what I'm attempting to do for all of the cities within Dallas County is to keep those core constituencies together and also to create a map that is fair to both Democrats and Republicans, our map, this map shows that of the eight Republican districts and this is something that everybody needs to hear. In Dallas county of the eight Republican districts under this map, six of the eight are stronger. Six of the eight are stronger Republican districts. Now mine is not. Mine goes to the -- the district that I'm in goes from 52.7 and drops back to 51.6 based on the McCain-Obama election. And the reason I am doing that is because I think it's the right thing to do. I've been sent here to represent the citizens of Grand Prairie and south Irving and that's what this map attempts to do.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: I appreciate it and I appreciate you doing that. But most of all I want to express my appreciation of you working with me because Mr. Chairman Solomons mentioned a while ago that this was a member driven map and I think he thinks that maybe for the power of the State of Texas. But for the Dallas County when you don't have any input into your own county and input into protecting your core interests, your city, your citizens, the people you represented for 18 years. I appreciate you at least giving me a chance to. Thank you very much.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Jackson, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: This is the one that I knew I was going to get.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: I heard you say that this thing saying that Irving and Coppell and Representative Harper-Brown's district. Are you aware that Coppell is not in Representative Harper-Brown's district?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: It current -- right now, it is not. Under this map it would be.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Do you know whose district it's in?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: That would be Mr. Jackson's.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: And do you know what Mr. Jackson would like to keep? Coppell.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I understand that Mr. Jackson would like to keep Coppell.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: I appreciate what you are trying to do I just don't agree with it.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I certainly appreciate that and I --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: It messes with a lot of people up north.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: It does but it also creates stronger Republican districts throughout Dallas county and not just for individuals.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: I don't necessarily agree with that and --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: And yours and mine are both weaker than what they were under the committee map.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Well, I will tell you that the district that was drawn for me is not the one that I would draw for me.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: But I have agreed to give it a -- but I have already given, Representative Anderson.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I understand, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Thank you.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez Fischer, for what purpose?

REP. MARTINEZ FISCHER: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Anderson, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

REP. MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and thank you Representative Anderson. I was curious. I was looking at your plan and I wanted to know if you are aware that House District 104 that belongs to Representative Rick Alonzo has a SSDR which is a Spanish surname voter registration. Today 58.3 percent and under the proposed Solomons' map that SSDR drops to 50.1 percent but it's still above the 50 percent threshold for the purposes of Voting Rights Act. Are you aware or ask you if you are aware that your proposed plan reduces Alonzo's SSDR to 45.5 SSDR.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I did not see that individually whenever I looked at it from a voting rights standpoint. What I understand the rule to be is that it is looked at a macro base it is not looked at a micro basis on an individual district by district analysis.

REP. MARTINEZ FISCHER: Okay. If looking at your amendment at a macro level, do you create any additional minority opportunity districts?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: We do not create any additional. We leave the -- we've attempted to leave the ones that are currently in existence there. We looked at representative -- in House District 104. House district 104, when we originally drew it, had a -- was over 90 percent African American and Hispanic. That was too high. We pulled it back to where I believe it is 86 right around that 85 number.

REP. MARTINEZ FISCHER: Okay. Well, if at that macro level if your plan doesn't create an additional minority opportunity district, I think, we know that the Solomons' plan speaks for itself and doesn't do that either then there is the potential that with your map at least as it pertains to Representative Alonzo that it could have a retrogressive effect. And I didn't know if you were aware of that.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I appreciate you for bringing this specific number. We attempted to avoid any formal retrogression at all. I think you can tell from the testimony -- what I have been up here saying, we attempted to keep communities of interest together. That is what we were attempting to do. If we didn't do it 100 percent, I am -- I would be happy to accept floor amendments.

REP. MARTINEZ FISCHER: And I would differ. I mean, this is a Dallas County issue. I am concerned about the overarching voting rights implication.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

REP. MARTINEZ FISCHER: -- no matter where it is in the State but I imagine that the Dallas delegation probably should confer about this. And I defer to Representative Alonzo and then the groups you have been -- the members you've been working with but I just had to raise that with you because it certainly hit my radar.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Anderson sends up an amendment to the amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. We are on Anderson amendment as amended. Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against the amendment as amended? Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Representative Anderson, and it just came to my attention and let me get your comments on this. It says that amendment 220 would eliminate two African American opportunity districts. True or not true?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Not true.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: And explain because that's the information that I'm getting.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: The districts 109, 111, 110, would still be African American opportunity districts.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Are the numbers being reduced in anyway?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Not that I'm aware of.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: And do you know what the numbers are presently in terms of --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I don't have it up here with me, sir.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. All right.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: May I ask Representative Anderson a couple questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Anderson, do you yield?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you. Representative Anderson, I know you've been trying to figure out Dallas County and I thought you for your efforts. Tell me what your plan does to District 111 and 109.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: In what respect?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: In terms of the movements you made in our district.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: As it pertains to a specific precincts or as it pertains to an African -- or as it pertains to the black and Hispanic percentage?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: As it relates to areas, communities and as it relates to the population.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: As it relates to areas in 109, we remove -- excuse me, in 111 we moved the southwest portion of Cedar Hill on the west side of 67 we moved it to House District to 107 in this map.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Okay. It didn't come from District 111. It came from 109.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I'm sorry, it did. It came from 109.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Okay.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: 111 we left predominantly intact, we had some of the Mountain Creek area that went to Representative Alonzo.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Are you familiar with that Mountain Creek area? And I assume you are.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, ma'am I am.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Okay. So when you move Mount Creek area to 104, didn't you destroy communities of interest because where you had to put it in 104 aren't you removing it where the communities of interest are with the other parts of Mountain Creek versus what's currently in 104?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: No, ma'am whenever --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Bonnen raises the point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Hartnett in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. There has been a lot of work among Dallas County members in our map. All of us have had a lot of input and discussion in this over the last few weeks. I appreciate what Rodney is trying to do but it has chopping effect on a lot of communities and interests. For example, in my district it's destroys my north Dallas district that's been in with east Dallas --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative -- for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: -- I have never represented for.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Could I ask the gentleman a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Hartnett, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: I yield for one question. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Sir, in your opening statement, you said that this was a lot hard work for the Dallas delegation. When I --

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: I didn't say Dallas delegation, I said members of the Dallas delegation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Okay. Excuse me for not being exactly correct. But when you say that don't you imply that everyone was involved in the discussion?

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Well, my understanding is that every one of us has talked about this map quite a bit.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Well, I tell you about Dan's map?

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: No. About the Dallas County map that has been about Solomons' House Bill 150. All of us spoke at length with Burt about the map. And so, I was just making the point that there has been a lot of work and discussion that's gone into the map. I am not saying everybody agrees with it by any means.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: I just got the impression, when you laid that out it seemed like you were trying to say that a lot of people had input into the map that was dropped in.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Well, I think a lot of us had input now that doesn't mean that the map was --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: I would have to disagree with your statement that all of us had since I did not in my communities of interest for the ones that got cut up. Now maybe that was by design, maybe it wasn't, but when your community of interest gets cut up, and you don't have any input into the map that was dropped in, I don't think it needs to be implied to the House that there was a lot of participation in the map that you dropped in. I just wanted to point that out. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE WILL HARTNETT: Obviously, I don't know who all Burt talked to but I know there was a lot of discussion by all of us and as far as my district it destroys my north Dallas community of interest puts me in with east Dallas that I have never represented in my 20 years. It also puts me into Garland which I've never represented in 20 years. So I urge you to reject the Anderson matter.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I'm, please, going to ask you to vote against the amendment or for the motion to table as this District 105 which is wholly within the city of Irving right now will now be spread into five different cities. It will go into Dallas, Farmers Branch, Lewisville, Coppell and Irving. And as far as our community of interest, the city of Irving would like to keep the District 105 as much in Irving as possible. So, please, support the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez Fischer.

REP. MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I will not start to make you think that I'm a member of the Dallas County delegation. I'm not. We have a better basketball team in Bexar County. Nevertheless, nonetheless, we will help where help is needed. I rise because I am concerned about the implications on voting rights and I know that I told members Mexican American Caucus that I will rise when I felt the need that we needed to be concerned about voting rights and this particular instance as it pertains to Hispanic opportunity districts, it does reduce a protected VRA district in 104, Representative Alonzo. It takes from a 50.1 percent of the Solomons' plan down to a 45 1/2 percent under the proposed amendment that is unacceptable to the Mexican Legislative caucus. I also know that there's some impacts on the African American community. And I defer to the chair and the members of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus to voice those concerns. I know they have already been reiterated on the mike but for that reason I would ask the members that are concerned about voting rights to vote to table the Anderson amendment, respectfully.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Jackson.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Mr. Speaker, members, on being up in the corner of the county, I kind of feel like an innocent bystander until this bill came up and now become a victim. And I don't like being a victim so I would encourage you to either vote against this now or vote for a motion to table. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I thank Representative Martinez Fischer to join us in this. I think one of things that we've heard throughout the state and definitely today is the issue of voting rights. The reason we deal with that is because, as I said throughout the debate, we are going to do what's fair and what's legal. Right now with this though vote you are taking a legal position on the Voting Rights Act. An example of that is Representative Martinez Fischer pointed out when you take the SSR from 58 to 50 to 45, you're decreasing the opportunity for a minority to get elected. In this case, me. So just to put a face to the law, this is it. I ask you to vote no on the bill and vote for the motion to table. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Branch.

REPRESENTATIVE DAN BRANCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. In addition to some of the legal concerns that have been raised and I appreciate Representative Anderson's efforts he's been in a tough position and I know he worked hard on this. But there are legal concerns and it hasn't -- doesn't have the agreement of the members or majority of the members like we do on the other map. So, I would respectfully concur on the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, members. I think you've heard the dialogue and discussion from a variety of members and I'm going to move to table only on the basis that there appears to be a number of members against it. And you all will have your opportunity to decide. There is something to be said about the SSR's -- SSVR reductions in the black voting age population reductions and there is some concerns on that basis and legal risk but I think the members will make their decision but I'm going to move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Anderson to close.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you, members. I respectfully disagree with some of the testimony with some of the -- I want to say testimony but with member's statements up here. This map that we've drawn is what I call the statement's map. Because it maintains the majority of seats with their core districts intact. It combines districts that have had large population losses instead of dramatically changing representation throughout all of Dallas County. It keeps communities of interest together. It keeps African American and Hispanic communities together without unnecessarily dividing physical communities. To my Republican colleagues, why is this important to you? The specifics are in the numbers but if you exclude one district the one that I currently represent, six of the other seven districts currently represented by Republicans in Dallas county, have equal or stronger districts under this map than the committee map.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Driver, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: I'd like to ask the gentleman a question, please.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Anderson do you yield?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Representative Anderson, was it your understanding that when we started to take up the redistricting process, the community of interest, was it extremely -- supposed to be an extremely high priority?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: I just wanted to make sure that the rest of the House realized that. Thank you very much.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Anderson sends up an amendment. Representative Solomons moves to table. Question is on the motion to table. Clerk ring the bell. Show Representative Solomons voting aye, show Representative Anderson voting no. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 119 ayes, 21 noes, the motion to table prevails. Chair recognizes Representative Miller for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE DOUG MILLER: Mr. Speaker, members, the Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety -- I'm going to request permission for the Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety to meet while the House is in session. We are going to meet at 3:30 p.m. today. The 27th day of April in 3W15 and we are going to consider pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. Chair recognizes Representative Callegari for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Mr. Speaker, members, I request permission for the Committee on Government Efficiency Reform to meet while in session at 3:30 p.m. April 27th, 2011 3W.15 to consider pending business and House Bill 2954.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. It's ordered.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Mr. Eissler for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I would like to move to recommit House Bill 400 back to the Public Education Committee.

THE SPEAKER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, we're moving onto the last Dallas County amendment. And it's plan 219.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Hang on, Mr. Alonzo. If you could just hang on for a minute. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Harper-Brown.

THE SPEAKER: Recognize Representative Harper-Brown.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Plan 219.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Alonzo, for what purpose?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: --

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, I just want to make it clear that we've already established it had debate that we are having that's going to be put on the journal; is that correct?

THE SPEAKER: That's correct.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: In addition to that I just want to make it clear that in my position opposing the Anderson plan, that it was because it decreased for Hispanic opportunity district especially in district 104 and I would like that to reflect on the record. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Linda Harper-Brown. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members this amendment will keep more of the city of Irving in the 105th District and allow District 115 district which is Jim Jackson's district to encompass the city of Carrollton and the city of Farmers Branch. Otherwise, it was my intent to change as few districts as possible in Dallas County. The amendment protects the community interest of these cities and also improves the compactness of the districts effected. And Representative Jackson agrees with me -- is in agreement on this amendment. And I move passage.

THE SPEAKER: Following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety will meet at 3:30 p.m. on April 27, 2011 at 3W.15. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speaker --

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Giddings. Do you yield?

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Would the gentle lady yield for a couple questions?

THE SPEAKER: She yields. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Representative Harper-Brown, District 109 is a district that is strong in terms of its committee -- its being a community of interest additionally the Governmental entities in that area tend to move together as a matter of fact they call themselves "the best southwest" you are aware of that. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: And the district that I represent, district 109, what does your map do with the core of this district. District 109 is the only district in Dallas County that had an excess population, which the common sense theory would say that it should not be acquiring any new population but just giving up some population. So what does your map do? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: It still has -- 109 in Cedar Hill, DeSoto, Lancaster, Hutchins and Wilmer.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. Grand Prairie as I understand it under your map, some of Grand Prairie is brought into this district and Grand Prairie is not a part of the so-called "best southwest." REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: It maybe. Grand Prairie maybe be. There maybe be a small piece of Grand Prairie in your district but not a very large portion of it.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. I think your map destroys the core of District 109 which is a minority opportunity district. It is very definitely a community of interest. It has the highest voter participation of any state representative district in Dallas County. In any of Dallas County. And it is the only district with an overage. And so, I understand what you are trying to do, Representative Harper-Brown, but I would have to oppose your map based on being a void for "the best southwest" and the rest of District 109. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: And I appreciate their standard and would say though your "best southwest" cities are still included in your district.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Anderson, for what purpose?

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I would like to ask a few questions.

THE SPEAKER: Would the gentle lady yield? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I yield.

THE SPEAKER: She yields.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Representative Harper-Brown, may I ask? No more than ten minutes ago you were talking about community of interest for the city of Irving, correct? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: That's right.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: And what happens to the community of the interest in Grand Prairie in your map? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I don't believe that the community of Grand Prairie is set up as sadly in this map as well as the original map.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: So, in other words, you are saying it's still cut up significantly. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I'm not sure if it is set up -- so I can agree that it's --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: How many districts does Grand Prairie -- the Dallas County portion of Grand Prairie, divided into in your map? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Let me look. Believe it's set up into three.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Okay. Do you have a portion of Grand Prairie in your map. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Does Representative Alonzo have a piece? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes, I believe he does.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Does Representative Anchia have a piece? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Does Representative Davis have a piece? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: That one I'm not sure about.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: And does Representative Giddings have a piece. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: She may.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: So, in other words, it gets cut into five pieces in Dallas County. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: That maybe true, I'm not sure.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: I'd like the record to reflect it cuts the 15th largest city in Texas into five pieces in Dallas county, plus it also -- remember Grand Prairie has two in Tarrant county, one in south -- in Ellis County. So we now have seven people representing Grand -- where would the representation from Grand Prairie come from? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I'm not sure.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Okay. So it would come from either -- from yourself as well as the other. It's coming from somewhere other than somewhere in Grand Prairie, correct? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I'm not sure if she was still living in Grand Prairie --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Okay. And the other question is, are you aware that Grand Prairie is the fastest growing city in Dallas County. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: No, I was not.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Okay. It is. It's growing fast on the southwest point. Do you think that Grand Prairie is a community of interest. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: All I know is that this amendment is fair and legal and I request the members to --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: So, in other words, you believe that Irving it's more important than Grand Prairie, correct? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Irving is a -- REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: -- Irving is what I represent and I'm --

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: -- just like I represent the city of Grand Prairie, correct? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: -- and I continue to represent Irving, have the 105th District within the city of Irving.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Okay. And so what will happen to that portion of Grand Prairie that you represent if you continue to represent Irving. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Well, I want Irving to have the majority of the district and the city of Grand Prairie will have a small portion. As a matter of fact, there will only be 11,000 people outside the city of Irving that will be represented. They will be represented by someone that cares about them as much as they do for the rest of their district.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Just like I am trying to protect the city of Grand Prairie, correct? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: And I understand that.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, would the gentle lady yield?

THE SPEAKER: Representative Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Would she yield for questions? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I will yield for questions.

THE SPEAKER: She yields?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Representative Harper-Brown, you just indicated to me that your amendment only effected or you led me to believe that your amendment only effected you and Jim Jackson but that's not exactly true; is that correct? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: No, that's right. And that's not my intention to infer that. My intention was that it is the majority of the change is within Jim Jackson's district and the 105th District in my map.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: But what you did to 111 is pretty substantial, wouldn't you say? You make a big change in District 111 as it relates what the impact does -- your amendment does. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I don't believe it was a substantial change to 111 but it was a change to 111.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Okay. When you were talking to me you didn't tell me you made change to District 111. Also does your amendment have the effect of making Mr. Charlie's district Hispanic majority versus African American majority. REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I believe the amendment is legal and keeps --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: No, no, no. We -- we can't determine the legality of it because it hadn't be challenged but the question is, did you in fact change the district from the majority African American based on your amendment to majority Hispanic? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I can't -- I'm not sure about that. I'm not sure where the majority is -- I'm not sure what the majority currently is.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Okay. Okay. Your map -- your amendment right now, what is the majority of that district now? Based on your amendment what is it? What is it currently? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Just one second. Just ask one second if you would.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: I don't want to use everybody else's time so I'm going to ask you another question as you are thinking through that. I know that answer to my question is that it becomes the majority Hispanic district versus African American but as it relates to district 111, did you in fact add another community that has nothing to do with District 111. Did you add another city? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: I'm not sure how it compares to what you have now on 111 but on 111 -- on 110 it is a 39.6.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: No, I didn't ask you about the numbers on District 111. I asked you about the numbers of 110 as it relates to the population. But now I'm talking about the geography in District 111, about the communities of interest in the District 111. Did you add a different community to that district? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: If it goes into Grand Prairie, it is added to that district.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: So, that is adding a totally new community, wouldn't you say? REP. LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Yes.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Bonnen raises the point of order. The gentle lady's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Is there anyone wishing to speak for or against Representative Harper-Brown's amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Davis of Dallas.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members, I just want to rise against this amendment. First of all, Chairman Ms. Harper-Brown said that this amendment did not only moved her and prearranged discussion between her and Jim Jackson when in fact this amendment goes way beyond that; it impacts a lot of our districts in the southern section. She if fact pairs me and Representative Anderson's district. She put in the entirely new neighborhood and community of interest in District 111. It's never been part of District 111. So to the extent that it has the appearance of being retrogressive -- it creates a minority district -- changes it from African American to Hispanic which we believe means it's retrogressive. We have to oppose this amendment. And I would move to vote against this amendment.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Anderson of Dallas.

REP. CHARLES ANDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members up here 15 minutes ago and talking about saving communities of interest throughout Dallas county. Trying to be as fair about the distribution as possible. One of the arguments against that was that one individual representative had picked up some additional cities. Now, the same representative is trying to protect one individual city in the city of Irving. Whereas, what I was attempting to do is to protect all of the communities of interest. Truth be told, I don't have a problem. I greatly appreciate what the committee did in drawing districts in Dallas County. I came up and argued my point for the city of Grand Prairie what we -- where we are now is, I will support Dallas County as it pertains to the committee map and I urge you to do so as well and to vote against this amendment.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Jackson to speak for the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, this is difficult stuff I know. And you know I really want the city of Addison back in my district. I know I can't have it. This amendment puts some stuff in the district I represent that I really rather not have. But it's an amendment I can live with that I believe --

THE SPEAKER: Representative Turner, for what purpose?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman, please, yield?

THE SPEAKER: Would the gentleman --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: I will yield.

THE SPEAKER: Yeah, he will yield.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Representative Jackson, does this amendment pair? Does this pair Representative Davis or someone?

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: I'm not aware. I can only speak to the district I represent in district -- that Harper-Brown represents.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: But in terms of -- but you are not aware whether it's going to pair --

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: I'm just going to speak for my perception of what it does in the area that I represent. You will have to leave that other issues for someone else because I really don't have the information.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Right, but you do -- but you do recognize that the amendment impacts not just your area but others as well.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: I have heard that.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. I will wait for someone else.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Very good.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: And as I said, I know it impacts some other districts but I just don't know exactly how. But in fact the district I represent to and in fact in some ways I would rather probably not want to impact it. But I know sometimes you have to give -- sometimes as I said earlier I thought I was an innocent bystander until I saw last map then I discovered that I was a victim. In this case I'm not quite a victim but I think what I give here is for the major good of others. So I'm willing to do it and I intend to support and vote for this amendment. And I hope that you will do so also. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Anchia to speak against the amendment.

REP. RAFAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker, members, I just want to talk really quickly about what this amendment does to District 103 which is the district that I represent. It moves me completely out of Carrollton and Farmers Branch which I represented from the beginning of my service here. But more importantly what it does is that it reduces the Spanish surname voter registration in the district that I represent and I think that's problematic and it is something the author of this amendment didn't talk to me about or any of the other members that this amendment effects. It seems like the author drew the minority districts in this map without talking to the minority members of the delegation. I think that's problematic and I hope that you would prevent the reduction of Spanish surname voter registration in the district I represent by voting no on this amendment. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to speak on the amendment.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Turner, for what purpose?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the chairman yield?

THE SPEAKER: Chairman yield?

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Me?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Yeah, sure.

THE SPEAKER: Yes, he yields.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Representative Solomons, does this amendment as far as you know is it pairing Representative Davis with Representative Anderson.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, it does.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: And is that different from what is presently existing in House Bill 150?

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, sir. What this amendment does is, Ms. Harper-Brown, Representative Harper-Brown, redrew the entire -- almost -- a large part of the west side of Dallas County different from what is currently before you under the current map.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Does it reduce African American representation in the district?

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: There doesn't seem to be a lot of legal problems in connection with that -- now it does effect Representative Anchia's district problematically.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Does it reduce the number of African American in the district?

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Well, I don't know if Representative -- the number of the Representative in Anchia's district or Ms. Davis' district?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: In Representative Davis' district.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: I can't -- I don't have anything that tells me that.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Is that not important on the --

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: It maybe important but I don't have it right here to answer. I don't want to speak out of turn and say it does. I think the way it what is does do is it breaks up Grand Prairie far more than what the original map does. It redraws the west side of Dallas County. It reduces the Representative Anchia's SSVR numbers problematically simply but not enough for allege counsel to have an over concern and --

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: -- what about --

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: -- and it's clear to me from the debate that there are members in Dallas County that may like it and there's members that really don't like it and it does take Representative Anderson and move him into Ms. Davis' district.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: What about Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway? Does it change the make of her district from being an African American district to less of an African American district?

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Unfortunately, unless you want to give me a break to go find out more about that I don't have the answer to that. I don't want to speak that it's an affirmative and it's absolute unless I really know what those numbers are.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: And the reason why I'm asking because --

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Well, we may actually get some here. When you say that somebody always wants to comes up here and help. And that's a good thing.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Right. If you would look at the numbers to tell us whether or not the numbers and Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway's districts are negatively effected.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Apparently Ms. Giddings in trying to help has pointed that the SSVR is reduced in Ms -- in District 110.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: And that's Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway's district which is African American.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Yes.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: And the reason I ask is, that it is my understanding that you are speaking on the amendment and not against the amendment.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Well, I'm speaking on it but one of the things that I wanted to make it clear was that I wanted to lay out what I thought the problems were. Partially with this particular amendment one of the reasons I probably don't have as much information as I might have on another amendment is because it didn't appear -- it didn't pose any legal problems for me to have to do that. It was really going to be up to the members in Dallas County and the rest of this body is to what they really wanted to do on this.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Does it now appear after receiving the information that it does pose a legal problem on specifically --

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: It imposes a reduction whether it problematic or not, I don't know.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Well, specifically as it relates to retrogression because now you have three people that are specifically speaking against it; Representative Anchia, Representative Davis, and Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway district that's been effected. And the numbers in the districts are reduced from what they are even under House Bill 150. I mean does it now appear, based on the information before you, and based on your information in your own map that this amendment produces s retrogression.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: It -- I was advised that it poses no legal problems on its face. It doesn't mean that underlying portion might not have some issue. But it doesn't seem that -- you know -- if legal counsel and alleged counsel said this is retrogression absolutely this is a problem or creates unreasonable risk it would -- I would have been happy to say that. They apparently did not -- whatever the changing are appeared to be some sort of range that they don't feel like it is a severe legal problem and I would need to bring the attention of the House or for the members to know about.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Chairman, do you need time to visit with your legal counsel? To see whether or not the amendment adversely affects Representative Mallory Caraway's district, Representative Davis' district, Representative --

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: If you want me to be accurate, and the body wants me to take a few minutes to do that, I will be happy to do it.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: No, Representative Solomons, I simply would like you to --

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: I would. Actually I don't mind doing that because I want to have as accurate information as I can for the body on these amendments.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: I'm simply --

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: If you are okay with me doing that I'm okay with doing that.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: I simply do not want amendments or a map on the floor that brings about retrogression. That's specifically my point. And I don't want to -- I don't want the members to be voting on an amendment or a map that reduces the representation of African Americans on this floor. Now if it means taking more time to visit with your lawyers I suggest that you do that because a lawyer -- being a lawyer of 30 years I see retrogression.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Guess what. I think I just got permission that it would be nice, number one, for me to take about a five or ten minute break, number one. Number two, it would probably be helpful anyway based on today. So, if you want to.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Do you want to pick it up tomorrow morning?

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: No, I actually don't like to wear this suit again. It's one of my better suits. At the end of the day I think I would like to do five minutes or six minutes something like that, just to verify for the House body. Because I do think that it's an important issue and I agree with the members and I'd be happy to do that.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REP. BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: The amendment is temporarily withdrawn until 4:00 p.m. today. Chair recognizes Representative Callegari for a motion. Chair recognizes Representative Callegari.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL CALLEGARI: Mr. Speaker, members, I request for the Committee of the Government Efficiency Reform to meet while the House is in session at 4:15 p.m. April 22nd, 2011, in room 3W.9 to consider pending business and House Bill 2954.

THE SPEAKER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Eissler for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE ROB EISSLER: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request permission for the Committee on Public Education to meet while the House is in session at 4:15 p.m. on 4/27/11 at 3W15. To consider House Bill 400.

THE SPEAKER: Members, you hear the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Clerk read the announcements please.

CLERK: The Committee on Government Efficiency and Reform will meet at 4:15 p.m. on April 27, 2011 at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business in H.B. 2954. The Committee on Public Education will meet at 4:15 p.m. on April 27, 2011 at 3W.15. This will be a formal meeting to consider H.B. 400.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members the House stands at ease until four o'clock.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Madam doorkeeper.

THE DOORKEEPER: Mr. Speaker, I have a messenger from the Senate at the door of the House.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Admit the messenger.

MESSENGER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am directed by the Senate to inform.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, we're about to go back to the Harper-Brown amendment. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Harper-Brown.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, we are back on the Harper-Brown amendment. Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. Representative Turner and I were talking about some retrogression and if there were issues about Ms. Caraway's district and we have run some numbers and he and I discussed that and I'll let Mr. Turner speak to that, as well. But it appears that the percentage increases are very, very minute and not perhaps material although there are some changes.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Of course. I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And that is correct from what I saw. There were some changes that did not appear to be material. Mr. Chairman let me ask just a one question to make sure that I am clear. Were the numbers that I saw, were they numbers that we are comparing what is existent under H.B. 150 to the amendment or were they numbers looking at where Representative Mallory Caraway's district is currently. And where they would be under the amendment of Representative Linda Harper-Brown?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Those numbers what I could gather, the plan that I was showing you was actually her amendment of what it did, as to what they ran. The current numbers are statistically for say black VAP under the current -- what we exist in today is 42.2 percent. In plan 153 which is the proposed plan by the committee before the body of the House now is 42.5 percent. The -- there's a change is only .03. Ms -- that's what we actually have now, it's in District 119, I mean 110. The percentages of any change -- although it does change downward it changes .03 -- I mean it's like nothing. It's like .03 or something percent -- it's very minimal but there is a change now for those members who have -- well, I'll just wait --

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. So just -- so that we are very clear, Chairman Solomons today when you look at the African American numbers just today regardless of 150 today the numbers are I think you said -- is it 42 percent?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: 42.2 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. And under H.B. 150 it is --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yeah. Plan 150 is committee substitute is 42.5 percent. That's black VAP.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And then on the Linda Harper-Brown's amendment it would be --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Pretty much it's 42.2 percent which brings it back to the current plan which we're under now.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. Let me yield --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: But you are talking about voting age versus the total. The numbers when you really look at it are -- if you look at that it says total and then it says VAP. The totals look like they are 39.6 percent but the VAP is really 42.2 percent.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield, please?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Sure.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN SPEAKER: Thank you. And I do apologize our -- for not being here for this discussion but our chairman for the Homeland Security and Public Security called a meeting to vote, so, I really thank you and appreciate all of you who are speaking on behalf of district 110. So, the numbers that Ms. Harper-Brown or this amendment is actually promoting is 39.4 percent and then she said to me that it would take it to 39 -- up 39.6 percent. So what numbers are what because you are saying 40 in the 40 range.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, the primary concern for retrogression is really -- I mean all the numbers are important but one of the things that they look at -- that I was told was you really need to look at the voting age population. That's really a key indicator more than controlled VAP. But when you really look at those -- what Ms. Harper-Brown has done is really taken what we had under plan 153 the one before you from 42.5 percent back down to 42.2 percent. But that's pretty much where you are today.

REP. BARBARA MALLORY CARAWAY: But under the existing plan, what is the Hispanic -- what are the Hispanic numbers?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: The Hispanic VAP's under the current -- under your district is Hispanic VAP is 41.7 percent. Under the plan that we had was 45.5 percent. And so 3.8 percent negative -- 3.8 percent deviation and what she's talking about in her plan is somewhere around, oh, I suppose totally you would have 16.9 or 16.3 three percent. What alleged counsel is basically saying to us and what the legal guys are saying is that if there is a change but it's within a very minute amount that they don't know if it's a retrogression or not. Now, you all may think it's retrogression but --

REP. BARBARA MALLORY CARAWAY: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- but it may create issues in court or not. It's something certainly --

REP. BARBARA MALLORY CARAWAY: Why do we keep talking about the court here? When we -- there is -- people -- apparently what Ms. Harper-Brown is trying to do in her particular proposal she retrogresses District 110 from an African American seat to a Hispanic seat and that is retrogression. And so I don't understand why even if it's a small or a what you're considering a small deviation of growth that that merits changing the whole growth map and a whole -- just not impacting District 110 but to accompany other people in the northern part of Dallas County.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: You know what? Part of this discussion should have been with Ms. Harper-Brown. I'm just telling you what I know based on these numbers that the percentages of increased Hispanic is through normal growth. It is not something that's a great addition. What everything we did -- here's what's going on. Our legal people basically believe, alleged counsel says, you know, it doesn't appear to pose any legal problem. Whether or not there's retrogression or not is really up to the courts and it's so minute that they don't think it would be a problem. But then some others may think that it is a problem. So, I'm not arguing whether it is or not. I'm telling you I don't know and I don't -- and it's so minute that it may or may not make any difference in that context of legality. Of what we all have to deal with in redistricting.

REP. BARBARA MALLORY CARAWAY: Well, let me ask you this and this should have been a conversation that I had with Ms. Harper-Brown and -- point because according to what you recommended is that representatives should have conversations with people if we are going to change it. I haven't seen -- the first time saw this was when I walked out of a meeting and you, the body, was discussing the negative impact that could have on retrogression so, obviously, these rules changing or the lack of input -- it is a very convoluted process. And it's very despondent because when you are asking District 110 to be part of a process and the people who are making these proposals, in fact, I was under the belief that if the amendments had not been -- according to what's been instructed with the community if it had not been agreed to then it was up for discussion so --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Let me just -- let me respectfully interject something. Just because you've been busy with your committee, you know, everybody is busy going back -- you had homeland security and some other committees. Ms. Harper-Brown's amendment according to the calendar rule has been out there for a bit not necessarily just folded up and we just did it, number one. Number two, I actually thought the committee wrote a darn good Dallas County map and I do think that was based on the input from all of the Dallas County members and, quite frankly, there has been some disagreement. Ms. Harper-Brown disagrees with the map as it exists today. We drew it, we voted it out, we thought it was a good district, a good way to draw West Dallas. Ms. Harper-Brown has redrew the west side of Dallas. It is up to this body if they want to agree with it or not.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Wait a minute, Mr. Speaker, before you tell me about time, can I ask him a question. Hold on just one minute before whoever wants to call time. Mr. Chairman, one of the earlier questions that I raised and one of the ones that I really need you to clarify from the committee's perspective is, whether or not you all interpret retrogression to not -- that if you flip from district from African American to Hispanic isn't that retrogression based on our interpretation from our lawyers with regard to Voting Rights Act. It says when you flip a district it has the potential to not elect a neutral person who was in that protected district it's retrogression. Now did that -- your interpretation -- is that what the committee is working on or not because that's a major issue.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I don't believe -- I don't know that her amendment --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: No, no, no. Listen to my question. As chairman of the committee, would you answer the question relative to what your interpretation of retrogression as it relates to flipping those districts so we'll know what the committee's position is or how you interpret that.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: The committee's position is based on and my position is based on what lawyers tell me in the litigation aspect of redistricting that, quite frankly, what you don't want to do is as they do an analysis that you are retrogressing a particular district from a minority opportunity district to choose someone of that they want to choose. So whether or not there is a few more Hispanics or few more black is not necessarily the issue. It's about minority opportunity to choose someone in a -- under the Voting Rights Act is a minority opportunity district. That's all I know about it.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: So, it is your position that African Americans seats are not protected under African American --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I didn't say that.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Well, that's what you are -- I'm trying to understand that.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I didn't say that.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Well, explain it to me then.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I didn't say that.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Solomons do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Chairman Solomons, and I think we all want to be clear. Can your committee tell us at what point can the African American percentage in any district presently held by an African American be reduced where it isn't considered to be retrogression.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: A specific percentage, no.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Because -- and that I have been told that there is a magical number as relates to a Latino districts where their numbers can be reduced where lawyers are saying that is retrogression. Is there a similar determining factor as it relates to African American districts and if there is not, that's fine. I simply want to know what the answer is. The second question is that if --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, whoa, whoa, whoa. Let me just tell you what I think the answer to that is, is what I said before about whether or not retrogression is done and whether or not it actually is. It's not clear on everything that everybody looks at. If you have a magic number in mind and some of the lawyers told you what that magic number is, I bet you I can find another lawyer that says, well it's not exactly that, it could be that. But it's -- it could be something else as well.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: If there is a reversal where African --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. -- raises the point of order. The gentleman's time is expired.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: And with all due respect I do move that the gentleman's time be extended.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: This is the first extension of time. Any objection?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm not opposing the amendment, number one. I understand what you are trying to do in connection with what I think, what you think the committee thinks or thought of at the time and I appreciate that. I can tell you right now that I don't have an answer, an exact answer. I can tell you if you flip something you are bound to have it reviewed. And I don't know what those numbers are. And what that absolute percentage is or all the factors but I would suspect just out of commonsense and what little legal training I guess I've had over the years but, yeah, if you are going to flip it you probably are going to have to -- be under some sort of a scrutiny.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Well, precisely the point that we are making here is that we respect to District 110 represented by Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway where that district had a plurality of African Americans, that district is no longer where African Americans are in -- is the number one group, for example. That now there has been a reversal by virtue of the amendments that are being put forth in this House. And the argument that -- the position that we are taken is that brings about retrogression as it relates to African American districts presently held by African Americans.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I think what you are doing is what every good lawyer does and whatever -- and in this case with the concern about how our districts look, that you're creating some reasonable doubt possibly. Is this going to be something that the courts can look at? My legal people seem to think it's so minute perhaps not, probably not. On the other hand, your perspective on it might be something that the courts actually say, yeah, it's a little bit more than it should be. I can't answer that right now. It's her amendment. I didn't really expect this dialogue on her amendment as such and I apologize for that to the membership. But going back and looking at what they are pulling up on her plan it seems that when you go back on at least 2010 and 2008/2010 and you look at totals of VAP's there is some change not for the betterment of what --

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: But, Representative Solomons, I don't apologize. I don't apologize for the questions --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, I don't apologize for the -- because I just wish I had a better answer for you.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Well, because, number one, I think it is very important for African Americans not to participate in our own demise. And we are not here to participate in our own demise. Neither are we here to participate and see lines drawn where our interest is being effectively diluted. We are not interested in that. And when we're looking at this amendment tied to H.B. 150, our interest are being effectively diluted. And as the chairman of the committee if you're not going to oppose the amendment, if you are not going to oppose the amendment in light of our concerns then it only adds to our concerns. So, I would respectfully ask you to oppose the amendment based on the concerns that have been advanced or there is I think -- it's -- it only adds to our concerns as --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And I understand that and I appreciate that concern and I indicated that I wanted to leave this to the will of the House. The House is obtained in couple of different ways. By motion to table and just on the amendment. If your issue is that you would rather have me have a motion to table, and depending on the outcome of that is still the will of the House. I am not going to say I am not going to do that. But I understand where you are coming from.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: We are not in advance --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And for consistency maybe I should.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: We are not interested in any kind of objective representative of a group in the Texas House of Representatives or in the State of Texas. If the body chooses to pass this map, with that amendment, so be it. But let it be very clear that you are passing it over the objections of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus and the black people that we represent because we view it as out right retrogression.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, here is what I'll try to do. I -- what plan -- 219 -- oh, hold on.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Giddings, for what purpose?

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was going to ask the gentleman to yield for a question but it looks like, Mr. Speaker, he was in the process of trying to answer a question.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I was going to say because of Mr. Turner's concern and the black caucus' concern about trying to be -- have a fair process and try to be as consistent as possible that sort of thing, I don't want to -- to be inconsistent. I will tell you this my --

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- wait a minute, I will let you talk.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: I was trying to respect you.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Okay. I really believe that this body will decide on what they want to do. Whether there is a motion to table, whether it's the will of the House, whatever happens. At the end of the day it seems to me that Ms. Harper-Brown's amendment does two things in particular for sure. One, it takes what Dallas County as a group basically tried to drop in and we had to wrap up some things and draw a map and basically changes the plan. It changes it dramatically enough at Grand Prairie, it changes the West side of the area. It does effect some other districts. Maybe not so much legally as you all may think but it does address and effect some of that. And at the end of the day I think that's what we are going to have to decide whether we think it's enough and what this body wants to do on her amendment, just like on the amendment she may have in the --

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- and yes I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Giddings, for what purpose?

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you, Mr. -- Chairman Solomons. I tried to give you enough time to get your point over without moving all the -- answer. Well what we believe is this. There is an enough growth in Dallas County in terms of African Americans that we can maintain -- at least maintain and we believe that we can in fact increase the African Americans minority opportunity districts without negatively effecting what is going to happen to Hispanics. So, I want to make that very clear. Number two, we want to make very clear that 110 goes from a majority -- a plurality African American opportunity district to a plurality Hispanic district. We want to point that out and we believe that's retrogression. The next thing --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I have some disagreement about that but go ahead.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. I'll tell you what, let us just ask you the questions. We have a lawyer like you do. What is the population the VAP population for African Americans in that opportunity -- in that African American opportunity today and what does it go to under the Harper-Brown amendment? And then give us the same information for Hispanics and let's see where the plurality is.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: According to these numbers it doesn't change anything then from today.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: The plurality of African Americans in 110 today is what number, sir?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, the 42 percent is voting age. If you are talking about the plurality of the total number is 39.6.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: So, today, not under the 150 or 153 but as we live today, her district is --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We need to be consistent, Helen. The total versus VAP. The VAP says, the voting age population stays exactly the same as under the current map that we live under now. Not the proposed plan, not under her amendment, it's what it is today. That hasn't really changed. What we did we raised it little bit in the proposed plan and Ms. Harper-Brown brings it back but doesn't bring it back lower than what you already have today.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Well, our numbers show that entirely different. So, we have to get back and get those numbers because even if I use what Ms. Harper-Brown has given us, it goes from 42.2 plurality --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheets --

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: -- to point --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: -- raises the point of order. Gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Where he will.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speaker, I respectfully request that the gentleman's time be expired --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: If I can just finish and have one question, fine. Because I just wanted to point out something to you and I'll be happy, I don't care. Here is the point. We want accurate information. The end of the day 16.99 percent is now. Oh, I'm sorry, 16.9 percent. Can't read the writing. The current -- what you have now -- under the current is 18.2 percent. That's what you have now. I mean there -- it actually goes down. So what we are understanding on Hispanics. But you are right and all of you are right on Ms. Caraway's district and what is occurring with this map, this amendment. The amendment is changing numbers. The question is by what percentages, are they enough to create reasonable doubt or issues of retrogression or whatever. So whether or not there are legal concerns or not the legal guys tell us it's within some ranges that they don't seem to have the same concerns that they may have on some other amendments. But --

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Well.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- but I'm not discounting what you are saying.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. Well, obviously we need to huddle after this Mr. Chairman because the numbers we have produced by alleged counsel obviously show us that the plurality changes from one to the other and we are using the numbers that came out to us with that amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Okay.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: There's no question about that.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Okay.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Secondarily, Mr. Chairman --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Gentleman's time is expired. Chair recognizes Representative Driver to speak against the Harper-Brown amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE DRIVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. Members, I need to -- Ms. Chairman, I need to correct something that Chairman Solomons said. This infers that the Dallas delegation was all inclusive in the drawing of the Dallas County map. It was dropped in, it was not all inclusive that's a false -- and it was false information he was given about it. The -- and with that I would like to -- Harper-Brown amendment, in my opinion, draws a weaker Republican districts and I move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Harper-Brown to close. REPRESENTATIVE LINDA HARPER-BROWN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I just want to clarify something as Representative Solomons said. The numbers that I have came from alleged counsel. I want to be sure that all my colleagues at the back understand. The black VAP now, currently in 110 is 42.2 percent. In the new amendment that I am proposing is 42.2 percent. It does not change. On the SSVR currently -- the SSVR in 110 is 18.2 percent and it goes now to 16.9 percent. So it's actually less Hispanic surname voting voters, SSVR. Factor less 110 -- and those numbers came directly from alleged counsel. So, members, I move to pass this amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Harper-Brown sends up an amendment. Representative Driver moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Clerk ring the bell. Show Representative Driver voting aye, show Representative Harper-Brown voting no, show Representative Anderson voting aye. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 116 ayes and 16 nays, the motion to table prevails. Mr. Flynn, Mr. Christian. Chair recognizes Representative Larson for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE LYLE LARSON: Yes, Mr. Speaker, members, I request permission for the Committee of Culture, Recreation and Tourism to meet at 4:50, April 27, 2011, in 1W14 to consider H.C.R. 98, H.C.R. 48 and pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Culture, Recreation and Tourism will meet at 4:50 p.m. on April 27, 2011 at 1W.14 at the agricultural museum. This will be a formal meeting to consider H.C.R. 98 and H.C.R. 48 and pending business.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Okay. I here request the committee on Recreation, Tourism to meet while the session -- while the House is in session at 4:50, April 27, 2011 in 1W14. H.C.R. 98, H.C.R. 48 and pending business. And I appreciate Ms. Thompson giving the new member the correction that was needed.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcement. The Clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Culture, Recreation, Tourism will meet at 4:50 p.m. on April 27, 2011, at 1W.14, the agricultural museum. This will be a formal meeting to consider H.C.R. 98, H.C.R. 48 and pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Flynn, Representative Christian. Representative Christian. Plans 217 and 215 have been withdrawn. Chair recognizes Representative Dukes for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWANNA DUKES: Mr. Speaker, members, I move to suspend all necessary rules to request -- to grant the Committee on Culture Recreation and Tourism permission to meet at 4:55, April 27, 2011, in room 1W.14 to consider H.C.R. 98, H.C.R. 46, and pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Duke.

REPRESENTATIVE DAWANNA DUKES: Mr. Speaker, members, I request to grant the committee permission to meet Committee on Culture, Recreation and Tourism while the House is in session at 4:55 p.m. April 27, 2011 in room 1W.14 to consider H.C.R. 98, H.C.R. 46, and pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Culture, Recreation and Tourism will meet at 4:55 p.m. on April 27, 2011. At 1W.14, the agricultural museum. This will be a formal meeting to consider H.C.R. 98, H.C.R. 46, and pending business.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Turner, Representative Woolley, Representative Coleman, Representative Bohac. Representative Coleman.

JOE STRAUS: Members, we're going to move onto Jefferson County. This is plan 145.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Keffer for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES L. KEFFER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request permission on the Committee on Energy Resources to meet while the House is in session at 5:15 today the 27th, place 3W.9 to consider pending business.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment -- following announcement. Clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Energy Resources will meet at 5:15 on April 27, 2011 at 3W.9. This will be a formal meeting to consider pending business.

JOE STRAUS: The following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Deshotel.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Ritter to explain the amendment. Representative Ritter. Members, this is plan 145.

REPRESENTATIVE ALLAN RITTER: Members, this amendment is agreed upon Representative Deshotel and myself and it just moves, I believe, just one little block from the Solomons' plan as is from my portion to Representative Deshotel's. It's all agreed upon. I believe it is acceptable to the author.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Ritter sends up an amendment. It is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. Amendment is adopted. Members, we're now moving to Travis County, plan 123. Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment my Rodriguez.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Rodriguez. Representative Rodriguez? The amendment is withdrawn. Representative Veasey and Representative Burnam come forward. For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: You just announced that Mr. Rodriguez' announcement was withdrawn is that temporarily withdrawn or withdrawn.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Okay. We'll make it temporarily. But Mr. Burnam you still need to come down. We are back in Travis County, plan 123. Chair recognizes representative Rodriguez. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Rodriguez.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Rodriguez to explain his amendment.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. This amendment adds a precinct, precinct 101, to my district. In Chairman Solomons' map precinct 101 is currently in Representative Dukes district, District 46. I talked to Representative Dukes, she agrees with this amendment. This is actually an asset that Representative Dukes and I presented to Chairman Solomons so this is kind of going back to that. Also in the amendment there is precinct 222 which is currently not -- according to Solomons map not in her district and we put that back in her district, as we all agreed to in Travis County. This tracts the African American migration here in Travis County going northeast -- at northeast part of Travis County. And finally, members, I have run several scenarios with precinct 101 in my district and found that my constituents are still able to elect a candidate of their choice in a ballot contest. And with that I will answer any questions if there are any.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Dukes, for what purpose?

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: Would the gentleman yield.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Do you yield.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: I yield.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: He yields.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: Representative Rodriguez, this amendment it effects only Travis County and the eastern portion of Travis County; is that correct?

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: The eastern part of Travis County and the northeastern part of Travis County; that is correct.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: And precinct 101 has historically been in what district?

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Historically it has been in your district.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: And precinct 101.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: 101.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: And this was a precinct that we agreed upon in movement because of the need to add additional voters to your district.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: That's correct. And it also being heavily Hispanic and trending Hispanic as well. It also as well, Ms. Dukes, has a tie in with a high school in my district, Johnson Memorial High School, in my district and so a lot of those kids that are in precinct 101 actually go to that school and to the feeder school and middle school as well.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: And the reason being was because there has been a lot of interaction between you and the previous representative of District 51 and the individuals in the community associated with precinct 101 that we chose to move that precinct.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: That is true. There is a lot of history of interaction between -- with the traditional District 51 and District 101. So, I think bringing them is actually a community of interest. So I think combining them and getting them all in the same district is a benefit.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: And precinct 222 is a precinct that mirrors the migration of the African American voters who have historically lived in eastern Austin that I represented in District 46 that now tend to populate the Pflugerville community in one of the precincts there which, in this case, happens to be 222; is that correct?

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: That is correct.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: So the point being that we were attempting to prevent any retrogression of African American voters in District 46 and prevent retrogression of Hispanic voters to District 51 and we came to a painless solution.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: That is correct.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: In anyway do you feel that this violates, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: No, Ms. Dukes it does not. I don't believe that it does at all. That any reduction in any Spanish surname voter registration or Hispanic are very minimus. And I talked to attorneys. It doesn't make any difference in terms of election history. It wouldn't make any bit of difference in that and so, I think this doesn't violate it in any way.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: And this was a gentleman's and gentlewoman's agreement.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: A gentleman's and a gentlewoman's agreement.

REP. DAWNNA DUKES: I think it's a good amendment.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Thank you.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Mr. Madden, for what purpose?

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Do you yield?

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: I do.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: He yields.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Mr. Rodriguez, when I heard this amendment in committee, the concern that the committee had in both ways is was the regression either in the African American communities, in Ms. Dukes or your district or the Hispanic communities in either yours or her district. Can you give us what the current Spanish surname voting numbers are in your district as it currently exists and what it would be under the plan 153 and what it is with this amendment. And then can you give us the African American numbers for Ms. Dukes precinct or District 50 in those same three.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: District 46 is where Ms. Dukes is.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: District 46.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Yeah.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: I have District 50 here.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Okay. Let me tell you my numbers. And I can tell you this, I'm not sure about the African American numbers if we don't have it -- I do know that the African American numbers go up by about one or two -- by very, very small number but it does go up, the African American numbers. For mine, the current map, what I represent today the Spanish surname voter registration is 38.7 under Burt's -- Chairman Solomons' map it goes down to 38 -- rather 36.6 and with this agreement that Representative Dukes and I have come to it goes to 36.2.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: So it goes down from what it currently is in Representative Solomons' map and it goes down even further.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: It goes down .4 percent.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Okay. And you don't have the African American numbers for Ms. Dukes' district.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: I know it goes up slightly but I'm not sure.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Okay. And that's true from current.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Yeah, the voting age it goes up .6. Yeah, 21.7 for African American it goes up .6 for African American numbers.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: As compared to the Solomons' map or compared to the current numbers.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: We're checking on that real quick. I will say this -- with that's one of the changes with precinct 222 there is an African American population in 222 which is why when we bring it in like this amendment does you actually increase the number by .6.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Okay. And that does that to Ms. Dukes.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Yes, it adds to hers.

REP. JERRY MADDEN: Okay. Thank you.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Thanks.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to speak on the amendment.

REP. BURT R. SOLOMONS: Mr. Speaker, members, this is really a minor thing in connection with what they're trying to do. I don't see there being any legal issues of any kind of consequence but we wanted to ensure a couple of points and so, I'm going to leave it to the will of the House so we can all vote for it. And take away all kind of potential argument. I don't think there are any but you know how these things go.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Mr. Rodriguez to close. Mr. Rodriguez to close.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: I close, go for it.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Mr. Rodriguez sends up an amendment. Question is on the amendment. Members vote aye, members vote nay. Clerk will ring the bell. Showing Mr. Zedler voting aye, Mr. Solomons voting aye. Have all voted? Have all voted? There being 144 ayes, 0 nays, four present not voting. The amendment is adopted. We are now moving to Tarrant County. Mr. Veasey, Mr. Burnam you are the next stop on our tour. Members we are doing plan No. 120. Following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment. Plan 120.

CLERK: Amendment by Veasey.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Veasey to explain his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, this map I believe more accurately reflects Tarrant County and the growth we have experienced. If you have read any of the articles in the Star Telegram or seen any of the other figures that are out you will note that most of the growth in Tarrant County and in the city of Fort Worth over the last decade has been Hispanic and African American. Under my amendment, this creates a new minority opportunity district in District 96. It wouldn't be a shoe in but it would be a new minority opportunity district. Under the current plan that we're in right now we have four out of ten districts that are majority black and Hispanics. Under the Solomons' plan -- under the amendment that was voted out only three of those district are now minority opportunity. Once again the problem with the math is that most of the growth has been African American or Hispanic but yet African American and Hispanic voting has been deduced to three districts. That is a huge problem. Also under the current plan as it was earlier noted my district was unnecessarily tagged. My district crossed I35 to go into southwest Fort Worth that is growing number of African Americans. And it was unnecessarily tagged because Lon Burnam's district that he represents was brought into southeast Fort Worth. District 90 was brought into the African American community into District 95, once again unnecessarily. We all signed off on our respective districts everyone's districts stay the same accept the two districts that are minority districts. Every district that was represented by Anglo republican in Tarrant County stayed the same. The only two districts that changed was the district that I represent and the Hispanic district that Lon represents. And that alone is unfair in itself. I'd be happy to yield for any questions that the gentle lady has.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Truitt for what purpose?

REP. VICKI TRUITT: Will the gentleman, please, yield.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yes.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: He yields.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: Mr. Veasey, at what expense?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: At what expense?

REP. VICKI TRUITT: At what expense does your map do what you want it to do?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I don't think that my map -- there is no expense that is made.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: OMG there is an expense, Mr. Veasey.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: If there is --

REP. VICKI TRUITT: Is it true -- I've heard a lot of discussion today about communities of common interest.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yes.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: The map that I'm looking at that you proposed splits a lot of communities with common interest right down the middle. How many minority districts are there in Tarrant County now?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Right now there are four.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: No.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yeah, there are. I can tell you which ones they are. I live in Fort Worth and I'm --

REP. VICKI TRUITT: I'm not sure that's correct --

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I can tell you exactly where they are.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: Where's the greatest amount of growth in Tarrant County been.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: In the southern sector and in the northern sector.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: The greatest numbers.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: In the northern sector and the southern sector of the county.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: Predominantly more so -- is it true that the population between the excess population between Mr. Geren's district and my district are almost adequate to populate a new district.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I certainly would not argue that there has been tremendous growth in the northern triangle in between your district and Representative Geren's district and I can also assure you --

REP. VICKI TRUITT: And I can safely say that your map cuts our communities of common interest right down the middle.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I can also assure you that there has been tremendous growth in southwest Fort Worth particularly as it relates to the African American community.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: And the maps that all ten of us --

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: That were probably just a minuscule Anglo a few years ago is now more black independent school districts.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: Isn't it true that all ten of us signed off on the map for Tarrant County and we all agreed that we could live with the districts and that is what is reflected in Mr. Solomons' map.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: That is not true. All ten of us signed off on our individual districts. My district -- I'm sorry, Representative Geren's very eloquently corrected me earlier and I want to get away from saying my district. But the district that I represent and the district that Lon Burnam represents the two districts that are the most minority in the entire plan. When it came back to the committee those were the two that were changed. Every other district that is represented by the rest of you stayed the same. Our districts changed. There's a big line going through the middle of my district. Representative Geren picked up the Como community and I think everybody over there knows Charlie and I think they are more comfortable being represented by Lon. But if you look at the major changes that took place from after the point in which we signed off the big change that has happened in the districts represented by the minorities and we didn't approve them.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: Well, I certainly didn't approve what you're trying to do to my district either.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Well, my intention was not really to mess with your district at all. The biggest problem that I had was with my district and Representative Burnam's and the growing number of African Americans in southwest Fort Worth and Arlington that I think are being --

REP. VICKI TRUITT: So I respectfully request --

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Personally that I think are personally being retrogressed.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: So, I respectfully request that you -- I'm in the district I represent the communities of northeast Tarrant County. Northeast Tarrant County is more than a geographical description. It is a reflection of community of common interest. This map splits them in half and worse and they will not stand for it. I respectfully request that you adjust -- if you want to adjust your lines to accomplish what you want that you move your lines farther to the south and not mess with northeastern Tarrant County.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I totally agree with you. I don't have any interest in messing with Tarrant County.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: So you'll withdraw your amendment, is that what you're saying?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Well, what I'm saying, I would be more than willing to work with you on that but I think that Representative Geren and Representative Solomons have said that the map is the way it is and that my district is going to be tagged. That Lon's district is going to be tagged also unnecessarily. And I don't think we're going to be able to change the map right now but I would be more than willing to work with you because I did not mean to mess with northeast Tarrant County.

REP. VICKI TRUITT: I have listened a lot today and I'm sure we'll continue to hear a lot more about communities of common interest and I cannot in good faith sit back and say nothing and watch my communities of common interest decimated by this amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I understand that's why I'm up here arguing right now. I don't want that sword going through this middle of my district that was changed with the amendment that happened in committee.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you. Representative Veasey, are you aware that within the last 10 or 15 minutes I have heard two of our Tarrant County colleagues express that they thought that the map adopted by the committee was a map that we approved of and that in fact is not the case.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: That is not the case. We all approved our individual districts.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: In fact the district that I represent currently was and has essentially been the same since first created by the Federal court the first time Tarrant County had a single member districts back in 1978.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Listen, since the creation of this district, neighborhoods that are incredibly important and protected by virtue of there minority status in District 90 including the Lake Como community where your mother and grandmother live.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And the Lake Como community has always, since the time of establishing single member districts, been a part of District 90; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: That is absolutely, correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And are you aware that the neighborhood that I live in, the Fairmont neighborhood, has always been in District 90; and in the plan as proposed by the committee this neighborhood that consists of two precincts is split down a street, in the middle of the neighborhood leaving me in my district and leaving my neighbors across the street out of the district.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: It absolutely splits those districts. Vicki very eloquently talked about community of interest a minute ago and those communities when you look Ryan's Place and you look at Fairmont and you look at those various neighborhoods along the Hemphill corridor, those are communities of interest, absolutely.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And so in offering up your amendment today those are two examples of corrections that you're trying to make in neighborhoods that are protected and were established in District 90 by the Federal judges in 1978. We could go on and expand about the Ryan's place neighborhood. And are you aware that the precinct where my predecessor Dole Willis has lived all his adult life and was in District 90 is now ripped out of this district.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yeah. And that's very unfortunate. And something else you should know about this map along with the rest of the body is that District 96 which is currently represented by Representative Zedler that is one of the fastest growing minority areas in the entire county. And right now they have a shot to decide who gets elected in that district under the plan that was voted out they do not have that opportunity anymore. It's like all that growth everything that has happened over there in the last 10, 20 years. The changes in the school district there. Nothing, it's absolutely nothing. They've become completely irrelevant under what was voted out.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So the county line plan alternative that you are offering is an attempt to prevent the retrogression that the committee recommendation represents.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: The plan that I have it looks like Tarrant County. The plan that I have it looks like Fort Worth. It does not look like, with all due respect to Vicki, that our county is South Lake. And under this map you would think that the entire county was South Lake because you would think that the demographics of entire county were the demographics of South Lake and that is not the case. We live in a very diverse county and we need to have diverse representation in these districts and the plan that was voted out absolutely does not achieve that.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So very importantly the district that you currently represent which is clearly minority opportunity district you are trying to protect from having it being, frankly, invaded by the district that I currently represent.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I wouldn't say being invaded but I do think that by having that finger go into the district -- having that little sword go into the district --

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Bonnen raises a point of order that the gentleman's time has expired. Point of order is well taken and sustained. Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against the amendment. Chair recognizes Representative Geren to speak against the amendment. Chair recognizes Representative Geren to speak against the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members and I'm respectfully going to have to ask to table this amendment. As Mrs. Truitt says it divides -- it splits several communities right down the middle. Fort Worth is split. It doesn't have -- there's no question that Fort Worth has to be split because the population is so large. The same thing with Arlington. But these other communities are split. This map also drops the Hispanic voting age for District 90 to below 50 percent where currently under the House map that voting age is over 50 percent. And -- excuse me, the map as proposed by the House Redistricting Committee. There are only -- currently there are only three districts that have minority majority populations in Tarrant County, not four. And under the map that's proposed by Mr. Solomons there are three minority majority districts. And, yes, if Mr. Burnam has a question I'd be happy to try to answer it.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Burnam, you're asking a question?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Yes, sir.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you. Isn't it true, Chairman Geren, that under the current existing lines that we were all elected under the district that I represent is 47.2 SSRB?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I believe that's probably correct. And under the new map it raises over 50 percent which I think makes it a healthier minority Spanish voting age district.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: It makes it healthier in that regard. Isn't it also true that to enable -- to accomplish this isn't it true that they now created the district where I'm now over 8,000 --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Hold on do you mind speaking into the microphone instead of turning your head.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm sorry.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Isn't it true that the plan that is proposed reduces the size of my district to be 8200 plus people below the standard count.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: It's well within the deviation, however.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: It's barely within the deviation.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: It is within the deviation.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And the way they achieve the increased percentages by taking the Lake Como community out which is overwhelming minority majority community; isn't that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: That's correct. And I'd be more than proud to serve them.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, I know you would be more than proud serve them but they expressed a preference to be represented by someone that they feel like they've had a long-term working record with.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Well, maybe but you know I've only had two calls and they haven't said, we need Lon Burnam.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, they haven't said they need Lon Burnam. What they've said is they want to be kept in District 90 and they want to be kept in District 90 because it's minority impact district. I don't mean to debate I wanted to just make it clear what is happening here. The reason I think it's important that we consider this amendment is the individual members' preferences were not respected in the committee process and I'll be speaking in favor of --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I don't disagree with you that the map that we turned in is not the same map that is on this map. With that, members, I would make notion table this amendment.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Burnam to speak against the amendment -- speak for the amendment, I'm sorry. Chair recognizes Representative Veasey to close.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Once again folks and this is why. Lon and I were talking about this earlier. We have this saying in Fort Worth that I don't like. It's called the Fort Worth way and it's something folks in downtown use when they want to get everybody else to comply and not say anything. But I will tell you that we have a very diverse county, we have a very diverse city and it is not represented that way on the map that was voted out of committee. And on top of that the only districts that were changed against members' wishes were the two minority districts, the ones that are heavily minority. And that is the one I represent District 95 and the one that Representative Burnam represents. When you look at Representative Geren's district which is a very upscale district and Representative Shelton's and everyone else represents, the Fort Worth area. All of those were kept the same. Mine was drastically altered from what we respectfully individually agreed to and as Representative Burnam. And with respect to the SSVR argument that has been raised over and over again I was happy to see that *MALTA sent out a letter today saying that Representative Burnam's district and Representative Farrar's district were already minority opportunity districts that -- where Hispanics controlled the district. So just by increasing that number that means absolutely nothing at all. It means nothing legally and it's just something people were saying today and throwing around. The fact of the matter is that the map that I have actually --

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: -- in just one-second. The maps that I have -- and I'd be more than willing to work and make some changes -- it more accurately reflects what the city of Fort Worth looks like. It more accurately reflects what the city of Arlington looks like which I believe now is probably majority minority city. And it more accurately reflects what our county looks like. Maybe our county didn't look like this 20 years ago but I'm telling you what it looks like now. And my plan more accurately reflects that. And I'd be more than happy to answer questions from my neighbor in Fort Worth.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Mr. Burnam.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Veasey you serve on the redistricting committee, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: That is absolutely, correct.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And you voted against the plan, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Yes, I did.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And specifically you believe that the plan the Tarrant County portion of the plan represents retrogression in your district in part because it excessively packs.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: It excessively packs. It takes me over I35 in the areas that are currently represented by other representatives and it makes it a lot harder for them to have any impact. They were having impact -- my district was already under the plan that each of us individually agreed to my district was already sufficiently African American as was your district was already sufficiently Spanish.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And do you believe that it also represents retrogression in District 90 in that it plucks out a huge minority community and puts them in a community in the same legislative district as Azle which is in the northwest corner of the county and doesn't have anything in common with the Lake Como community.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: The Lake Como community which is the community that I'm from and where my mom went to school back when the schools were still segregated that she finished from. I can tell you they were hurt when they were taken out of a congressional district and now they have no influence in the current congressional district that they are in. They were hurt when they were taken out of the old Mike Munsley senate district, which I believe was Senate District 12. Now they are in a senate district that goes all the way up to Denton County. And like I said they know Charlie. They know Charlie's family, Charlie's brother wouldn't have been elected to congress if it had not been for the Como community. So they know his family.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: You're absolutely right. Charlie's brother wouldn't have been elected to congress if I had not run that voter turn out bank back when. Helping him to turn out the vote back in Como.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: So he's known. But I can assure you that the way you vote versus the way Charlie votes would be more reflective of the community and make my grandmother, who is -- who will turn 99 this year, it will make her much more happier.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I want to ask you about the other two districts that we believe potentially represent retrogression. It is clear to both you and I that the districts that you and I currently represent are -- represent the retrogression that is pervasive in this plan. And specifically with you it is packing and with me it's packing and cracking. And in the instance of District 96 which is a proven track record that it is a coalition district when there is a heavy voter turnout as opposed to when there's a low voter turnout. Is it your belief that African Americans in particular and minorities in general have been cracked to assure reelection of a white representative that does not receive minority votes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Absolutely, you wouldn't think that Tarrant County was one of the fastest growing African American and Hispanic counties in the entire country.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: It is one of the fastest growing Hispanic and African American counties in the entire country. The county is adding one seat because there's going to be 11. But the overall retrogression that you're trying to fix is instead of having 3 minority districts with ten we're only going to have three with 11 and that is achieved by retrogression in the two that are most minority represented at this time.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I want our maps to look like Tarrant County.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, I hope the wisdom of the House is that they recognize it is in the House's best interest to vote to table -- I mean, vote against tabling because they assure there will be retrogression in Tarrant County. And my attorneys have assured me today that we will be in court as soon as it's enacted.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Geren, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Would Mr. Veasey yield?

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Of course I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Veasey were you aware that there were changes made in the districts that Dr. Shelton represents, that Ms. Patrick represents and Ms. Nash represents and that I represent and they didn't know anything about it either. Are you aware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I'm aware that there were slight changes made to it.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: There were changes made and you indicated that there were no changes made. And I hardly think that you can call the District 99, a current District 99 affluent when I represent Pelican Bay, Texas which is one of the most -- do you realize one of the poorest cities in the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I agree with you.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: And are you aware that Castleberry I. S. D. is one of the poorest districts in the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: I agree with you on that and I erred. What I meant is the portion --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: I appreciate you admitting your error.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Members, please, vote no on the notion table.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Veasey sends up an amendment. Representative Geren moves to table. Question is on the motion to table. Members vote aye, vote no. Representative Geren voting aye, Representative Veasey voting no, Representative Burnam voting no, Representative Woolley voting aye, Representative Shelton voting aye, Representative Branch vote aye. Remember you have voting stations at your desk. Have all voted? Have all voted? Being 96 ayes, 43 nays, four present not voting, the motion to table prevails. Members, we're going to map 203. Chair lays out the following amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Burnam.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Burnam to explain his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Members, I have a perfecting amendment to this amendment. It is acceptable to the author because I authored it.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Members, before we do the amendment to amendment I recognize Representative Aycock for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE JIMMIE DON AYCOCK: Thank you, members, Mr. Speaker. For all the staff that is watching downstairs feel free to rotate in and out if you want to. There's food downstairs in Grundy Hall. Members, if you get a break and you get tired of all this fun if you can dig out a way to get out, go. But anyway I don't think any of us are going. Mr. Solomons, at any rate the party is underway in Grundy Hall for the staff. If y'all want to go down there it's the WII Bowling Tournament and you got a chance to help the Boys and Girls Club.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, just so everybody knows we have some of my famous white wings in the members' lounge that I brought. Also Representative Lozano brought come of his special wings. In this operation we're having a wing night. We're going to be here tonight so we'll make sure everybody is full of energy to carry on and so forth. And some way or another I'm going to get over to the WII tournament because I am the defending champion. So we can say it's Debbie's famous wings as well, so you know. But anyway it's our treat. Representative Lozano I've been looking for you. We're winging it tonight.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Following amendment to the amendment. Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Burnam.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Burnam to explain his amendment to the amendment. This is plan 236.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Members, plan 236 is an attempt to comply with an artificial rule that's been established in this process that I disagreed with at the Justice Department. So before I lay this amendment out and explain it I want to read to you something that is a quote from the Justice Department Redistricting Guidelines 2011. It says, in determining whether the ability to elect exists in the benchmark plan and whether it continues in proposed plan the attorney general does not rely on any predetermined or fixed demographic percentages at any point in the assessment. Rather in the departments view this determination requires functional analysis of the electoral behavior within the particular jurisdiction or election district. The fact of the matter is we thought we had an agreed to plan and that plan was acceptable for District 90. District 90 was established by a Federal Judge in 1978. It was the first time that we had single member districts in Tarrant County. At that time as I have discussed in the lay out of Mr. Veasey's amendment a number of communities, neighborhoods, minority majority minority neighborhoods such as the Lake Como community, the Fairmont neighborhood that I live in were all included in this district. Plan 236 does not quite meet 50 percent threshold that was arbitrarily created for the convenience of promoting this bill but it does come to 49.1. It is a really, really ugly map. I'm almost embarrassed at how ugly this map is but it does restore the Lake Como community into the district and it restores my own neighbored into the precinct -- district as opposed to being divided right down the middle. How it achieved 49.1 percent is picking up census tracks here and there in Mark Shelton's district and Mr. Veasey's district and Charlie Geren's district. And I believe the only reason anybody would oppose this is because they are trying to artificially suggest that they created a Hispanic opportunity district. That opportunity exists has existed since the creation of the district by a Federal Judge in 1978 and will continue to exist. Communities of interest, specifically minority communities of interest, have been ripped asunder and that in itself represents a form of retrogression. I move adoption.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Mr. Burnam sends up an amendment to the amendment. It is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment to the amendment -- Representative Burnam sends up an amendment to the amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Now we're on the amendment as amended. Chair recognizes Representative Burnam to explain his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Members, I really said what I needed to say about this. I'm trying to restore communities of interest within my district. In particular I am anxious to recover the Lake Como community because of my relationship with the community my entire life and their relationship to District 90, the entire life of single member districts as it was created by the Federal Judges in Fort Worth. Again, the neighborhoods that I have mentioned are the Lake Como community, my own neighborhood. My wife and I have lived on Sixth Avenue for 31 years and the west side of the street where we started living in the district 31 years ago is no longer in the district. East of the district where we chose to buy is in the district. And I know that sounds a little peculiar but that's way the map was adopted. I want to emphasize to you that I believe the courts will find and my attorneys who will be representing the district believe that changing this district as proposed by the committee represents a form of retrogression. By continuing to discuss it represents a form of filibuster not recognized on the House but I've been asked to continue to talk about the issues concerning retrogression in Tarrant County for a few minutes. The issues in Tarrant County first is a retrogression in the predominantly African American districts represented by the excessive packing of that district. The retrogression in my district represents the artificial nuance of just two or three percentage points in the registered Hispanic voters. When, in fact, if you take out over 10 percent of the voting population in this district is the minority constituency in the Lake Como community. And if you rip it out and put it in a district in far northwest Tarrant County in Azle. And while the people in Azle are wonderful folks they just don't have very much in common with my intercity Fort Worth constituencies, Lake Como community. I'm extremely concerned that in a district that is largely a no growth district that you would put me at such a low number it undermines the one person, one vote. It might reduce my workload in my district office but that's not my objective. My objective is to continue to let the people of district 90 have this coalition district that is clearly Hispanic driven, majority Hispanic. The district is currently 70 percent Hispanic. It's just that there aren't that many registered voters and we're working on that every week. My district manager goes to the citizenship seminars, does voter registration. We're continuing to increase voter registration in the district every session. Yes, I would gladly yield to my chairman.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Do you yield.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I do.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: He yields.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Mr. Burman where is your district located now and how is it effected by this current amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I have proudly said the entire time I've been in the legislature that I am the only member that only represents Cowtown because my district is the only district that is entirely contained within the city of Fort Worth. And it is made up of numerous neighborhoods all of whom contribute very significantly to the wealth of what we have in Cowtown, USA. My district is predominantly minority precincts. I am going to be loosing that claim to fame as a result of redistricting and that's rightful just distributing the population. We accept and recognize that under any plan I need to start representing or the District 90 needs to start including the Sansom Park municipality which is just to the northwest edge of Fort Worth. It needs to start representing the Blue Mound community which is just to the north of Loop 820 and just west of I35.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: That's close to Saginaw and Meacham Field, that area?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, I do have the Meacham Field area now. I have everything inside Loop 820. I don't have Saginaw, it's just outside Loop 820 and I won't be picking up Saginaw because it's, frankly, got too many white people in it. Where as Blue Mound is 50 percent Hispanic registered voters.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: But then you would come back down from Blue Mound road to 28th Street, the north side coliseum.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I have all of the -- I used to be able to stay until Charlie got the museums in the last round of redistricting, I used to be able to say that I had everything that you come to Fort Worth to see. I have the stockyards, I have one of the most exciting downtown cities in the country and I had the museums. But during the last redistricting Charlie got the Amon Carter Museum and the Modern Museum and that complex where the Will Rogers Museum and I miss having that but Charlie is big into the fatstock show and rodeo. And I can appreciate how much he enjoys representing that part of Fort Worth I miss it. But I have the Southwestern Baptist Seminary in the district, I have the Carter-Riverside community which is a long famous community for it's involvement, commitment to the city of Fort Worth and I'm going to loose some of that in the redistricting process.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: What about the downtown district.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, I currently have all of the downtown area. Unfortunately because of population trends downtown has moved from being predominately low to moderate income people of color to predominately higher income white folks. So I'm go going to loose all of the downtown area as a part of the redistricting already and I've accepted that as a necessity.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: Does that include the convention center and the new hotels renovations.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm going to loose the convention center and all those wonderful hotels downtown. And I'm going to loose a lot of cultural attractions to downtown that I'm going to regret having to loose but I understand.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN SPEAKER: And who would pick that up?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mark is going to pick that up. Mark Veasey will be moving into the downtown area and it will be the whitest and most Republican part of Mark's district.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Representative Bonnen raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Phillips for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Members, Transportation committee and especially those that maybe waiting for us, we are not going to back in tonight. Obviously, it maybe late. I just wanted to let everybody know that Transportation committee we will not be going back in tonight to committee. Thank you.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to speak against the amendment.

REP. BURT R. SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. And I know Lon is going have a question and I'll yield in just a second. I understand what Representative Burnam is doing but I do have some legal concerns. We tried to iron out what those legal concerns are and one of the problems is that this amendment reduces, even with his amendment to the amendment, reduces the SSVR District 90 below 50 percent. Now his amendment to the amendment involving Como brought it from 48.4 percent to 49.1 percent but it's still below 50 percent. We took testimony from *MALTA which basically said this was one of the districts they thought needed to be above 50 percent. We had testimony to that effect. We effectuated that testimony on behalf of trying to ensure that we had this district above 50 percent trying to accommodate what we thought needed to be done. And also what *MALTA thought needed to be done. This by itself it doesn't look like much but when you start talking about statewide retrogression analysis we've got to be consistent. I cannot be -- I don't want to be -- let me put it this way I don't want to be inconsistent with, you know this district and then go into Harris County and listen to that issue and maybe some other places. So the idea that *MALTA even testifies to the effect -- specifically to two districts and this being one of them that it needed to be 50 percent. That's why we did what we did. As much as I respect Representative Burnam and understand what he's trying to do with this and it's not just sitting off by itself. Some arguments can be made that it's already a minority opportunity district, etc., etc. But we have specific testimony and so I respectfully going to have to move to table this amendment. And, yes, I will yield.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: Mr. Burnam, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: The gentleman has agreed to yield. I would like to ask him a couple questions.

REP. LARRY TAYLOR: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Now, Chairman, were you not able to hear Representative Veasey when he talked about the letter earlier where representatives of the Latino community have said that that criteria is not particularly important in this instance and that in fact it's -- we're talking about barely more than one percentage point in one criteria.

REP. BURT R. SOLOMONS: I understand what the letter seems to indicate but it doesn't refutiate and take back the testimony by *MALTA on the record as well. I am trying to be consistent and be very conservative in what we're doing with the legal risk involved in this map. I know it doesn't make some people happy but I think that's in the best interest of the map as a whole and the body as a whole. And I understand. I am very sympathetic, don't get me wrong put that on the record but at the end of the day when you look at retrogression statewide analysis we've got *MALTA testifying very specifically to your district. We have a letter that says it shouldn't be a big problem but at the end of the day we've got conflicts on that and we're off to the side trying to discuss that. And I felt like it was in the best to go ahead and not have an unnecessary legal risk in connection with it. So I'm going to respectfully move to table?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Burt, can I ask you a couple of other questions?

REP. BURT R. SOLOMONS: Sure.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Okay. Did you have the opportunity to hear me when I was reading the quote from the Department of Justice Redistricting Guidelines that they put out this year.

REP. BURT R. SOLOMONS: Go ahead.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Oh, would you like for me to read it into the record again.

REP. BURT R. SOLOMONS: Sure, go ahead.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'll go ahead and do that. "In determining whether the ability to elect exists on the benchmark plan on whether it continues in the proposed plan the attorney general does not rely on any predetermined or fixed demographic percentages at any point in the assessment. Rather in the departments view this determination requires as functional analysis of the electoral behavior within the particular jurisdiction or election district." Mr. Solomons, you are proposing to rip out Lake Como which is at the heart of this district and consistently votes with the majority Hispanic community in support of a candidate that they prefer in school board elections, in city counsel elections and legislative and congressional elections. And while I understand that you're trying to establish a norm here do you understand that it looks a little hypocritical to people that are looking at it closely because if you were really following the models recommendation you would create five new Hispanic districts not just call Representative Farrar's and my district new Hispanic districts. Those two counties in Harris County and Tarrant County already vote for who they want to vote for and most of the minority communities don't want to have their districts ripped up.

REP. BURT R. SOLOMONS: You know what? It's not hypocritical especially when *MALTA doesn't mention your district as one which they testified and said they need it to be above 50 percent. If your letter said that, yes, it may not be a qualifying factor. In fact in District 90 it's not an issue. We agree it's not an issue. Then we wouldn't have this debate. At this point in time they haven't retracted that testimony and I'm going to move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Burnam to close.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you members. All I'm asking you is to let the people in the Lake Como community to stay where we have been in since it was created by Federal Judge in 1978. Additionally I'm asking you to let my across the street neighbors, who we have been neighbors with for 30 years to stay in the District 90. That's been District 90 since they moved into that neighborhood. I think it's completely inconsistent when you look at the broad scope of things to say we're going to rip this district up so we can pretend like by adding a few census tracks here and a few census tracks there that are randomly scattered around the edges of the district that you are making this any stronger of a Hispanic impact district. So I would ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Veasey, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Would the gentleman yield?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Yes.

THE SPEAKER: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Mr. Burnam, you have read the letter that MALDEF put out today in your District 90. And District 148 in Harris County that is represented by Representative Farrar.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I'm familiar with the letter and I have read the comments from the Department of Justice concerning redistricting guidelines into the record today twice.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: And you are aware of that the MALDEF, NAACP, Texans for lawsuit reform, all sorts of groups and organizations, the Texas Public Policy Foundation that all these different organizations that they have input and influence and they lobby members on what they think should be a good redistricting plan but that not all the time are all those recommendations taken. And I was just wondering do you think that Chairman Solomons or the body is going to let one organization draw the entire map because I don't think that every recommendation that MALDEF has made has been accepted. And so, I'm trying to figure out when they've already put out a letter saying that your district is already Hispanic opportunity district and so is the 148 represented by Representative Farrar --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: You know and --

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: -- why we are letting them have the control in these two instances.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: -- Mark, in answer to your question. I am glad you brought up the NAACP because it couldn't have been clearer to me for longer that the representatives of the NAACP in Fort Worth are extremely agitated about a number of things with regard to this redistricting process. One, they are agitated that I'm being forced down further and further into your district and dividing that community, dividing the JP districts, dividing constable districts, dividing city council and school board districts in a historically -- the southeast part of Fort Worth that is represented by African Americans. In doing that, it forces you into the west side -- west south side of Fort Worth. I'm clear that the NAACP doesn't like that and I'm clear that the NAACP does not like the idea of ripping Como out of District 90 because Como has been a part of the District 90 legislative district since the Federal judge established it. And I think it is equally clear that this is all conflagance[sic] to look like we're not in retrogression. And this amendment that we are talking about right now is the last opportunity to avoid significant retrogression and Tarrant County. We have retrogression in your district, we have retrogression in my district, we have retrogression in the east Arlington district, and we have retrogression in District 96. That makes this an illegal plan. And as soon as the governor signs a plan like this into law, there will be a lawsuit filed by the NAACP in Fort Worth over it. And I'm trying to help us get on down the road. Let's resolve Tarrant County now, right here within the next few minutes in a way that we can avoid litigation on Tarrant county.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: When you look at the, you know, the fact that the chairman won't move at all and restore the districts back to their original status, even though it was already a Hispanic district. And when you look at the fact that the press reports that wrongly came out the next day after the hearing saying that there are two new Hispanic districts we're creating, that they are trying to create this false sense that two new Hispanic districts were created when in fact they were already Hispanic opportunity districts?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: I think everybody is going to see through this false contrivance and I think everyone is going to recognize the chairman's unwillingness to bend and be flexible and work is part of the problem with not only the plan in Tarrant County but the State as a whole. And I think that's the reason we are going to end up in court and not know for sure what our lines are going to look like by the filing deadline in January.

REPRESENTATIVE MARC VEASEY: Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Burnam sends up an amendment. Representative Solomons moves to table. The question is on the motion to table. Members, vote aye, members vote nay. The clerk will ring the bell. Show Mr. Burnam voting no, Mr. Solomons voting aye. Have all voted? There being 100 ayes, 44 nays and four present not voting, the motion to table prevails. Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, I would like -- members, hello -- Members, I'd like to suspend the following rules, the five day posting rule to allow the Committee on Defense and Veteran Affairs to consider S.B. 1732 at 8:00 a.m. April 28th, 2011 in E2012.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Phillips, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Would the gentleman yield on his announcement?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield for question?

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Yes, sir.

THE SPEAKER: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: There's a great debt of gratitude for your service tonight and we sure appreciate it.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Thank you, Larry.

REPRESENTATIVE LARRY PHILLIPS: Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. Motion is adopted. Following announcement. The clerk will read the announcement.

CLERK: The Committee on Defense and Veteran Affairs will meet at 8:00 a.m. on April 28, 2011, at-E2.012. This will be a public hearing to consider S.B. 1732.

THE SPEAKER: Chair announces the signing of the following in the presence of the House.

CLERK: S.B. 85. S.B. 323. S.B. 439. S.B. 527. S.B. 638. S.B. 1226. S.B. 1846.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Gallego. Members, plan 183 is withdrawn. Members, we are now moving to the Coastal Plains for the next stop of the Texas tour. Mr. Walle, Mr. Hunter, Ms. Morrison, will be our tour guides. All right. Members, we are going to map 172. Chair lays out the following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Walle.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Walle to explain his amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members. This amendment creates a community of interest for the city of Sugar Land and for the Asian American residents of Fort Bend County. This amendment is not a partisan amendment it doesn't create a district for Republic or Democrat, it simply unites the community of interest. The map that came out from the seems to be convoluted and violates the city boundaries, it's precincts fracture the city of Sugar Land and diluted Asian American voting power in Fort Bend County. This amendment reunites the city of Sugar Land and creates an opportunity for Asian Americans in Fort Bend County. The current H.B. 26 is 33 percent other which is the closest proximity we have for Asian American voters. The Solomons' committee map is made up of 20 percent other. This 20 is clear retrogression. This amendment puts over 30 percent other or Asian American into H.B. 26. Also the combined African American, Hispanic group makes up 34 percent and with the Asian American -- and Asian Americans over 30 percent this creates a great opportunity for a coalition formation so that everyone of the three groups could elect a candidate of their choice. Asian Americans would have the greatest single voice in this district something that really -- that doesn't really exist anywhere else in the State. Mr. Speaker, I move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Howard, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Would the gentleman yield for some questions?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Walle?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Okay. Do you realize that the three representatives that represent Fort Bend County have all signed off on the plan that we have. We have worked together. We have represented the majority of these three districts. And the fourth one that's being created we have -- one of the three of us has represented the majority of it, also. We've already agreed to this plan. We like the plan. Everybody's agreed to it and we don't feel like we need to change this plan. Are you aware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I'm aware of that.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: We've all signed off on it.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well, I would only add that Fort Bend County is not in Harris County but it's important to the Houston region, to the Harris County region and Asian Americans make a significant population voting block in that county that I believe that they need to have somebody that they can have the opportunity to elect.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Mr. Walle, are you aware that the majority of the Asian community is in District 26 which I represented for the last 17 years. And as a matter of fact I had a group of them here yesterday with a resolution. I've represented those people. I get along well with them. I go to all their events. They ask me to represent them which I do and we do have two Asian Americans on our city council which I represent the city, the majority of it. And we already have that. They are already represented.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Are you asking me a question? I'm not --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: I'm asking you, are you aware that we already have that representation? They are primarily concentrated in the city of Sugar Land, are you aware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I'd -- the way I would answer your question is that being that there are significant -- again there are significant amount of Asian Americans in this county it would be very important for the future and the future growth of Fort Bend County that they have an opportunity to elect -- and it doesn't have to be somebody that's Asian American, but somebody that's represents their interest. And as you so eloquently stated, you are stating to me that you represent their interest and I take your word at that.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Well, they are concentrated already. They are concentrated in the city of Sugar Land. You are saying they are all over the county. Their concentration is within the city limits.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Within the city of Sugar Land, correct.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Yes, thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Zerwas, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

THE SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Sure.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you Representative Walle. I was -- I'm sorry I missed some of the dialogue between yourself and Representative Howard in terms of the proposal that you are looking at for Fort Bend County. You are a Harris County Representative, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: And to the east side there.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Correct, north.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Can you give me a little bit of background what drew your interest to Fort Bend County?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: For me -- and I mentioned this earlier. I think you were out when we had the --

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Yeah, I apologize.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: -- the Asian American communities for us in the Houston region in the Harris County region -- and I admit I am from Harris County there's no denying that. But Fort Bend County in the explosion of Asian American population in Fort Bend County, particularly the city of Sugar Land as Representative Howard corrected me on has a significant increase. And I believe it's important that they have somebody that they can elect and represent their interest. And it will be a candidate of their choice. And as I mentioned before, it might not be an Asian American but I think for the future I think it's important that if there's an Asian American and it might be a Republican. Asian American Republicans from Fort Bend County, they have the opportunity to elect that person.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: And I think those considerations as Representative Howard and myself and Representative Reynolds looked at, how do we best represent the exploding growth in Fort Bend County is in fact reflected in the map that Representative Solomons put forth. I certainly can speak to the cultural diversity in Sugar Land and that diversity is actually reflected in the city council, on school boards and thing like that, where I think you see a tremendous diversity of representation there. And I think as I heard Representative Howard say the tail end of his comments, you know, the opportunity for those people to run and to run competitively there I think is there. And I can't -- I must say it was not accidental that the map appears as it is. I think something is taking into consideration the cultural diversity is a reflection on that map. I would suggest that perhaps your amendment was trying to attempt to reflect that also; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And I agree with that notion because Fort Bend County is very diverse. I have family members that live in Rosenberg and it's a very culturally rich county and I admire it for it. And for me, I think -- my chief of staff, Neesha Dave, is from Fort Bend County. And so for me I think that having folks that is reflective of their communities is very important. And in Fort Bend County that's just -- it's an international county. There's no single -- there will be no single majority population or ethnic group in Fort Bend County and I think it's a great, rich culture down there.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Would you agree that the individuals that do reside there and do represent and know those communities and cultures pretty well probably reflected that in the proposed map?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I would say that in the proposed map I think what we need to do is fast track that because my amendment particularly tries to increase the amount of Asian Americans in Fort Bend County and particularly for an Asian American to be elected in that district. And for me, I would say that we need to fast track that.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: And I don't know if fast track is the right way to look at it or if we should be doing things with our district maps that fast tracks anything. But I certainly think that we ought to be considerate of the diversity of the population and I would have to say that I think personally that map is reflected in what we see in the Burt Solomons' proposal that we have before us. I know you don't agree with that or else you wouldn't put forward an amendment with that --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: -- but that would also -- there's probably more than one way to skin a cat but if I were to look at a map those people that live in that particular district day in and day out know those communities probably are going to come up with a pretty accurate map. Would you agree with that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well, I would say that for me, and being somebody from Harris County where we're adjoining Fort Bend County, and I'll give you an example. Representative Hubert Vo has a coalition district where there is no single majority minority but they do have a large segment of Asian Americans that have decided -- that whole community has decided to elect Representative Hubert Vo. Well, you know in this current proposal we eliminate the opportunity to bring back Representative Hubert Vo and I think it's -- at one instance we were -- I'm trying to make sure that we have a coalition district for -- with this amendment for Fort Bend County for an Asian American to have the opportunity to win a seat. At the same time we are eliminating Hubert Vo's district, that community's district in Harris County and I think it's wrong.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Well, I'm certainly not here to speak to the particular dynamics that are going on over there. I think we got with the size of Fort Bend County growing like it has and trying to make sure that people have the opportunity to be represented in a fair fashion, I'd have to say that we have our hands full with that. But I would have to say that, you know, I believe the original map that is proposed by the Representative -- Chairman Solomons is the one that does reflect the opportunity for any culture to come forward and step forward and run a fair and balanced race out there. And I'm not saying yours doesn't but the map that basically has been generated by those individuals that live in that district reflects that. And I think it probably reflects it -- probably better than somebody looking at it from outside in. And so, I appreciate your consideration in all of this. We are very fortunate in Fort Bend County to have the population that we have out there but I would have to say also respectfully that the map that Representative Solomons brought forward to us will in fact allow any individual from any cultural background to run a fair and competitive race in that environment.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well, we will see the next election cycle that pans out Dr. Zerwas.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN ZERWAS: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I move adoption.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Howard to speak in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Members, I'm really a little bit confused why a representative from Harris County is coming forward with Fort Bend County showing us how we need to do our redistricting and that three of us who were there, two Republicans and one Democrat, have already decided how we want to have our districts represented in the future. They are fair districts. They are all within a couple of hundred people in each of the districts. We talked about -- Mr. Walle talked about the diversification of the -- particularly Asian community. They are concentrated primarily in my district. I've been representing those people for 16 years. They overwhelmingly voted for me, I've never lost an election less than 60 percent and I get along well with those people. Representative Zerwas has represented Wharton County for all the time that he's been in the legislature. That's going to be part of the new district that will encompass the part of the Fort Bend county. The majority of the new district will still be Fort Bend County, so we've been representing this area. We like to keep representing it. Again, Representative Reynolds is the third representative in the county. He's signed off on the district. He's happy with his district. I'm happy with mine. Representative Zerwas is happy with his. So I would ask you to oppose this amendment.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. Apparently you've heard some of the dialogue this amendment was really not drawn by Mr. Walle and by any members of the effected district. And I haven't heard anything but from Mr. Walle that they are in favor of it. It does put out on in District 26 and, quite frankly, from what I can gather and some of you have gathered that they are not in favor of it. So we'll let the will of the House but I'm going to move to table and I'm probably going to oppose the amendment.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Walle to close.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, members, this -- the explosion of the Asian American community in Fort Bend County is one of the fastest growing counties in the state and in our region. But for us it's important and I'm sympathetic to the Asian American community in Fort Bend County. It's a community that needs representation and I think that you have to have somebody that both interest and to a certain extent -- and sometimes they need somebody they can confide in. As mentioned before there is some new elected officials from the Asian American community down at Fort Bend County that have been elected. It's important that they have an opportunity to elect somebody that reflects their views. And if it -- if it's somebody that looks like them, then that's more the better because that's somebody that represents their issues. And I vote in favor -- against the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Speaker?

REP. JOE STRAUS: Ms. Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Walle, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Walle, would you say that sometimes it's taken in our history of our state outside groups, outside interests to do perhaps what members of our body weren't willing to do. For instance, I've got a district that was created by a lawsuit and several of us here have those sorts of districts and, of course, those -- somebody from the outside had to come in because this body wasn't willing to do that. Would you had say that --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: -- similar to what you are trying to do.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Correct. And being that we have single member districts now -- allowed in the early 70's to have the great Mrs. Thompson in this body. Allowed folks that represented them and sometimes looked like them and have the opportunity to elect somebody that voted their interest. And again, this amendment doesn't, you know, it's not a -- it's actually a swing district to be honest with you but it would increase the opportunity that an Asian American could win.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: So you're just basically -- you are demonstrating that there's -- the possibility is there. Even though, perhaps that the folks effected have made a different decision.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: And Harris County is directly adjacent to Fort Bend County, correct? It's not like you are coming in from Mars or somewhere.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: No, I mean a lot of people -- a good number of people from Fort Bend County work in Houston. In the central business district, in Greenway Plaza, in the medical center, work at the University of Houston, work at UT med center, Baylor, it's a highly educated community and they work in Harris County.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Representative Walle sends up on amendment. Representative Solomons moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Clerk ring the bell. Show Representative Solomons voting aye, show Representative Walle voting no, Representative Gutierrez voting no. Have all voted? Show Representative Dutton voting no. Being 99 ayes and 38 nays, nine present not voting. The motion to table prevails. Members, we are on plan 178. Nueces County. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Hunter.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE TODD HUNTER: Mr. Speaker, members this is something that we didn't get in committee. We got in one precinct changing it to two precincts. Meets the criteria and it's been approved by the committee.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Representative Hunter sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Plan 180. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Morrison.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Morrison.

REPRESENTATIVE GEANIE MORRISON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. This amendment impacts only Representative Kleinschmidt's district and my district. What we are looking at doing is exchanging two counties by moving Dewitt County back to my district which I have represented since 1999 and keeping the communities of interest more intact and moving Karnes County into Representative Kleinschmidt's. Exchanging counties leaves both districts within the allowable population deviation. And I have spoken to Representative Kleinschmidt and the amendment is acceptable to him. And I also believe the amendment is acceptable to the author. So, thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I move adoption.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Representative Morrison sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Mr. King of Zavala, Representative Gonzalez, Representative Oliveira, Representative Raymond. Plan 161. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by King of Zavala.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative King of Zavala.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This amendment that I have addresses two counties in south Texas, La Salle County and Jim Hogg County. I'll give you just a little background just a minute here. I've represented the La Salle County for a number of years now. It is part of the Winter Garden community which is comprised of several counties, Dimmit, Zavala, La Salle, Frio counties make up the Winter Garden area. I do business in LaSalle County, all of things that we do -- we represent an area for a long, long time. It's part of the local

(*inaudible) development council in that area, plays ball there and have business interests there and the whole issue like that. The Solomons' map is -- and in the district that Mr. Solomons has drawn for District 80 there. The district I represent, I'm already picking up 90,000 new people that I have never represented before. And they moved La Salle county into District 35, and they moved Jim Hogg County which I've never represented, so that's actually 95,300 people that are new into the district -- into District 80. And so, what my amendment proposes to do ladies and gentlemen is to take La Salle County and move it into District 35 and -- no, I'm sorry -- to take La Salle County and move it out from District 35 into District 80 that I represent and I have represented for years. And take Jim Hogg County and move it into District 35 which Representative Aliseda currently represents. He's never represented Jim Hogg or La Salle county, either one. Jim Hogg County has 5,300 people, La Salle County has 7,500 people. The demographics are about the same. The Spanish surname voter registration is about the same. And, quite candidly, it doesn't change Mr. Aliseda's district very much. It changes his district from a 55.1 percent Republican district in the Obama election -- no a 55.5 percent Republican district in the Obama election to a 54.9 percent Republican district, if you make this change. He's never represented either one of those counties and I have represented La Salle for a long, long time and it's a good fit. And I've already taken 90,000 new folks into the district and I think there is an amendment to the amendment which is acceptable to me because I'm a reasonable kind of person.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Raymond.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD RAYMOND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. Members, the proposed District 80 that Representative King has right now comes into Webb County which I represent Laredo and Webb County. And this amendment to his amendment simply puts some landmarks that currently in my district, back in my district and involves movement of no people whatsoever. It's acceptable to Mr. King. Acceptable to Mr. Solomons and I move adoption.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Representative Raymond sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Is there objection to the amendment to the amendment? Is there objection to the amendment to the amendment. Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. We are back on the King amendment as it is amended. Chair recognizes Representative King.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Members, I visited with a number of you about this and this makes a negligible difference in the electoral numbers of the district. But it's a huge difference. If you look at the maps on the computer it just looks better. It makes a straight line instead of a crooked line, and in terms of travel and working --

REP. JOE STRAUS: Representative Aliseda, for what purpose?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: May I ask the --

REPRESENTATIVE KING: -- Aliseda than it is for me.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: -- may I ask the gentleman.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. King, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Sure.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Mr. King, you and I have talked about this amendment; is that not correct?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Yes, we have.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: And you understand that I'm not happy with this amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: I understand that you are concerned about loosing three-tenths of a percent. Yes, sir.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: That's not really the way I perceive it. You understand I'm a freshman. And -- how long have you been here?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Yes, we do understand that you are a freshman. Yes, sir.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: All right. How long have you been here, sir?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: I have been here eight terms.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: All right. And how long was it since you have had an opponent?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: I'm sorry.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: How long has it been since you have had an opponent?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Oh, three or four terms.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: All right. You understand that I'm likely to draw an opponent and any reduction in my Republican numbers could effect the possibility about whether I come back or not. Would you agree with that?

REPRESENTATIVE KING: I would and I'm likely to draw an opponent also. But you know I'm a big boy and I'm okay with that. That's why we run for office, Mr. Aliseda.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: You will concede with me though that this particular change to my district does in fact reduce my Republican numbers.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: By maybe three-tenths of a percent in the Obama election which was a high watermark for the Democrats in our part of the world. Yes, sir.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: And perhaps in the Obama election but if you go further down the ballot where my election is likely to end up closer to the Supreme Court races, it significantly reduces my numbers. For example, in the district I'm currently in I won my election by 1600 votes. The amendment that you have will reduce my Republican numbers by about 600 votes down ballot.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Well, you know I have a lot of sympathy for you there, Mr. Aliseda. But, you know, we're not here to try to reelect certain people. We're here to draw districts that make sense for Texans and the folks that we represent in south Texas.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Let's talk about --

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Let's talk one at a time here, Mr. Aliseda.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Let's talk about making some sense, Mr. King. La Salle County is in Eagle Ford Shale. We are going to talk economic sense now. The La Salle County is in Eagle Ford Shale.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: And the economics are important to you, Mr. Aliseda?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Well, they are in the sense that I'm trying to keep community of interest with Eagle Ford Shale. And I happen to have in my other part of the district McMullen County, Live Oak County, and those also lie in Eagle Ford Shale. So economically that would be a community of interest with the rest of the district. Jim Hogg County happens to be several --

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Let me tell you we don't draw the districts for what's best for the economics of the members either. But, that being said, the Eagle Ford Shale is also in three of the four counties that I represent. It is in -- that I will be representing, it is in Webb County, it is in Dimmit County, it is in Zavala County, it is in Frio County, that's four and in La Salle County. But like I said, if you want to talk about that, that's just --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I could say the same about the Atascosa -- my currently in any district. But you understand I oppose you in this amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: I do understand that and I visited with you extensively about it and you understand that it's a district and it's a county that I have worked for a long time and it's been in my district and it makes a marginal change in your electoral reelection possibilities.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I do have in my district change about 90,000 people. So I understand where you are coming from that is something that you have to deal with when you go through this process but I would ask that the other Republican members in the House and my freshman class members vote against you on this amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: I was hoping you would say that because you pointed out that I have served here eight terms. And in eight terms and all the debate I have ever had here I have never called on the Democratic or Republican party to support me on anything. I called on each of the members as representatives of their individual districts to make decisions that are good for Texas and for their districts and not for one party or the other.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Redistricting unfortunately is a very political process. It's probably one of the most political things we do here every ten years. So yes, I think a partisan politics can play a role in here.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Yeah, what you are worried about three-tenths of a percentage point --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I disagree with it that much. If it was --

REPRESENTATIVE KING: I think you should be more worried about the people we represent and communities of interest --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: If it were only that --

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Winter Garden community is a community of interest. La Salle County, the Middle Rio Grande Development has been a part and has been a part of that cog for -- ever since we've had a cog in the 70's. There's all kinds of reasons except for the fact that you just don't want to do it.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: No, if it was only .3 percent I probably wouldn't care but it's significantly more than that.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: It might be five-tenths of a percent. Yes, sir.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Thank you, Mr. King.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: You're welcome. Members, I move the adoption of this amendment. Or is it acceptable to the --

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to speak on the amendment as amended.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Mr. Speaker, members, that -- you know I've known Representative King since we came in together in '95. You all know Mr. Aliseda. I think you heard the debate. Mr. Aliseda is going to stand up here and argue why we shouldn't vote against it. Mr. King has made his argument. This is one of those things where it is negligible and in some numbers but it seems to be -- it does have some impact. Not lot and there is some. And this is one of those tough decisions that you all are going to have to make on this because it's so minor in numbers but it means a lot to both parties. And, you know, in trying to conduct this -- whatever we are doing, series of amendments. There is some areas that I feel very strongly about. There are some things I have told the members I'll move to table and there's some things I said that I wanted to do and I wanted to defend the map and I wanted to defend the committee's work. This is one of the rather negligible issues that we only for the members themselves I think y'all have to make your decision based on what they are doing. So, yes, Mr. Smith, that's exactly what I'm doing. Thank you very much.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Aliseda in opposition.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: All right. Members, you know Mr. King and I have been getting along very well this session. I consider him a brother from another mother. But this is one of the things that we discussed often and I have my reasons. I honestly believe that Jim Hogg County besides taking me way down south almost to the edge of the valley there or at the edge of the valley, it does change my Republican numbers.

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: Mr. Speaker.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Anchia, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Aliseda, do you yield?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Yes, I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: What's wrong with Jim Hogg county?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: There's nothing wrong with Jim Hogg County --

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: My mother-in-law who is 83 years old lives in Jim Hogg County, my wife was Ms. Jim Hogg county in 1985, a county fair queen. What is wrong with Jim Hogg County.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Other than they tend to vote more Democrat which when you are Republican that makes a difference.

REPRESENTATIVE RAFAEL ANCHIA: Why is that a bad thing, is what I want to know Mr. Aliseda? Why do you not --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Well, I am a freshman and planning to run for reelection. For that reason and, you know, when I was talking about the numbers with Mr. King and he was looking at strictly Obama campaign race --

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Villarreal, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Yes.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Aliseda, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you. Mr. Aliseda, so is this amendment just about Jim Hogg County?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: It is about taking one county that's currently drawn in the Solomons' map, La Salle County, and giving that to Mr. King and him giving me another map -- excuse me, another county that has been in the Solomons' map, Jim Hogg County, and attaching it to my district.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And is -- does it change your ethnic composition any?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Yes, it does.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: How?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: A very small percentage it actually reduces my Hispanic voting age population.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: How about your Spanish surname registered voters?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: It increases it a little bit more.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: So, Mr. King's amendment increases the number of Spanish registered voters.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Spanish surname registered voters but it's not --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Thank you. Spanish surname registered voters.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: It drops my voting age population, Hispanic voting age population.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And we know that Spanish surname registered voters is really the relevant population to look at if you want to get a sense of a minority groups or a Hispanic populations ability to elect a candidate of choice; is that right?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I would leave that up to Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: And -- nonetheless I will answer it for you. And the answer is yes. Spanish surname registered voters are the groups that participate in elections not people who are non-citizens who happen to be Hispanic, who are being counted. So, you are fighting this amendment because it actually increases the number of Hispanics that can vote in your election.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: No, I'm not fighting for that.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: No, but that is the consequence of fighting this amendment.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: We are talking less than .02 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Well, let's just be honest because you made a very significant public record in wanting to oppose this because it reduces the number of Republican votes that you'll receive. And isn't it true that that is a consequence of boosting your district with Spanish surname registered reporters?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I would disagree that is the consequence.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: You are admitting that what Mr. King is attempting to do is put in more or at least restore, restore the number of Spanish surname registered voters.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I'm not conceding that my district necessarily loses.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Are you aware that your district actually drops in Spanish surname registered voters from where it is today in the district you got elected into to the Solomons' map from 38 to 40 percent?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I don't --

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Are you aware of that?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I don't think those numbers are correct.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Well, they are. I'm sorry. This is Anglo voting age population. Anglo voting age population actually increases from 38 to 40 percent.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: So you are using Spanish surname for what you want to talk about but now you want to talk about Anglo voting age population rather than using Hispanic voting age population. You want to compare apples and apples or apples and oranges?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I'm just trying to make the point that your district has become less. It has been lessened in Spanish surname registered voters. Mr. King's amendment attempts to make a difference with -- regarding communities of interest, the effect of which is that it will increase your share of Spanish surname registered voters and you seem to be opposed to that.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I'm not opposed to that. I'm opposed to the fact that it changes my district into a more Democrat district.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: It changes your district into a district with more voters who are Hispanic -- actual voters. Not voting age population.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Less than .02 percent.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Garza, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Will the gentleman yield?

REP. JOE STRAUS: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Yeah, I do.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Jose, I want to acknowledge and ask you a question. I remember your testimony from the voter ID bill and maybe this is a little retribution for that, I don't know. But this is about redistricting and about winning an election and representing the people in your district. I just want to ask you how hard did you run to win your election?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: My district is composed of seven counties. This current district is composed of seven counties. I ran that district up and down for months and months and months, so I worked very hard.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: And I know a lot of people here have talked about their relationship with their constituents. Do you feel that you represent something that is a little different being a Hispanic, being a Republican but also being rural and representing a certain demographic of Hispanic or a certain demographic --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I do believe that Hispanics need to have two parties representing them. Not just one. If one party represents them and they get taken for granted and the other party ignores them. So this is why I think it's important that we have two parties representing an ethic minority and I think the entire body ought to be thinking about that when they cast this vote.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: And how do you think your representation as a Hispanic candidate, as a Republican office holder for your district is different when it was previously held by -- what is the difference? I want to find out, what's different this time around? Why are you sitting here as a representative of that district, of that area?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Because my district is a conservative district and I ran as a conservative and I vote as a conservative and my opponent was a liberal.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: So, would you say that the attitude of the Hispanics in your current district the way it is being presented and we are supposed to defend the author's map because of the amount of work that they took in putting this together, I mean do you feel comfortable that it needs to stay the way it is?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I believe that the current map, although different for me is better for me than the map Mr. King is prosing by adding this additional county and taking away one of the counties. And the reason I believe that is I'm already just like Mr. King is upset about running and what is almost completely a new district I'm doing the same. And it's a gamble for both of us. I understand that. And I wish I could keep some of the counties that I have lost in this redistricting process but realistically, given what's in Nueces county, what's happening in the valley, things have to shift. So I'm absorbing counties that belong to Mr. Hunter for example. Counties that belong to Mr. Lozano or to Mr. Guillen, and that's why I'm apprehensive about even any changes on a map that I've looked at already and have agreed to.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Okay. Well, I already told you that I think you are a rock star and I think no one is going to represent people in your district better than you. Jose, thank you for answering my questions.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I move to table.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Mr. Speaker.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Walle, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Would the gentleman yield for a few questions?

REP. JOE STRAUS: He yielded to the floor.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: He doesn't want to answer any more questions?

REP. JOE STRAUS: He's yielded to the floor. Chair recognizes Representative King to close.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Thank you, members. I appreciate your attention on this and I apologize to each and every one of you for dragging you into something like this. For people that have been around for a while, quite candidly, we would have never gotten to this level. And some of the folks that are in charge around here are probably surprised that we are doing this discussion. But I think it's clear that the changes that it makes to Mr. Aliseda's direct are minimal. Whether it's two-tenths of a percent, or four-tenths of a percent, it's minimal. Any changes that it might make to Hispanic voting age population I think it shows a two-tenths of a percentage in the Hispanic voting age population. So, the numbers are really not relevant. The relevant issue is that you have a community of interest here for La Salle County and Hebbronville where Jim Hogg County is, it is a great place. I have nothing against the men and women who live in that community. It's a great place. I've just never represented it and it's not part of the Winter Garden which is basically the part north of Laredo and this is a county that I've represented for a long time. They've indicated to me that they would like to stay in the district and that I'm representing. And there just is no reason not to have anyone. You look at the amendment and I ask you to do that ladies and gentleman on the computer screen you will see that it creates straight lines instead of crooked lines and it just esthetically looks a lot better. And it's a lot more compact and it's communities of interest. It's not partisan issue in my view. And I understand that Mr. Aliseda is afraid that he's going to lose his reelection. And ladies and gentlemen we all have those issues when we get up here but that's the part of the thing we do when we sign up here. I don't think it's a Republican or a Democrat issue. It's simply -- this is one of those amendments where we are going to be able to make a judgment based on what's good for that area of Texas and the communities of interest and recognize in the things that have been going on in here. And with that I close and ask for your favorable consideration on this. I think Mr. Solomons left it to the will of the House if I heard him correctly and I ask for your favorable support on this amendment, ladies and gentlemen. I move adoption.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Representative King sends up an amendment. Representative Aliseda moves to table. Chair recognizes Representative King.

REPRESENTATIVE KING: Thank you, Republican colleagues that loves me has informed me that the he did file a motion to table. So I need to ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Representative King sends up an amendment. Representative Aliseda moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote no. Clerk ring the bell. Show Representative Solomons voting aye. Have all voted? Have all members voted? There being 75 ayes and 62 nays and six present not voting, the motion to table prevails. We are on plan 187. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Gonzalez of Hidalgo.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Gonzales.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually this amendment, members, is an amendment by myself, Representative Martinez and Representative Munoz. You know throughout the day I've heard many times from colleagues that about how much their districts mean to them and I'm no different. We've also heard colleagues object to amendments because they make major changes to their districts and I can definitely understand that because the proposed map dramatically changes the districts in Hidalgo County. In fact my district is dismantled completely. I'm left with the 1.5 percent of my district, 1.5 percent of my district. If you want to get a laugh and it's been a long day and you might need one, come look at the map that I put up here and it will show you a configuration of the distribution that I have. I won't comment what it looks like, you can make that determination for yourself but it is not a pretty picture. It is a completely different district from the one I've represented. District 40, which -- oh, not only is my district dismantled the number has been changed and I will no longer be District 41 under the proposed map, I would be District 40. The old District 40 that is currently belongs to Representative Pena would have 1.1 percent of its original district left. So basically the two districts have been swapped. They have been swapped and the Democratic precincts have been lopped off Representative Pena's district. So they tried to make it a Republican district. Not only did my district become dismantled in the process. Representative Armando Martinez's district was changed. He took in a different community of interest he never had. District 36 belonging to Representative Munoz was changed leaving him with 57.2 of his district. The DTD's which are my precincts in my old district, 14 of them were split. We heard this morning Chairman Solomons object to Farias' amendment because it increased the number of split VTD's. Well, in this one 14 VTD's have now been split. Hispanics have been packed and cracked in this map. In fact, my current district has an SSVR that we've been talking about today of 69 percent. It would now have 87.4 percent packing Hispanics into the new district. Whereas Representative Pena would go from 88.3 percent to 63.9 percent. A dilution of Hispanic voters of 24.4 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Would the gentle lady yield?

REP. JOE STRAUS: Ms. Gonzales.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Thank you, Representative. And speaking -- being that our testimony wasn't in the minutes from the committee, and we were all against the current map that was drawn, the Solomons' map for the valley. Just a quick question. Does this map create a new house district in the Rio Grande valley?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: No, it does not. It does not create a new house district. One of the complaints we've had and there's another amendment that will come up later is the fact that Hidalgo County is one of the fastest growing areas in the State. So is Cameron County. Despite the fact that we have an excess population in both counties we did not get a new district.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: And to accommodate Representative Pena and his party, they have done packing. Can you explain the packing for me? The SSVR in your current district, District 41 is what? Is it 69 percent?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: 69 percent and now my new district would go to 87.4 percent, an increase of 18.4 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So that's where we get the packing from because we are packing more people into your district.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: More Hispanics.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: More Hispanics.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: More Hispanic surnames.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So the SSVR in Representative Pena's current District 40 right now, as it is right now, what is that percentage?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: 88.3 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: But under the proposed plan that would be what?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: It would be 63.9 percent a drop of 24.4 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Which is a clear indication of --

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Cracking.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Cracking --

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Diluting Spanish surnames.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So the new proposed District 41 which is the old District 40. See -- what they had to do is go and swap your numbers, am I correct?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: The numbers were swapped I believe because I had pointed out to the committee that you compare the old district it follows the incumbent. And if you look at the numbers of the SSVR in the old district, compare it to your new district and it follows the incumbent. So they just switched the numbers and said, okay, now we are comparing 40 to 40 and you are really comparing two different districts.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So how does that district rank as far as size in the State of Texas? Is it one of the largest or is it one of the smallest?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Well Representative Pena's new district would be one of the smallest.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Okay. And what would that deviation be?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I believe it's a deviation of 4. --

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: A negative 4.1 percent --

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: A negative 4.1 percent.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Which is a population of 150,238 people; am I correct?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So our districts would go up in population but Representative Pena's new district where they are cracking it is going to go down in deviation and the population is going to get smaller only for one reason.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, one reason and that is to give him a district where he can be elected. But the reality is this. And let me point this out because I think it's a very important fact. The lines did not need to be changed we all have excess population. This was not a situation where somebody needed to go and take somebody else's population in order to create a district that would be -- that would be the right size. We all had excess and that's what this amendment does. If I can real quickly, let me say what the amendment does. The amendment is going to put us basically back to where we were. It will decrease a little of the population so that that way we are not over the amount we need to be since we all had excess. In fact I think Representative Pena had like 30 almost 32,000 extra. So it will put us back, it will preserve the communities of interest, it will not split any VTD's. It's going to be -- it is going to be more in line with everything that we've been talking about today. It is going to assure that we are not violating the Voting Rights Act and it's going to -- we are not going to be putting us in new cities. Right now I'm in seven new cities under the proposed map and all the cities I have including my core city of McAllen, Texas is gone. What I have left of McAllen is the street I live on. The street I live on and right around the corner from my home. And -- the rest of the city is gone.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So in regard to your new district what percentage of your district is left because of this new proposed plan?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: 1.5 percent of my district is left.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: I only have 72 percent of my district left and that is a big change because they have changed the communities of interest. But let me ask you a question. Do you live in your district?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I do live in my district, of course I do.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Okay. And do you -- do you know where this quote came from. "I'd rather not say where I live. If I run for election I definitely live in the district, he said." Do you know where that quote came from?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I saw that quote for the first time today, and it came from an article in one of the papers back home.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: It came from the Mid-Valley Town Crier and that was Representative Pena's quote in that paper --

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, it is.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: -- because they are questioning where he currently lives in his district. But if they change this map and he gets his way, then he will now live in the district that he would represent, am I correct?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: That's correct based on what's in the article.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Thank you Representative.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you Representative Martinez. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Mr. Speaker.

REP. JOE STRAUS: Mr. Munoz, for what purpose? REPRESENTATIVE SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.,: Would the lady yield for questions?

REP. JOE STRAUS: Ms. Gonzales, do you yield?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, I yield. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Representative Gonzales, when were you elected to Texas House?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Back in 2004. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: And since 2004 have you represented current District 41?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I have. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: And have you been involved in any competitive elections since 2004?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, as a matter of fact I have. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: And have you had any general election opponents?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I have had general election opponents, twice. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: And in the past few elections, have you been a preferred candidate of choice from constituents from District 41?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Apparently so. They've reelected me. And I'm proud to say that despite the fact that I always had a marginal district, I always won my election with a significant amount of the votes. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: And you are familiar with Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, right?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I am. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: And is your district subject to Section 5 preclearance.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, all of our districts are down in that part of Texas. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: If there's retrogression in minorities friends or minority citizens to have the preferred choice is now protected will your district be precleared?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: No. I don't believe our districts will be precleared because they would have to be redrawn and in compliance to the Section 5. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Now, in regard to the current House Bill that we are debating today, prior to the map being unveiled, did you submit any proposed changes to the map?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, as a matter of fact if you recall Representative Munoz, you and I and Representative Martinez submitted an amendment to the map and we all testified at the hearing. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: So the chairman and the committee members are aware of the proposed changes and the amendments that we had offered, right?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, they were. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Now, were they also aware that you were the preferred candidate of choice in 2004 since you were first elected?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, I believe so. I've been reelected each time. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Now, regarding the changes in your current district, currently as you mentioned earlier, less than 2 percent of your current district is in the new proposed district; is that correct?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: That's correct. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Now would you have to establish new constituent relationship?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I would have to start all over. I would end up loosing the cities of Sharyland, of Alton, of Palmhurst, most of McAllen and the part of Edinburg that I have represented and I would gain seven new cities. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Now, when you -- in your proposed new district, are Hispanics compacted? Or packed?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes. In the proposed district they are going to add more Spanish surnames voters. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Now what happens -- and I think you mentioned earlier -- to your current district under the map that we are debating at this point in time?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I'm sorry, could you repeat that for me. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: I guess specifically regarding to VTD's, were VTD's split in your current district?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, 14 of them were. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: And what else was done to your current district, in terms of not only splitting VTD's.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Well, they split 14 VTD's, my communities of interest are gone. You know the people, the new cities that I would represent I'm sure they are all wonderful people but I've never represented them and they weren't the ones who elected me. The people who elected me are the ones that expect me to run and they would be put into another district that they didn't ask to be put in. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Do you think that by removing the VTD's from your current district that that is a violation of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Absolutely. REP. SERGIO MUNOZ, JR.: Thank you, Ms. Speaker.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, Representative Munoz.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Members --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Aliseda, for what purpose?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Would the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Gonzales, do you yield?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, I will yield.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Ms. Gonzales, as I understand it you were at the redistricting committee hearing when MALDEF testified that this particular map would not violate the Voting Rights Act.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: What I remember, Representative Aliseda, one, MALDEF was talking about looking at how do they create more minority districts within the State. That's what they were looking at under Section 2. My complaints were under Section 5. The question was asked of Luis Figueroa as to whether he saw any other violations and he said that he didn't know of any. I spoke to Luis Figueroa afterward and he mentioned to me that he was going to go back and look because he wasn't aware of this. He was looking for the creation of new minority districts. So, frankly, I think that asking that question -- I don't know if Luis had not had an opportunity to look at the minutiae of every district down south or whether his focus has been in creating new districts but at that point afterward he told me, I need to go back and look at his information.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: But his information was that it would not violate the Voting Rights Act; is that correct? Yes or no.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: That's what his testimony was. And -- but I will -- I would be happy to share this information with him so that he can see the numbers for himself because they speak to it better than anything else now.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: And this particular map that you are proposing -- and once again we are going to talk about partisan politics because this is a partisan process -- does in fact change Mr. Pena's Republican numbers; is that not correct?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: What it does, yes it does. And let me tell you why, Representative Aliseda. What it does is it puts us back to creating communities of interest. It goes back to not splitting VTD's, it is not going to take Hispanic surname voters out and pack them and crack them. It is going to be a much better map. Now we do not redistrict as you know or as I believe you know we do not redistrict to accommodate a party affiliation or to accommodate a member who has decided to switch parties. We redistrict --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I disagree with that assertion.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: -- because redistricting --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I disagree with that assertion. I think it is one of the considerations that you can have in a redistricting process. So there we would not agree on. But looking at --

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Quite frankly, I don't believe that you throw three members under the bus to save one, I don't. And I think that that's being done under this now.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheets raises the point of order. The lady's time is expired and the point of order is well taken and sustained.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move adoption of the amendment and I also ask the remarks between myself and the other representatives be reduced in writing and put into the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, all of the comments that are made today since the beginning of debate on House Bill 150 will be reduced to writing and placed in the journal. Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against the amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Oliveira in favor of the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: Mr. Speaker, members, this is my fourth redistricting that I've gone through and I've seen some very interesting things and creative maps. I have even seen some fistfights on the House floor and it wasn't between Mrs. Thompson and myself. It's been a very interesting process, redistricting. And I noticed in the last couple of amendments, the discussion has been about partisanship. Certainly redistricting has some elements of partisanship but the issue here that we are bringing to you is a very simple one. The United States Constitution, the Voting Rights Act and even our own Texas Constitution is very clear that if you combine Cameron and Hidalgo County, you would be able to create 7.05 districts. Excuse me, gentleman, please. You will be able to create a brand-new minority opportunity -- majority probably -- precincts or districts for a Hispanic in the Rio Grande Valley. Now this is not intended to be against Mr. Pena who is my friend or Mr. Guillen or anybody else. It is simply about complying with the law of our great nation and our great state. It says, you must, you must, you shall advance opportunities for minorities to get seats. Why do we have these laws? Because historically minorities were never at the table. Blacks, Hispanics, Asian Americans, could never get elected. So these laws were promulgated and passed and our basic constitutional principles based on the one man, one vote rule that we would be able to have more representation. And here this is one instance where Chairman Solomons did cross county lines. And the sacred county line rule that he has not wanted to violate, he did. And in this particular -- abomination in House Bill 150, he did it and he did it in a way that discriminates against minority voters and minority representation. Quite simply put between the two counties, Cameron County has enough for 2.4 percent of a representative. Hidalgo has enough for 2.6 percent. These two counties could have been together, kept the representatives they had and had a brand-new seat. So when we are talking about and making perhaps a record for others to review, please note that in this particular instance my good friend Chairman Solomons has made the most blaring error. You could have created one new Hispanic -- and done minimal, minimal problems for all the members involved --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Burnam, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Chairman, did I just hear you say that you felt like there is a little inconsistency in the process of the day. And in this instance it seems like what is good for the goose is not good for the gander when it comes to the rule of not crossing county lines?

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: Yes, I mean this is one instance where it's blatantly clear that this particular bill without this other amendment presented to us on the floor today violates the county rule which seems to be principle behind this particular piece of legislation. So I'm submitting that if it's such a good rule, why did you do it here and why did you do it in a way that prevented an Hispanic representative and prevented the one point some-odd million people in the Rio Grande Valley from having a new voice, a new person at the table, and somebody to come up here and advocate for their needs and for their issues and be their representative. And that is a gross error in House Bill 150.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And do you see that inconsistency is being analogous to another inconsistency (*inaudible) where our parents as being compared to -- we drive for over 50 percent Hispanic voters as the criteria in creating minority districts on some occasions and on other occasions we're not really concerned about that.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: I'm very concerned about that. I think the rule is clear that you don't have to have a 50 plus district to be a minority opportunity district. In fact many of us are elected today in districts that don't have those kinds of percentages and I'm talking about minority members. When I first arrived here in 1981 there were maybe five Hispanics and we had -- when we had our caucus meeting it was at a breakfast table. And over the years -- but only through the courts did we get the relief we needed and did we get the representation that we were entitled to. And I think it's the very same thing for African Americans in Texas and the very same thing for people like Representative Vo who deserve a seat at the table as well.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So over the years, it appears that the only way the legislature is willing to -- well the legislature is not willing to do it. Over the years in order for Latinos to get a fair representation they are entitled to they have to take it to the courts. And the only way the representatives in Tarrant County ever got to single member districts for this kind of representation is through the court.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: I think that's exactly right. In fact, almost every lawyer on both sides of the docket in these cases will tell you that every gains that the minorities have made is not because of the votes in this body. It is -- it has happened because folks went to the courthouse to get the relief to see that the one man, one vote rule was honored and that people got their fair amount of representation. So I think it's a little sad today that in this year of our Lord 2011 we are still having to fights we had in '81, '91, 2001 and God forbid in another ten years for now.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And so what you are suggesting is that if we are going to bust county lines we should bust it for the purposes of adhering to the Voting Rights Act and assure those five Hispanic districts that had not been created in this process.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: I absolutely agree. I think the county line rule is an important rule but it is not -- it is not the thermometer, it is not the gage to decide all of these issues. There has been an overreliance upon the people that are in favor of this bill that have not recognized that. And I think we will have -- we will have to see, I guess, the relief at the courthouse for itself.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you for indicating that the Voting Rights Act is really important.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: I'm waiting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Guillen, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Oliveira, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: Mr. Speaker, I yield for questions.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Chairman, I am a little confused. You are talking about how the counties of Cameron and Hidalgo should have been -- the leftover of those two counties should have been put together.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: Correct. And it has been done in previous redistricting where there was a representative, I believe, it was done in two different redistricting, where there was a representative elected from a part of Cameron and a part of Hidalgo County. So there's historical precedent for this and it being a minority district as well.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: First of all, I pulled up the amendment on the amendment system and it doesn't show what you're advocating for.

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: This particular amendment I will agree does not create a seventh district. Those maps were laid out earlier today that would have create the seventh district.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: So what you are talking about --

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: What has happened here because is you were protected my friend and you got population from Hidalgo County so that you didn't have to keep the population you had before. What has happened here is Cameron and Hidalgo County because of that protection given to you, when you didn't need it to keep your minority opportunity districts or your majority, minority district, that population was sacrificed for your benefit and perhaps for Representative Pena and I speak with you in a friendly tone as I can. But this issue is bigger than you or me or Mr. Pena or even the other members of the valley delegation.

REPRESENTATIVE RYAN GUILLEN: Well, I appreciate that you make the assumption that something was drawn to my benefit. I am not sure about the logic behind that. But I wanted to make sure that I understood that everything you've been arguing about does not apply to the amendment that's about to be voted on; is that right?

REPRESENTATIVE RENE OLIVEIRA: The amendment is to fix the balance of what has happened in Hidalgo County which is another abomination when you look at what it did to their particular districts and how it divided communities of interest and how it changed Hispanic voter registration populations and basically also violated the Voting Rights Act and the constitution.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is -- we've heard a quite a bit of debate and this is one of those things where it's very personal to members and not an easy decision for the members of this body I'm sure. There --

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- I'm not finished yet. This amendment switches some precincts between District 41 represented by Representative Pena and District 40 represented by Representative Gonzales. I don't know that it materially impacts the SSVR's of either district or caused any major legal concerns. It does negatively impact Mr. Pena -- I guess, Mr. Pena's district members. This is a very personal thing to all these members in Hidalgo County. Members need to pay attention and do what they think is best. I just want to speak on the amendment in the sense that Mr. Pena and Mr. Guillen have not agreed to the plan but you have to understand the concern that Ms. Gonzales has in connection with her district. So y'all have to make another hard decision. So that's all I really want to say and I think Mr. Pena wants to close and he'll move to table. And I don't really think that I want to answer any questions. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Okay. Well then, Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Who drew the lines for this district? For the Rio Grande Valley? Mr. Solomons' map?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Redistricting committee.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Excuse me?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The redistricting committee.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: But who was the one drawing the lines? Who was telling them how to draw the valley map?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The chair is not advised.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So the chair doesn't know and the chair can't tell me who was telling them how to draw the lines? Because obviously people give their input, members give their input to the members map.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair is not advised --

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Can the vice chairman come out and tell me? The chairman can't? Of the committee?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: You have to ask Mr. Villarreal.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Mr. Villarreal, would you, please, answer that question for me?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Would the gentleman yield? Chair recognizes Representative Villarreal.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Thank you Representative Villarreal for standing there and answering questions. First of all, who drew the lines for the valley map? Who gave the ideas for the valley map?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I'm going to give you an answer. I don't know.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: That seems to be the answer but somebody had to have given the input because obviously the majority of the members from the valley gave their input to the committee that drew the line. It didn't matter to them because they didn't draw it the way we had asked.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: It's supposed to be a members map, as our chairman had mentioned from the beginning of the session.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Who drew the map? Who gave the authority for this map to come out?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Well, who gave the authority for the map to come out? The answer to that is the committee.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So the committee.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: I understand your concern and I share it. I don't support what happened in the valley. As you know I voted against the map coming out of committee. I believe another Hispanic district can be drawn with a combination of population in Cameron County, Hidalgo County, and Willacy County, and we failed to do that. For that reason I believe this map is compromised legally.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So then let me ask you, did the map -- whatever was brought up to the committee it doesn't matter who drew it or y'all don't know who drew it so y'all can vote on it? The committee can vote on something they don't know anything about?

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: Well, I can tell you this, ultimately, the chairman puts his name on the map and owns the map and brings it to the committee for feedback and public hearing and every individual on the committee has an opportunity to voice their concerns and cast yea or nay vote.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Pena to speak in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Members, I rarely get up here to speak. I certainly haven't gotten up to speak on an individual bill in the last two sessions except for when I had a bill before you. And I can understand the quandary that you all are having because I had it a moment ago when I had to make decisions about Dallas -- uncomfortable. I did not draw this map. But there's certain things I do know and certain things I did ask for. I said one, please, don't pair any of my colleagues. Don't pair any colleagues because I want them to have an opportunity. I think Representative Gonzales is a fine member. She's a liberal member but that's fine. I'm a conservative member, that's fine. No, no, no. Please, I mean no disrespect.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Let me finish, Armando. I wanted everybody to have a point of view and I certainly wanted everybody with a variety of opinions to have a point of view. So, when asked I said, please, don't pair my members. The other thing I said was if there's going to be spillover I would rather have an experienced member come into the valley than a freshman. And so Representative Guillen, who you know, is somebody who is respected, senior member, and so that was my suggestion. Those are the two suggestions I made. Let me finish Armando. And so there's a very conservative district in the valley. One I would say. And it is has been a 50/50 district. That was represented by Representative Gonzales. I live fairly nearby. Then there are other districts that are fairly Democratic. And so I think -- this is my observation of the map you want to put the conservative member in the conservative district. You want to give Representative Gonzales a very Democratic district. And that she has. She is not paired with me. Representative Martinez represents the same area that he represented before, save an additional area which is considered part -- what we call the mid-valley. That's fine, represent -- everybody has their place. This is what I believe to be fair. I think Representative Gonzales will go on to win without an opponent. It is a very Democratic district, probably in the eighties. She is a strong Democrat. She will get elected. The district that has been drawn that everybody reportedly says is for me is actually 52 percent Democratic district. That's fine. Because I believe that conservatives should have a voice and at least be able to compete in the valley which I call my home. And so for those of you who are out there deciding what is fair, what is right, please, listen to what I said. I believe this is fair, this is just, this is right. We have an experienced member that comes into the valley. The committee tried it's best not to break the county line rule because it's in our constitution. If the court says, a court, preferably the Supreme Court or a Federal court, says that the county line rule can be ignored then that's fine. I would love to have an extra district but until court says so that's what the committee did. And then everybody has their place. So I ask the members who are out there to stand with me on this. Obviously there are strong opinions but I do think that things are a little too personal here.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Martinez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Will the gentleman yield?

THE SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes.

THE SPEAKER: The gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Representative Pena, you talked about pairing. Was there a chance of snowball chance that there was going to be pairing in the valley?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: No. Somebody asked me a question what do you want and I said --

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: I didn't ask you that. I asked you whether there was a chance that there will be pairing in the valley.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Somebody asked me the question. I simply said, I do not want to be paired nor do I want my colleagues to be paired. That's what I said.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: But that's not what I asked you. Is there a chance of a members being paired in the valley with a population growth that we have?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: That's a question that --

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Simple yes or no.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I don't know the answer to that. It was not something I decided.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Do you support creating a new minority seat in the Rio Grande Valley in Hidalgo County?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: You do support that?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: You do support that? So, you will support this amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: No, I didn't say that. I will -- it doesn't create a new Hidalgo County district.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Will you support a new district in Hidalgo County?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Sure, if you can get the courts to agree that that's legal, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Do you live in your district right now?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I do.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Your current district?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes. And let me tell you a little bit of slur that you through at me earlier. The reporter asked me, where do you live and I said well I'm selling my house and I intend to move. And he said if you intend to move, where do you intend to move to and I said, well, if I intend to run for reelection, I will live in the district. But I rather not reveal that because I'm in the process of purchasing something. That's what I said.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Under your proposed plan you have a drop of 24 percent under the SSVR.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Understand, that this is not my proposed plan.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Okay. Did you have any input on the plan.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I told you the input that I had which is I did not want my colleagues paired. Which was done.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So you didn't have any input whatsoever on the --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: -- that I gave.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Representative, answer my question?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Okay. So did you have any input on the lines being drawn in Hidalgo County?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I had some input.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: What was your input?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I asked that my colleagues in the valley not be paired. I asked that the conservative members get a conservative district, and I asked that the other members represent the areas that they have. You getting the mid-valley. I asked that a senior member like Representative Guillen come in if there was spillover. I think that's basically what I asked for.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Did you have any input the way your district was drawn?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: No. When I met with the members what I said to you was, look I expect that the Republicans are going to maximize the conservative seats. That's what I told you, you can recall that. And I said I will not draw this map because one, I did not want to be involved. And two, that I didn't want to be involved in pairing or being involved in effecting my neighbors districts.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: So, the drawing of your lines in your district you didn't have any input in.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: No, I never even bothered to learn the red --

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: How many times did you meet with the valley delegation to talk about the map?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I think we had one valley delegation meeting.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Where you said what?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I said, look, guys, get ready -- conservative districts here, I would expect that Republicans to maximize their seats and be protected.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Thank you. Thank you. That's all we needed.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for questions?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: Thanks.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Castro, would the gentleman yield?

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: Yeah, he yields.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: Representative Pena, you agree that that map looks almost like a transformer cartoon or --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yes, it looks like a running man.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: -- a Tetris video game.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Yeah. Look, Joaquin, the district is fairly compact compared with the other districts in the State, if that's your question.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: It looks like a transformer cartoon or a Tetris video game and the reason I ask that question is because historically the lack of political power in the valley has had very practical consequences. For example, there is no medical school in the valley.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Amen.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: There's no law school in the valley.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Amen.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: There are very few that --

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Amen.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: -- and so you would agree that they are very practical, political and economic consequences to the decisions that are made in redistricting?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Amen. And let me tell you this. Democrats ruled this State for decades. And we suffered in squaller. Okay. And it's only until recently that some Hispanic Republicans have stepped forward that your party has started to pay attention to the people in south Texas.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: You are right. And there was a conservative Democrat that controlled the State and tended to favor the rural areas and we lost. Now what I don't understand is for years now getting ready for the census, I've been reading that valley is one of the fastest growing parts of the State and one of the fastest growing parts of the nation yet, in Texas there's no new districts for the valley?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: There needs to be.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: So you agree that there needs to be a new seat now.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I think there needs to be -- if you would give us the permission to break the county line rule. But the county line rule is in the constitution --

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: The county line rule -- the county line rule is broken several times in the map -- and I want to give you one example. One example, Aaron, and then I'm going to -- I'll ask you a question at the end. When there was a debate going on between Representative Farias and Representative Garza or he wasn't debating but we were debating Representative Farias' amendment. Representative Solomons made the point that there was a natural boundary in San Antonio so that Representative Farias would have cut in -- Mr. Speaker, can I finish asking him my question?

THE SPEAKER: Representative Bonnen raises the point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the permission to extend my questions. I'd like to finish my question.

THE SPEAKER: Members, this is the first request for extension of time. The question is limited to Mr. Castro finishing his questions. Members, is there any objection? Hear none. So ordered.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: I yield to finish the question.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Castro.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: My question is in five parts. No, I'm just kidding.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: See that Harvard education gets you far.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: So, Aaron, so Representative Solomons made a point that the reason that he didn't table Joe's amendment is that there was a natural boundary in the proposed map and that the amendment made the boundaries much more jagged. If you look at the valley map, the whole thing is jagged. There is no straight line in there. How did you justify those two -- how do you reconcile the justification on the San Antonio map and what we see here in the valley?

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: The entire map has that sort of thing and you know I didn't draw the map so I can't answer.

REP. JOAQUIN CASTRO: Thank you Representative.

REPRESENTATIVE AARON PENA: Thank you. I move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Gonzales to close.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members. Thank you for your patience. I know this is not an easy one. I do want to say, you know, I'm concerned about the arguments I heard about pairing. The reality is there was not going to be any pairing. We have so much excess population in our county as you well heard. We could have easily created a new district. And the idea that Ryan Guillen would be a new member, veteran member, brought in. I have a lot of respect for Representative Guillen but he's always been a part of our delegation. It's not bringing a new member and he has sufficient population in his own district that he didn't need to move over into Hidalgo County. The reason I brought this amendment is because I'm trying to restore our communities of interest. I'm trying to keep precincts from being divided. I'm trying to assure that the Spanish surname voting registration numbers are vital under the Voting Rights Act. And I'm trying to give the people that have voted for us, the people that they asked for to represent them. You know I read a blogger say -- a blogger say that well, this will be a more Democratic district for me and that I should be happy about it. The reality is that those are not the people that elected me. I'm proud of the fact that I have many Republicans that voted for me. I don't appreciate the characterization of what my voting record is. In fact, I can say that until recently, Representative Pena and I probably had a very similar voting record. And so this is about making sure that the preferred candidate of choice stays in their district. And that's what this amendment does. It does it not only for myself but it does it for Representative Martinez and for Representative Munoz. Three of the four that are in Hidalgo County at the present time. And with that, members, I ask that you, please, vote against the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Would the gentle lady yield?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, I will yield Mr. Garza.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Representative Gonzales, I just want to simply ask you a couple of questions. You mentioned that the redistricting of the map only allows you to retain only 1.5 percent of your current district.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Are you aware that there's 14 representatives in this room that have zero percent of their current district?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: No, I'm not aware of that. I don't -- I haven't seen those amendments today. Perhaps they were brought up but I didn't hear that.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Well, through the pairing.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Oh, through the pairing. Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Yeah, that's -- they actually have zero percent.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: That doesn't mean a zero percent. I don't believe -- I don't agree with that assessment of it.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: The next question I would ask is, I left the valley. I have an interest of who represents me because I have -- I currently own two properties. I own one property -- where you are the current representative of that area.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, I am.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: I also own a property in Sharyland Plantations which was my residence when I left the valley in 2006. And that's on Shary Drive in Sharyland Plantation. Now, are you the current representative in that district?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: No, Sharyland Plantation, that's in -- that part of it is Representative Munoz's.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: That is Representative Munoz. And if I'm not mistaken is there not 100 percent Hispanic representation in the House currently in the valley from Mission, Rio Grande City to Cameron County?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, if you are asking if all the representatives are Hispanic? We are.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Okay. So there's 100 percent Hispanic representation.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, there is.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: So really, what we have created is a new constitutional minority district in that knowing the area of the valley and the area of this current map represents is more of and -- I want to applaud Representative Aaron Pena for having the courage to represent a party that's been underrepresented in the valley. I have many conservative friends when I lived in the valley that felt that they could not be represented fairly unless they ran under a one party system.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: So what we've actually --

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: So -- excuse me -- what we've actually created, is the constitutionally stronger valley and in that conservative Hispanic because are not all the districts heavily majority Hispanic, 65, 80 percent?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Representative Garza, I have had two Republican opponents each time. There was choice given to the voters in the last two elections and they choice me over the Republican opponent. So they've had a choice. This is not about whether a Republican --

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: -- a state representative's seat --

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: There's been a marginal district, as you heard representative say my district it's always been a marginal district.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: And I have -- when was the last time when a Republican held a State representative's seat in the valley as we know it today?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Never and that shows the preferred candidate's choice --

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: Okay. That was all the questions I had Representative Gonzales. Thank you very, very much.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Kim Flurry in '93 and I stand corrected.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Mr. Speaker --

THE SPEAKER: For what purpose, Representative Farias?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Would the gentle lady yield?

THE SPEAKER: For what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: For a quick question.

THE SPEAKER: Would the gentle lady yield?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Of course.

THE SPEAKER: Go ahead.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I got here a little bit late. While my colleague was up here ranting and raving about Republican and Democrats, so I didn't -- I missed the conversation but it's really strange -- do you -- why would a person like that a representative, who I challenge on the little bitty space would come up here would come up here and defend Representative Pena when he wouldn't even come up here and defend himself? You know why people do that?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I'm not advised.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Well, they do it because they don't want to stick up for themselves. But let me ask you, didn't Representative Pena -- under what party did he run this past direction?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: He ran as a Democrat.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: He ran as a Democrat. And now we didn't try and turn this into a Republican, Democrat debate. We tried to speak on the issues about minority districts and the population. And I believe the conversation was initiated by the folks that came up here and addressed me about being Republican. So the gentleman runs as a Democrat; is that correct?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: And then after he wins what does he do?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: He switched parties.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: I'm sorry?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: He changed parties.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: He changed parties. Well, now when it's time to redistrict, he seems to be saying, well, I represent the Republican party. Do you agree that he bamboozled all the folks there that voted for him in the last election?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I'm not going to comment on that. And I think that's for them to decide when they go to the polls.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Well, personally I think that's what he did. You might not answer that but I believe that now he's doing the same thing to save his seat and continue to be a state representative; do you agree with that?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I think the lines have gone in such a way that you leave me with 1.5 percent of my district. Yes, there has been -- there has been some hanky-panky going on. I'll agree with that.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: Thank you very much, Representative.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: And, frankly, thank you for bringing that up because I -- you know, I feel very strongly about my district as so many of us do. And I do not -- I do not want to ever bail on my district. These are the people that elected me and they're the ones that I'm standing up here for today.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE FARIAS: That is why you and I and the rest of these folks here are here today as representatives of our districts in the best way we can, whether it be Republican or Democrat who is in our district. We try to represent them all equally. Thank you very much.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, Representative Farias. Members, I move for adoption of the amendment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Chairman.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Garza, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: I just wanted to add my comments with Representative Veronica --

THE SPEAKER: Would the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN GARZA: -- are on the record. All the comments are? Okay. And again my intention is not to get involved in the valley as Representative Munoz calls it. I just think constitutionally conservative Hispanics need to be represented in the conversations today and that was my only intention and I apologize. There was no disrespect intended for the delegation in the Rio Grande Valley which I love very much and my wife wishes she was still there. Thank you very much.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you.

REP. MARC VEASEY: Mr. Speaker, would the gentle lady yield?

THE SPEAKER: For what purpose?

REP. MARC VEASEY: Would the gentle lady yield?

THE SPEAKER: Would the gentle lady yield, please?

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Yes, I do.

THE SPEAKER: She does.

REP. MARC VEASEY: Representative Gonzales, I wanted to make one thing clear in front of -- so everyone will understand. The -- in the valley when Hispanic Republicans are elected, into office isn't it generally the case that the Anglo voters that also live in the valley, who have right to vote just like anyone else, that those are the voters who elect those Hispanics into office and not the Hispanic majority of the Latino voters.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: I think that's an accurate description.

REP. MARC VEASEY: Thank you.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you. Members, I move for adoption of the amendment. And thank you again for your patience. Oh, I'm sorry. There is a motion to table. So, please vote, against the motion to table.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Gonzales sends up an amendment. Representative Pena moves to table. Question is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote nay, members. Clerk will ring the bell. The question is on the motion to table. Show Mr. Pena voting aye, show Representative Gonzales voting no. Have all members voted? All members voted? There being 98 ayes, 46 nays, the motion to table prevails. Members we're on plan 162. The following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Gonzales of Hidalgo.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Gonzales of Hidalgo.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, I'm not going to go over everything we just heard. This amendment was one that was an attempt to create more of a Republican district for Representative Pena and to still keep the core of the district -- to keep the communities of interest together. It would be one where it would allow us to continue to represent the cities that we currently have. It would mean that Aaron Pena would end up with the most conservative district in the county. So this amendment is somewhat of a compromise from the last amendment that took us back to where we had been. And I ask for adoption.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to speak on it.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. I think as -- what we heard for the last several minutes over the prior debate this is a similar amendment. I think there's a similar, same issues. I think the members will vote their consciouses and do -- when I make a motion to table it's not meant with any disrespect to anyone but I would move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Gonzales to close.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Members, again this one is an attempt to even out the districts. It would give Representative Pena the most conservative district in the valley while allowing the communities of interest to stay together. We are all concerned about the Voting Rights Act and I think this will comply. And I also ask you this. My district has been reduced to 1.5 percent under the current map. We are setting precedent here. Today it's me, tomorrow it can be you. I ask you to remember that when you do your vote and I ask you to vote against the motion to table.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Gonzales sends up an amendment. Mr. Solomons moves to table. Members, questions on the motion to table. It's a record vote members. Clerk will ring the bell. Show Representative Solomons voting aye, Representative Gonzales voting no. Have all members voted? Have all members voted? There being 99 ayes, 45 nays. The motion to table prevails. Members we are on plan 181. And that plan is withdrawn. Mr. Gallego -- We are about to start on West Texas. Mr. Smithee, Mr. Craddick, Mr. Perry, Mr. Landtroop, Mr. Hardcastle is up here, too. And Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, we are about to start West Texas. It's plan 154. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SMITHEE: Mr. Speaker and members, we're going to West Texas now. This amendment covers about half the State geographically but only about 10 percent population wise. It's the -- it's my amendment along with Mr. Hardcastle and Mr. Turner that we've been working on. But seriously this is an effort to do some things in West Texas that I've talked to, I believe, everyone effected by the amendment nobody has a problem with what we are doing. The big two -- the two significant things that we are going to accomplish here is that we will avoid the -- what is really the unnecessary pairing of Mr. Perry and Mr.Landtroop and then we will also eliminate a good part of that district that has drawn so much attention. That linear district that goes pretty much to the West of Texas that -- over 350 miles. It's still going to be fairly a wide district when you look at it but it's also going to have some breadth to it as well. These districts are more compact than the original plan. They seem to fit together well. And like I say it was a join effort of the people in our area and I think it works better not only for the members from West Texas but more importantly for the constituents because we do preserve the communities of interest and we make these districts geographically compact. And so, with that -- I don't know if Mr. Hardcastle wants to say anything but I would move for adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Following amendment. The Clerk will read the amendment. We are on plan 154. I'm sorry, plan 206. Plan 206. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Perry.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Perry.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Members, this is a amendment that cleans up some of the inner district stuff that might effect the district as a whole between. It's between me and Representative Frullo and more importantly it just really cleans up some stuff that has been asked to by the district. Let me lay out the facts. Lubbock is surrounded by 22 mile access road. Currently District 84, Representative Frullo district currently it is internal to the loop for the most part. Probably 95 percent or more of his district included in that. With the exception of -- move passage. Move passage -- there's a little finger that goes up inside the loop that I'm a party to. That finger is a derivative of the past political agenda. The people involved in that particular finger have no interest in being in the political process anymore and from a voting strength perspective, the district that I'm trying to divest myself of voted 64 percent in the last race for McCain, voted 59 percent for Rick Perry. So, it's not like I'm trying to pass off a different party affiliation. This district complicates the voting process. It complicates the electoral process. People are confused at what part of the district is. We just need to clean this up at this time from where we are at. It's been like this for years. Most of the people that I talk to agree that it's just time to get that fixed. So I would ask that you support this amendment. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against the Perry amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Frullo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Mr. Speaker, my fellow members. I'm sure what you've heard is from the heart and meant to be the best intentions but I would I think otherwise. The amendment that we heard was entirely within Lubbock County. It impacts two districts mine and Mr. Perry's and I'm against this. I found out about this amendment yesterday around noon and I don't like it. What I have looked into it, it doesn't help my district and what it does is it adds about 16,000 new residents to my district and takes out about 4,000 to get me to the new number. Really wish that we weren't taking up your time to discuss this. Unfortunately we are. And I think that what it does do with the Smithee amendment is it addresses the pairing issue which we are all for removing. This amendment is not needed. It's not consistent with my current district and I would urge that -- I move to table this amendment.

REP. HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Hilderbran , for what purpose?

REP. HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Would the gentleman yield for some questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Frullo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Yes, sir.

REP. HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Representative Frullo, what does this do in terms of the original map for Lubbock in terms of where Texas Tech University is located which is currently in your district? Did the Solomons original map that was brought this day include Texas Tech in your district?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Yes, it did. Solomons map included the Texas Tech district and the Smithee map also includes the Texas Tech district and both maps are drawn to have the same new district. What this amendment to the amendment does is changes that district. As I mentioned earlier, the amendment to the amendment is not needed.

REP. HARVEY HILDERBRAN: So is it like a tech -- what is it do that you don't like. It seems like Texas Tech is in your district no matter what in all three versions. So what is it that it specifically to -- how does it change your district?

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Well, what it does is that my district originally needed about 10,000 people. This adds 16,000 and then pulls out 4,000 that I had represented in the past. What it also does is the new areas that were added approximately 10,000 are new or higher growth areas which can expand as the population increases. This picks up a an area of land loss.

REP. HARVEY HILDERBRAN: Okay. Thank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN FRULLO: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez-Fischer to speak on the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE MARTINEZ: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I do not live in West Texas but I know members of MALDEF asked me to let them know when there are issues that put us in a position to vote for maps that we don't ultimately agree on in the bigger picture. And so, I believe this is a fight between West Texas members that may have a legitimate dispute but as far as I'm concerned I intend to vote a white light on this. And I just wanted to advise members of MALDEF and those concerned about voting rights that they may want to pay attention to this. Let somebody else have this fight. We can sit this one out.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Perry to close.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Members, I'm not sure what -- I have five rural counties basically. This is the only thing that fits an urban category. Mr. Frullo's district is 100 percent urban. Inside a loop with the exception of probably 1 or 2 percent which is a finger that crawls up inside the district. It makes no sense from a voter's perspective. It makes no sense from an electoral perspective. This has not dilute the Republican vote in that area. It doesn't change anything on a district. We've got plenty of Republicans to go around. It's just been something that's been out there for more than ten years. It's a community of interest in my opinion. Those folk in that little finger area need to be removed.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Gonzales, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE VERONICA GONZALES: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: You represent what area of the State?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: I represent the South Plains region. Under the Smithee amendment which we expect to be adopted would be Lynn County, Terry County, Borden County --

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: And you justify that as West Texas?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Well, it's South Plains, West Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: And where is the county that's located with the western most county in the State of Texas?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Except El Paso.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: Okay. So El Paso is West Texas and you all are --

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Far West Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: Far West Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: There you go.

REPRESENTATIVE NAOMI GONZALEZ: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: If the speaker will -- for the record, correct the fact that West Texas is El Paso County and we do not have -- in this.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Yes. Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE MARISA MARQUEZ: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: But members what we -- what it does to the district is that it cleans the electoral process. Does not impugn either one of us from the voting perspective. It makes to -- been out there ten years. It was politically motivated back then. That day is long been gone. It needs to be corrected -- and I think this is time to do it. I'd ask for your support. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Margo, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Margo, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Question for Mr. Perry.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Perry, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Mr. Perry, in El Paso we refer to Lubbock as Yankee land.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLES PERRY: I hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE DEE MARGO: Okay.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Perry sends up an amendment. Mr. Frullo moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Clerk ring will the bell. Show Representative Frullo voting aye, Representative Perry voting no, show Representative Solomons voting aye. Have all voted? Have all members voted? There being 81 ayes, 15 nays and 44 present not voting. The motion to table prevails. Members, we're on plan 250. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This adds Loving County to District 74. It was the fastest growing county in District 74. It grew from 67 people to now 82. A growth rate of 22 percent. And it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Gallego sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. We're back on the Smithee amendment as amended. Chair recognizes Representative Smithee.

REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SMITHEE: The amendment is acceptable to the author and I would move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, the Smithee amendment as amended is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none amendment is adopted. Members, we're going back to Harris County. Representative Turner, Representative Woolley, Representative Coleman, Representative Bohac.

THE SPEAKER: Members, the House will stand at ease until 8:50 p.m. House come to order. Thank you all for your patience, members. Mr. Geren. Chair recognizes Representative Geren.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I move that the House grant the Senate's request for the appointment of a conference committee on SB 18.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Members, are there any instructions to instruct the conferees? If not the conference committee on Senate Bill 18. Clerk will read the conference committee.

CLERK: House conferees for the conference committee on S.B. 18. Geren, Chair, Ritter, Sheffield Hardcastle, Oliveira.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Davis of Dallas for a motion.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I'd like to suspend all necessary rules to take up House Resolution 1583 and House Bill 3206 and House Bill --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, you've heard the motion. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair lays out the following resolution. The Clerk will read the resolution.

CLERK: H.R. 1583 by Davis of Dallas. Honoring Dr. Denny D. Davis on his 20th pastoral anniversary with the St. John Church in Grand Prairie and Southlake.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Move adoption.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Is there objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Pitts for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM PITTS: Members, I wanted to make an announcement that the Appropriations Committee meeting at 7:00 a.m. is going to be postponed until -- as well as the committee photo. It says we will start upon adjournment tomorrow. We will take the photo first and then start the hearing. So try to, please, make it to the committee hearing as soon as we finish on the floor tomorrow. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Madden for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE JERRY MADDEN: Members the Corrections Committee is scheduled for this evening is canceled.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Jackson for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE JIM JACKSON: Members, the Committee on Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence that was scheduled to meet this evening is also canceled. We will try to meet again tomorrow.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Gutierrez, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: State your inquiry.

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: Have we had a moment of just to honor the San Antonio Spurs tonight?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Exactly. Why don't you tell us what the score was?

REPRESENTATIVE ROLAND GUTIERREZ: I think it was like 109, 103 but I just want to know -- I just want everyone to know that that was a moment of bipartisanship with my colleagues, Larry Taylor, as we honored the San Antonio Spurs. Can we give them a big round of applause.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: We are about to go on the Harris County -- Harris County map. We're on plan 191. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Woolley.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Woolley.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Chairman, members this is an amendment that effects some of the districts in Harris County. It's been discussed and agreed to and there is an amendment to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, the amendment to the amendment is a complete substitute is plan 271. Following amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, we really appreciate your patience. What we've all worked together in the effected districts that are part of speaker Woolley's amendment and have agreed to a substitute amendment that the members believe is a good part of the plan to put into House Bill 150. And --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Woolley, for what purpose?

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for his questions?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: Be happy to yield.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Coleman, we did, we all worked together in the backroom and you know it changed your district some to a number that is about what you have now. I'm not sure what we ended up.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: It's 38.2 percent. And from 39.2 percent in the map. But what I have now is 38.2 percent.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Right. And it was -- you know, it was below what we were told that might be acceptable as a black opportunity district. And we know that it's worked for you but it's -- I wanted to make sure that it is a black opportunity district.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: That is correct.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Can you give me that assurance?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: I can give you that assurance. And I also believe that these changes do not -- are not retrogression of District 147. And also that it is still an effective opportunity district where African Americans can elect the candidate of their choice and have that opportunity to do so based on this map.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Okay. As long as you can give me that assurance.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: I do give you that assurance.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: I will accept the amendment. Thank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: Thank you very much.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Speaker, I know you said that all the comments would be reduced to writing and put into the journal. I just wanted to make sure that happens, please.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: That's correct. Mr. Solomons, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: I'll be happy to yield, Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I think you've already addressed it but I want to be very specific because I think we set out the legislative intent and I would just like to make sure that it's very precise. And I don't mean to be disrespectful --

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: That's fine and I understand that you've had to deal with preciseness score.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Too many weeks.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: Yeah.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I want -- I know this reduces the black age voting percentage to 147 from 39.2 percent to 38.2 percent. And Mr. Coleman, do you believe that it is retrogressive?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: No.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: All right. And do you believe that because District 147 is non African American majority district now?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: It is not an African American majority district. It is an effective opportunity district for African Americans and has been so for the last 20 years and before.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: So, it's been successful before in the past?

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: It has been successful before in the past and it has been --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: You believe that it's going to be successful in the future.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you very much.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: Thank you very much. And members, again, this is an amendment to Ms. Woolley's amendment that several members worked on to come up with a an agreed to Harris County map for -- and it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Coleman sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Representative Woolley.

REP. BEVERLY WOOLLEY: Mr. Speaker, members, I move adoption of amendment 191. And it's acceptable to the author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Woolley sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection the Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Following amendment. Clerk will read amendment. It's plan 159.

CLERK: Amendment by Bohac.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Bohac.

REPRESENTATIVE DWAYNE BOHAC: Mr. Speaker, members, this amendment is between my district and Representative Farrar's district. It shows a block between us impacting a total of 150 people. This amendment does not impact legality of either district since it is such a small change. Representative Farrar has agreed to this as well. And I move adoption. And it is acceptable to our esteemed author.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Bohac sends up an amendment. The amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment is adopted. Members, Chair recognizes Representative Howard for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: Members, I'd like to have your attention for a minute. Tonight there's been severe storm damage across the South particularly in Alabama and Mississippi. They have had 130 different tornadoes hit the ground. 54 people have been identified as being killed already. Most of North Alabama is without power. They shutdown the power plants there. I just talked to my brother and sister by cell phone. They don't have any power. My wife is in Mississippi, they don't have any power. So, if you would, I would like to just take a moment of silence and let's pray for those families who are now without power and without water and no shelter tonight. The President has already declared the state of emergency for the State of Alabama and the governors of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia have all declared state of emergency. Bert wants to add something, too.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I appreciate you bringing that up. We have a very good friend back home and their daughter goes to the University of Alabama. Their house was destroyed. Her -- she was a class so she is okay. And her roommates basically were in a bathtub and survived but some of her friends have been killed. So I appreciate Charlie bringing this to everyone's attention.

REPRESENTATIVE CHARLIE HOWARD: The University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa has been particularly hard hit. So, if we could -- let's take a moment of silence and each of us pray in our own way for their safety and care and God's mercy. Thank you and I'll say amen here in just a minute. Amen. And thank you, members.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, we're on the statewide substitute. Plan 146 has been withdrawn. Plan 155 has been withdrawn. We're on plan 164. Following amendment. The Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Alonzo.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo. Is Mr. Alonzo on the floor of the House? Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. This amendment that I proposed is the MALDEF amendment. And what it also did added an amendment to the package that said Dallas County would add three new districts. And members, I have spoken a lot of times about what we're trying to do here in the redistricting process. What I say is what's legal, what's fair. And in the legal process I said that we wanted to increase as many Hispanic opportunity districts and that's why in the MALDEF amendment I added that we increase the plan to have three opportunity Hispanic districts. But aside from that what this plan also did was, have two districts in West Texas that gave an opportunity for Hispanics to get elected out of the Odessa area and the Lubbock area. But members in the spirit of time and Mr. Speaker --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Burnam, for what purpose? Mr. Alonzo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I do.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Thank you pleasure, Representative Alonzo, I'm reading your proposed amendment with some concern because it discusses that maybe your proposed amendment challenges the county line rule and puts a preference for Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. Have we seen other examples during the course of the day where the county line rule have been violated minimizing Latino representation in the valley?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And I am very well aware of violating the county rule and let me tell you that; for example, in the West Texas area there's not a violation of the county rule but more of an opportunity of dealing with the county rule to create an opportunity for Hispanics to get elected in West Texas. And let me -- permit me for a minute. We saw the debate in West Texas and we had folks from West Texas create their debate and what's going on. And what happens members is this. West Texas lost two districts because of the loss of population. But in West Texas there was an increase of Hispanic population. And with my proposal we would create an opportunity to elect -- I'm sorry, to have two opportunity districts to elect Hispanics in West Texas by violating -- by using the county rule to create an opportunity. And if I may, Mr. Burnam --

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So, Representative Alonzo, is it your contention that clearly, if the plan offered by the committee is prepared to violate the county line rule to the detriment of Hispanic representation in the valley, then, clearly, we should be prepared to violate the county line rule in West Texas to maximize the opportunity for Hispanic representation.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: The answer is, yes. And let me tell you why I say that.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: Well, you are going to have to speak a little louder because it's getting harder to hear you.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I'm going to try. And the reason I'm going to try is this. Under the process that we were working, the state constitution says that you cannot violate the county rule. But then it goes to another level which is the U.S. Constitution and Federal law. In my opinion, and I would assume that the courts will decide that the court -- not that I will decide, but the courts will decide that what's going to happen is this. If by violating the state constitution county rule, you have an opportunity to create more Hispanic opportunity districts that will be allowed.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So, would it be your contention that not only should we be prepared to violate the county line rule in West Texas where we can in fact create an opportunity district that we should not violate the county line rule in south Texas as the plan has done to undermine the representation of Hispanics.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, I would want to do everything I can to make sure that all the rules are applied. But in this case, the reason there is a Voting Rights Act is because the Voting Rights Act said, look, let's look at the state law and if we can take it to another level for -- we have a Federal law that allows for districts that can create an opportunity in this case, which I'm arguing for Hispanics to get elected, then that's what we are going to have to do.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: So, while I'm glad you have offered us this opportunity to consider violating the county line rule, is it true that you also have another amendment proposal that would not pair my good friends and new member from Dallas County against another member of Dallas county and will have an opportunity to support what you're trying to do with another amendment?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That is correct. That is not my intent and as I spoke to my good friends from Dallas, the main purpose of presenting this proposal is to talk about the opportunities. But just want you to know what I'm going to do and I was going to -- if the speaker would allow me, I'm going to withdraw this proposal and speak through it in another fashion.

REPRESENTATIVE LON BURNAM: And I thank you for this opportunity to have this dialogue about violating the county line rule and how it appears that we are being very hypocritical in this process because we are willing to violate the county line rule when it's convenient to undermine and contribute to retrogression of representation of Hispanics. But apparently we are not willing to consider violating the county line rule when it would enhance Hispanic representation. But in this instance I'm really glad that you are withdrawing this amendment and will be considering another amendment that accomplishes the same without pairing one of our new colleagues from Dallas county against another. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw this amendment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: For what purpose?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield for a couple of questions?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Gentleman, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I will.

REP. ERIC JOHNSON: Representative Alonzo, this amendment -- did we ever talk about this before you laid this amendment out or before you filed it? Did we ever have any discussion about this at all?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: No, we did not.

REP. ERIC JOHNSON: Well, if we had, I would have strenuously objected to you even submitting it because I'm sure at this point if you were not aware of it when you filed it that it actually pairs me and Representative Caraway. Do you understand that that's what your amendment does?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Well, let me tell you I -- your thoughts and that's one of the reasons I'm going to withdraw this amendment.

REP. ERIC JOHNSON: I appreciate that. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Turner, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Would the gentleman yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Alonzo, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you. Representative Alonzo, by laying the amendment out -- by laying out you were not intending for this amendment to have any legal affect are you?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. So you are just laying it out for the purposes of laying it out but in no way are you intending for it to have a legal effect now or even after this legislative session.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE SYLVESTER TURNER: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheets raises the point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Following amendment to the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Villarreal.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: The amendment is withdrawn. Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against plan 164, Alonzo amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to speak against the amendment. The amendment has been withdrawn. Representative Kleinschmidt, Representative Christian. Members, plan 166 is withdrawn. Plan 193 is withdrawn. Plan 195. Following amendment. The clerk will read amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez-Fischer.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez-Fischer.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is an amendment that represents a statewide plan. Before I get into laying it out. There is a simple amendment to the amendment that I drafted. For an inadvertent error that I did in Dallas County that was brought to my attention by Representative Eric Johnson. So, I would like to bring that to the amendment to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, it's plan 269. Following amendment to the amendment. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Martinez-Fischer.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Martinez-Fischer.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, this is an amendment to the amendment that actually takes Representative Eric Johnson's black voting age population and restores it to its current percentage which I didn't do intentionally. It was inadvertent. And I'm glad that he brought it to my attention. So the amendment to the amendment is acceptable to me as an author of the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Martinez-Fischer sends up an amendment to the amendment. And the amendment is acceptable to the author. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. The amendment to the amendment is adopted. We are back on the Martinez amendment as it is amended.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Gallego, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Would the gentleman yield for a question?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Martinez-Fischer, do you yield?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I yield.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Mr. Martinez- Fischer I have a couple of West Texas questions for you. We've had a little bit of a conversation about it but in my lifetime, just in my lifetime we have seen a change where there were only eleven counties in West Texas that had a Latino population of at least 15 percent. But now in fact, even as long ago as 1990 about half of the counties had populations of more than 20 percent and in fact most counties have populations in West Texas of about 40 percent Latino population. Is that your understanding?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I'm excluding El Paso, when you take El Paso out of the West Texas factor there is still -- Latinos represent 40 percent of the West Texas population. And so it's only fitting and appropriate that that population be acknowledged with an opportunity for those constituents, those Texans, to have an opportunity to elect the candidate of their choice but unfortunately despite their growth, as you know, Representative Gallego, what happened to West Texas has certainly changed. The course of the region, based on census numbers that we saw just this year that suggest that there was a very big declining population in West Texas. But all the while Latinos maintained their growth and they maintain large percentages of growth but yet you will not find that growth reflected in any House district. And so this is what part of my lay out in this plan will seek to remedy that.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Well, there are no new minority opportunity districts that are created. And whether you're talking about the rural parts or, you know, urban is a relative term but Odessa, Amarillo, Lubbock, Midland, the panhandle, all of those areas the Latino population is pretty significant and yet there's not really an opportunity in any one of those particular districts to elect the candidate of their choice. Is that your understanding?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I'm sorry, Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: That your understanding?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: It is my understanding. And, you know, again, if you look at the trend you look at what's happening, you see tremendous opportunities to create districts where we all represent different constituencies. And as Texas is starting to change demographically so must representative districts to meet those changes. And in West Texas, again, despite the massive population loss, you still see the region robust and dynamic Latino population that probably deserves a district or two at least on the map that I'm offering two opportunities to elect the candidate of their choice. And it's not -- it's not anything to do with partisanship. I think we know the West Texas region has a conservative bent. But it certainly deals with giving communities of color the ability to put their candidate of choice in office. Whether they be a Hispanic Democrat or a Hispanic Republican the fact that they are Hispanic is what matters in the map that I'm offering.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Well, even as you look across Texas, the Latino population is the fastest growing part of the population in Texas. And yet, it doesn't seem like the Latino was rewarded with the commensurate number of Latino seats -- new seats or opportunity seats even in this particular proposal.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: You don't. And I mean, in my lay out, you know it's undisputed that 89.9 percent of all growth in the last decade was minority growth. Was Asian, African American, Hispanic. Hispanics alone made up 67 percent of that growth but --

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: So, the 39 percent of the growth is minority. And two-thirds of that is Latinos and yet the number of minority seats or Latino seats in particular is not really commensurate with that growth.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: It's not, I mean, you won't see that reflected anywhere. And the irony is that those numbers, that growth that we've all taken credit for that's going to allow Texas to have four new congressional districts and we've acknowledged the responsible demographics for bringing those opportunities, but when it comes to the State House it's almost that we seem to ignore the fact that the minorities have driven the State in terms of representing that dynamic growth. And it's almost 90 percent but if you look at our current maps that we have today and you look at the House Bill 150 you don't see the growth reflected in Mr. Solomons' proposal. And so, what this map seeks to remedy is to demonstrate that if you wanted to create minority opportunities, you certainly can. And so when a map is presented to the body, that suggests this is the way it has to be, I'm here to say that that's not the case. As -- particularly when it comes to the minority community we didn't even make the effort. And, in fact, I would argue that we had opportunities to create new districts and rather than do that, we took those existing districts and just made them more minority so that we didn't have to create an additional district in -- you know we know about packing and we know about overpopulating. And it seems to me that there is a trend that seems to suggest that minority districts are packed in heavily populated. And when you do that you just conveniently do not have the population to draw new districts. And so, what this is -- this is not a perfect map and I have said this to anybody. I've talked to people who have looked at this map and I said listen, if we work off the status quo and you give us the additional minority seats that we're talking about, you can draw this map however you want. I had a very good conversation with Lois Kolkhorst who said your map cuts one of my counties. I said, well, if we did, we cannot grow the minority community in your county. And so, if you work with me on taking these minority districts we'll do your district however you want. You can draw it however you want. But allow us the opportunity to demonstrate that the minority community is certainly relevant. We are -- we should be given the appropriate credit for the growth that we've demonstrated in this state. And that growth should transcend itself into the political representation that they should have, not just in the State House but in the State Board of Education, the State Senate and in the Congress. I imagine we're talking about creating congressional seats based on the same population and guess what? There are minority districts being discussed. And so, it's not as if this is a rare phenomenon or an anomaly, this is a reality. But we have yet to embrace that reality. When, again, we draw a map under the auspices of protecting incumbents, under the auspices of taking minority performing districts and making it more minority so that we just don't have the population to spare to add additional districts. I don't think it's mean spirited. I think it's intentional. But I also think that I have an obligation as do you, as do -- as does any minority member of the legislature to actually demonstrate that if you wanted to do this, you most certain could. And this is what the map I'm offering suggests that with specific reference to minority community, Hispanic community, you can put two district in West Texas. You can put a district in south Texas. You can put a district in the Dallas metroplex and you can put a district in the Harris County area. And we are not doing that. And when you don't do that you are denying the minorities the opportunities to be relevant in this body. And I think that whether people want to support that or not, that's up to them. But I know it's up to me and I think it's up to every minority member of this legislature that say we are going to stand together to make sure that minorities are accounted for no matter where they are. And because when we are bringing this body to look more and more like the State it actually represents, then I think we are doing the justice to our constituents. And so, it's not an anti-- you know, there are pairings in this map. You know I've talked to people who have been paired. There is pairings in Chairman Solomons' map. He doesn't make any apologies for it. I mean he regrets it. I certainly regret it. But I recognize this. Anybody who wants to bring a map, that will take into account the relevance of the African American and Hispanic and Asian growth that we have in this state, let us have that opportunity and we'll cede the rest of the state to you to draw however you see fit. But don't tell me that we cannot do it. Don't tell me that the numbers aren't there to support it. Don't tell me that we count for an apportionment but we don't count for single member representation. Just don't tell me that because that's not being truthful to me or the constituents that we represent or the communities of color that have made this state a very strong and robust state. You know tell me that that's not your priority and I will accept that. But unfortunately it may not be the priority of this body or the leadership of this body but it's certainly deemed to be a priority to members that are under the Voting Rights Act. And whether you are a DOJ or the D.C. circuit court for the District of Columbia they have a different standard. And I take my hat off to Chairman Solomons. We served on committees together. We have been on the same side of several battles. We've battled each other. We've all -- you know almost anybody who has ever debated or had a serious issue with Chairman Solomons knows that you cannot have one without those exchanges becoming heated. But yet we find a way to overlook that and come back and --

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Sheets raises a point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Is there anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against Martinez-Fischer amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Solomons in opposition --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Mr. Speaker, members, I appreciate the dialogue between the parties. Mr. Martinez-Fischer has several different amendments statewide that all go into the issue of breaking county lines. Unnecessarily, in my opinion, and in violation of the Texas Constitution. The splits -- the split -- the legal issues are splits a number of counties. One, two, three, four, five -- about 20 counties whatever it is. One, two, three, four -- -- over 30. Some of them are split two different ways. I think we need to abide by the Texas Constitution on the county line rule. And I am going to move to table this amendment. And I appreciate the -- like I said I do appreciate the dialogue. I do appreciate their creating the record that they think they need to create for legal challenges, perhaps, about the county line rule. But we are obligated to abide by the Texas Constitution. So I'm going to move to table this amendment. And, yes, I will be happy to yield.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, first I was trying to say is that you know you are the type of member that you have the ability to disagree and disagree passionately because you believe in what you do and you work hard. And sometimes things get personal and heated but at the end of the day you are always willing to shake it off, shake hands and we move onto the next issue. I'm not the only one that admires you for that. I think we as a members of this body appreciate you for that, can play hard and work hard. So first, thank you for that. But having said that, we've discussed this issue with the county line rule and I submit to you that you are indeed correct. I take the position it's my contention that Federal courts, Federal authorities have construed that the permissibility of breaking county lines to create minority opportunity districts. I understand your position today as the chairman of redistricting and as a member of this body of your allegiance to upholding your interpretation of the Texas Constitution but we just have a disagreement on the applicability of the county line cuts. I think we should have the discussion now. I think you believe that we should have it. If this matter were to move into some sort of a litigation phase before some -- you know some authority whether it be in a court of law or with the Department of Justice, but that is a dispute that you and I have. Am I captioning that correctly?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I think we do have a difference of opinion. I mean it -- to me it's not a matter so much of interpretation. I think that's exactly what the Texas Constitution says. I do appreciate your position. I also know that one of the -- in fact early on when we first started the bill, we had some discussion about who I talked to and I know that there was a very fine attorney on behalf of the Hispanic community in one of the groups. I think it was MALDEF talking about the county line rule and the idea that their position was that Federal law could preempt this. But they also I think understood my position and what this body has to do in abiding by the Texas Constitution at this point.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And when we say that, perhaps that could be -- Federal law could supersede or preempt our state constitution. I mean it's -- you know it's U.S. Constitution or Federal statutes that derive from the U.S. Constitution and so, just like we couldn't have -- if we had a state amendment that said, you know, there should not be freedom of religion, we know that state constitution at some point in a Federal discussion could be problematic given the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: The Texas Constitution in the county line rule is not in the U.S. Constitution. Freedom of religion is in the U.S. Constitution. And it's in the Texas Constitution as well as I believe. But at the end, it is a situation where unless this body and the legislature, both chambers wanted to produce a Texas -- an amendment to the Texas Constitution have it voted on by the people of Texas that says, we are not going to have a county line rule, we are sort of obligated to follow the Texas Constitution unless I think a higher authority and I don't believe that even the Department of Justice. I think it's -- you've got to have the U.S. Supreme Court basically strike it down for some reason. But right now, that's not the law. And we are trying to abide and have a fair and legal map. And there's some disagreements about what some people think is fair and legal, and we think it's fair and legal to abide by the Texas Constitution.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And I know that you know while freedom of religion is in the U.S. Constitution I also know that, you know, the Voting Rights Act is a derivative of the U.S. Constitution that deals with equal protection under the 14th Amendment and so forth. But let's -- I know we don't have a lot of time I want to talk to you about -- you and I have a fundamental disagreement on what is considered a county cut and what you consider to be a spillover. And I've used a precise example of the Rio Grande Valley where I believe -- and I don't want to speak for you but my interpretation of what you told me is you know bringing over Representative Guillen's district into Hidalgo County is just a spillover and not necessarily a county cut is that --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: It's a necessary spillover because the U.S. Census data and how you draw those lines. It's not a county cut issue. There's -- we only have I think one county cut in this entire map where it's absolute necessary. I don't think the Texas Constitution and we can talk about the differences of interpretation but I don't think Texas Constitution allows the House Redistricting Committee to arbitrarily just start cutting county lines. Just because -- even though I understand you know about minority districts or for any reason. I don't think it allows us to do that.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Okay. And you know, I think that we can respectfully disagree on that. But I think that you -- do you acknowledge that 89.9 percent of the growth in this state in the last decade is, you know, borne at the hands of minorities being African American, Asians, and Hispanics?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: The -- let me go back to my initial. We -- what the actual demographics of the State are, is 70.4 percent white which includes Hispanic, 11.8 black, 0.7 American Indian, 3.8 Asian, 0.1 Pacific Islander, 10.5 other race, which is, you know, on the census. How you fill those out. And 2.7, two or more races. So when you talk about the Hispanic population it's about 41.8 percent is the Hispanic population in context.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: The State population?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Right.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: But I'm talking about in terms of the growth. The measurement of the growth by demographic by ethnicity --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Hispanic population is the second largest demographic in the State of Texas and grew by 41.8 percent. Is not the fastest growing demographic though but it is a fast growing demographic.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And we recognize that fastest growing demographic is not the metric, it's how big you are is the metric, I would think. Do you believe that it's the -- that for the purposes of acknowledging minority growth it's percentage and not the total population increase?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well -- let me ask something before we talk about that. My notes indicate based on the census numbers, in fact, the three ethnic groups that grew faster than Hispanics were Asians grew at 71 percent. Native Hawaiians, believe it or not, grew 50 percent and American Indian population grew 44 percent. So we are talking about some growth by a variety of groups. Now Hispanics are singled out in a lot of ways in the press and other ways as being the large demographic growing population in the state. But when we blow it down truly to who grew faster and grew in greater numbers at a faster rate --

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Sheets raises the point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend another ten minutes.

THE SPEAKER: Question of time. Is there objection? There is objection. Members vote aye, vote no from your boards.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: And those are percentages not actual numbers but they are percentages.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And my inquiry is based on, you know, population. Like what could you tell me what the Native American population is from 2000 to 2010 or the Asian population from 2000 to 2010 --

THE SPEAKER: The gentleman's time is expired. There has been objection to the extension of time. So we are going to have you vote. It's a record vote. Members vote aye, vote nay.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, I call for a record vote.

THE SPEAKER: Record vote is requested and the record vote is granted. Please vote.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Parliamentary inquiry. Exactly what are we voting on?

THE SPEAKER: Voting on --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Extension of the time. That whether or not we are going to continue the debate on an alterative statewide plan that would enhance the Hispanic representation opportunities in Texas House of Representatives. Okay. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: We've got a vote in progress, members. The vote is on a motion to extend time. All members voted? All members voted? Being 58 ayes and 77 nays, the request to extend time fails. Is there anyone else wishing to speak on, for, or against the Martinez-Fischer amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Martinez-Fischer.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: With all due respect, to my good friends and colleagues, from the Harris County area, they work really hard to come up with a map and worked together and put this body to a pause for a three hour period and yet we are here to debate the first alternative statewide map and you maybe tired and you maybe a little upset but guess what I'm tired and I'm upset too. My map is not the reason why we are here at night. So the lack of courtesy extended to a member to lay out a statewide alternative when we can spend three hours to deal with a county I think is something that I never thought I'd see happen on the floor of this House. And we made extension after extension, accommodation after accommodation, but be that as it may, I think it's important to recognize where we are at. What this map does is it takes the current House Bill 150 and it takes Spanish surname voter registration at 50 percent or more that's currently 30 in the proposed map to 34 under this amendment. It takes the Hispanic voting age population of 50 percent or more from 34 under the Solomons' proposal to 42. It takes the African American voting age population from 2 under the Solomons' proposal. This is -- 50 percent or more from 2 under the Solomons' plan, to 3 under this plan. Combined African American, Hispanic voting age population at 50 percent or more. It takes the Solomons' map which is at 53 to 62 and we do all this while shrinking the total deviation which is a big constitutional sure. We grow the State with minorities, with smaller districts. At 9.69 total deviation to Burt -- excuse me, to House Bill 150 to 9.90, almost to the max, maximum deviation. So using those metrics we are only to maintain the status quo and in fact go backwards on Hispanic opportunity districts. Not acknowledging the growth of the African American community. And we can do that with a map that's a 9.9 deviation but yet I can come up with an alterative that's not perfect, I recognize. But with the 9.6 or 9.7 total deviation we can grow the map with five Hispanic opportunity districts. I think there's something wrong in the analysis of House Bill 150. And if we don't want to have that conversation, I respect the chairman's view that the Texas Constitution is what matters on this floor. I say especially to those of you who do not like to have these matters end up in court, don't like having disputes in court, litigations, this is exactly where we are going to go. And if we have that conversation. I know the chairman, I take his word, when we get there and then we can have this discussion. And I know that I feel confident that we will have that discussion in some juncture. And I believe -- I think what this amendment does -- again, I congratulate the chairman for working really hard on a task I'm sure that he didn't volunteer for -- but simply to pack and deny minorities their opportunity just so that we can perpetuate the status quo is not good enough anymore in today's Texas. Today's Texas is changing. West Texas alone is proof positive of that. But this map does not reflect and does not keep up with the changing pace of our state. And for that, I will ask you to vote no on the motion to table. And thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Martinez-Fischer sends up an amendment. Representative Solomons moves to table. Please vote aye or nay on the motion to table. Clerk please ring the bell. Representative Martinez-Fischer voting no, Representative Solomons voting aye. Everyone voted? All voted. Being 96 ayes and 45 nays the motion to table prevails. Members, we are now on plan 196. Following amendment. The Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Gonzales of Hidalgo.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Members, if you heard throughout the day and throughout the evening, about the growth that we've experienced with the minority population in the State, especially with the Latino population, the two largest cities in the Rio Grande Valley -- or the two largest counties are Hidalgo and Cameron County. According to the 2010 census the combined population of those two counties is over 1.18 million people. That population surpasses the amount required to justify a new house seat in that district -- in that area. You heard earlier from our colleagues Rene Oliveira and he was adamant about how important it is to create this seventh seat in the Rio Grande Valley because of the growth. And because of the fact -- despite the fact that we like our good friend Ryan Guillen his district already had enough population and did not need to spread into Hidalgo County. Yet we can have another representative that would provide more representation for our area which is what the people that elected us to come here -- and expect from us. Despite the fact that our county had an under count and there's a lawsuit pending on that. There is no question that we still have the population to create a seventh seat. This amendment reflects that growth and creates that new seat which is House District 72. This particular area of the map -- this particular map will preserve the core of the districts. It will not split any VTD's that we've talked about earlier this evening. The SSVR number would be acceptable with no deviation of more than 5 percent. So I ask you to, please, vote for this amendment and let's create another seat in the Rio Grande Valley.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Members, you've been hearing the dialogue and understand the concerns by our Hispanic colleagues in connection with this. We are also back in the same dialogue in the sense that we've been hearing from the beginning and throughout the debate about splitting county line rules and I'm going to move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against plan 196? If not Representative Gonzales to close.

REP. VERONICA GONZALES: Members, we all want to avoid a court case. I think this is a very clear indication here of something that will get us to court. When you have a growth in these two counties with the high Hispanic population -- there's no question about that -- and we're not creating a seat. So I ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Gonzales sends up an amendment, Representative Solomons moves to table. The vote is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote no. Clerk, please, ring the bell. Show Representative Gonzales voting no, Representative Solomons voting aye, representative Sheffield voting aye. All voted? All voted? There being 98 ayes, 46 nays the motion to table prevails. Members, we're now going to plan 197. Following amendment. Clerk, please, read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez-Fischer.

THE SPEAKER: Members, before we do move onto that the Chair recognizes Representative Sheffield for an important announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE RALPH SHEFFIELD: Members, the Committee for Defense Veteran's Affairs, the meeting that was scheduled for tomorrow at 8:00 a.m. It is canceled until date certain.

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES L. KEFFER: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Keffer, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JAMES L. KEFFER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Representative Sheffield Representative Lozano for providing dinner for us tonight. Thank you very much. It was very good.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Gallego to explain plan number 197. Chair recognizes Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think this is an issue just with respect to creating some additional minority seats in North Texas. And I would be happy to have a conversation but since nobody is asking questions. It's a conversation that I had with Mr. Martinez-Fischer earlier about the opportunity to create some of these seats. So, I would move adoption to the amendment.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons to speak in opposition to the amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. The variety of these maps are all in discussions of various regional activities -- regional divisions and county line breaks. And I think we have all heard that discussion before and we're of the position in following the Texas Constitution. I'm going to move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Anyone wish to speak on, for, or against Mr. Gallego's amendment? Being no one. Mr. Gallego to close.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker I would --

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, just a couple of questions please.

THE SPEAKER: For what purpose, Mr. Alonzo?

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Just for a couple of questions.

THE SPEAKER: Will you yield, Mr. Gallego?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Absolutely, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you, Mr. Gallego, and just a couple of questions. You presented your bill. The reason I want to ask questions about West Texas, Mr. Gallego, is because in the efforts that MALDEF is trying to do is to increase the population in West Texas; is that correct?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And let me tell why I say that. Not too long ago I was in a meeting with some of -- one of the State agencies in Fort Davis and I said what do you think the population is in Hereford, Texas? And you know what -- the Hispanic in Hereford, Texas, you know what they said?

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: I am sure they give you a low number.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Zero. And I said, what do you think about 90 percent? And the reason I bring it up is that you represent a part of Texas as to West and moves on north of the West. And what the (*inaudible) -- caucus is trying to do is address the question in this amendment, in this bill that says, yes, there was a drop of the population in West Texas and as a result two districts are being lost. But because of the increase of the Hispanic population, there is an opportunity to have two Hispanic districts in West Texas. So I just wanted to thank you for being in this bill forward.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: I will tell you, Mr. Alonzo as I indicated agree with Mr. Fischer, as I indicated from -- to 1990 there was tremendous growth in the Latino community. And I think if you look at most school districts -- Mr. Hochberg would probably be a better resource or if you look it up on the internet. If you look at the number of school kids by ethnicity by school districts, not only in far West Texas where I live but in the panhandle and in other regions. That number is now majority Latino. I mean it's clearly a growing population. And if it's not addressed in this redistricting, it will have to be addressed in the next one because that population is surging . There is the issue as Mr. Solomons indicated of whether you can break open county lines in terms of -- and that's an issue that folks are pretty sensitive about and pretty protective of. But -- and I will tell you that I love counties that I represent right now and this proposal for me would have me give some of those up. And it's -- it's not the district and I -- I can't stand here and say that it is my district because I kind of object to that. Because it kind of isn't mine. It belongs to the people who live in it. And I have the privilege of representing them. And what this amendment for me represents is an opportunity for me to say to the Latino community in West Texas that there are ways that and they are going to continue to look for the growth and there are ways their voices can be heard. And this is one of those ways.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: And I think what you are doing is by presenting this bill, we are seeing we are not going to forget West Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: We are not going to forget West Texas and particularly the Latinos who live there. Who have for a long time been under counted and under represented in many of the elected offices out there.

REPRESENTATIVE ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you Mr. Gallego.

REPRESENTATIVE PETE GALLEGO: Thank you, Mr. Alonzo. And Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity. Mr. Solomons, thank you for the opportunity to work with you. And I move to close. I ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Gallego sends up an amendment. Mr. Solomons moves to table. Question is on the motion to table. Clerk, please, ring the bell. Members vote aye, vote nay. Show Mr. Aycock voting aye, show Mr. Solomons voting aye. Have all voted. There being 100 ayes and 45 nays, the motion to table prevails. Members, we're now on plan 198. Following amendment. Clerk, please, read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez-Fischer.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Mr. Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD RAYMOND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. The Solomons' redistricting plan fails the Coastal Bend by reducing its political strength by eroding neighborhoods and communities of interest throughout Corpus Christi and Nueces County. Specifically H.B. 156 to dilute an already voting power by dissecting communities with district lines. For instance, the neighborhood around Hillcrest Park in the *TC Airs Recreation Center, precinct 30 and 38 is the historical are of Corpus Christi's African American community. These neighborhoods are grouped into the districts of 32, diluting their voting strength. Precincts 45, 46, 64, 65 are well established Latino neighborhoods around William's Park in Corpus Christi. These precincts are split into two districts, diluting the voting strength of Latino's in Nueces County and further eroding community of interest. Precincts 115 and 116 which is the area around St. Andrews Park, and is also a heavily Latino minority neighborhood are split into two different districts. Also it moves a new south side -- moves precincts 115, 116, 3, 88, 29, into two state representative districts further diluting minority voting rights. H.B. 150 then takes precinct 4, 20, 93, 114, 118 which are Latino neighborhoods near Crestmont Park and *Cavinous Field and places them into district 32, but not to preserve a minority seat. The precincts are split just enough to insure that Latinos are only 49.2 percent of the population. Not only does it dissect communities of interest, members, but H.B. 150 as currently drawn violates Federal law and the Texas Constitution. Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act (*inaudible) 1973 -- Section 1973C prohibits the enactment of any practice or procedure that either has a retrogressive effect on voting rights of minority voters or was adopted with the purpose of discriminating against minority voters. Generally retrogression means diminishing the political strength of the status quo. Current minority opportunity districts are anchored in Nueces County. House Bill 150 eliminates one such district altogether and moves it to Rockwall County to create a new Anglo minority district over 400 miles away. As a result House Bill 150 violates Section 5. In contrast the Mexican American Legislative Caucus plan for the Coastal Bend complies with the one person, one vote standard and protects the Latino opportunity districts in the Coastal Bend. The MALC plan divides communities of interest in the creation of an extra Latino majority district. The Solomons' plan does so to reduce minority representation of the Coastal Bend. We and MALC -- as MALC members we will work with any plan that insures the Latino community or representative commensurate with a population growth. The whole county rule has been interpreted by Texas courts to mean making the fewest cuts as possible to preserve the one person, one vote standard. In this instance MALC's plan avoids the retrogression of the minority voting interest. All statehouse plans cut counties. The MALC does so to insure minority voting strength. The Solomons' plan does so to support an unconstitutional gerrymander that dilutes minority voting strength. Coastal district modification -- let me just mention how the Coastal Bend amendment differs from the other MALC amendments. The Coastal Bend modification is essentially the main MALC plan moving the B county voting precinct 17 from District 33 to District 35. The purpose of the move was to strengthen the districts lines between the districts in Beeville, Texas and to balance the deviations between the districts so that both districts were more evenly -- most districts more evenly account for the undercut of the Latino population in the 2010 census. The move results in a more even line division between the districts and balances the deviation so that District 35 goes from minus 4.7 before the change to minus 3.6 after the change. And District 33 goes from a deviation of minus 1.1 to minus 2.2 percent. Members, I move adoption.

THE SPEAKER: The Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to give an equally inspiring response.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Kind of hard to follow that. This is a continuation of the dialogue on the Texas Constitution county line rule and I'll move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Mr. Raymond.

REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD RAYMOND: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate your effort at comedy at 12:45 -- 12:40 a.m. but there's nothing funny about this for me. If my comments are not inspiring to you I hope they are inspiring to the Supreme Court to the Justice Department to others who will look at this in a more serious manner. And I hope, members, that you will vote against the motion to table.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Raymond sends up an amendment. Mr. Solomons moves to table. The vote is on the motion to table. Members vote aye, vote nay. Clerks please ring the bell. All voted? All voted? Show Mr. Solomons voting aye, Mr. Raymond voting no. All voted. There being 99 ayes and 44 nays the motion to table prevails. Members, we're now on plan 199. Following amendment. Clerk, please, read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez-Fischer.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I'm going to be very brief. First let me tell you what I'm trying to do in this plan. Mainly focusing on Dallas County and Tarrant County. Right now as it relates to Hispanic opportunity districts we have two in Dallas County and one in Tarrant County. With this proposal, we are give an opportunity for three districts in Dallas County and two in Tarrant County. As a result of -- because of the overpopulation of Latino majority districts in Dallas County, it serves one overarching goal to limit Latino influence in Dallas County districts. Therefore, House Bill 150 violates the one person, one vote principle in Dallas County. As a result by packing existing minority opportunity districts and by using the State's county rule to limit the creation of minority opportunity districts in Tarrant and in Dallas County and in light of the fact racially polarized voting continues and -- in Texas and in Dallas and in Tarrant counties. House Bill 150 violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The MALC plan complies with the one person, one vote. Creates additional minority districts and maintains Hispanic minority district. Members, I'm going to keep it short. The chairman has not asked to table yet but instead of giving a three page speech I'm going to ask that this document that I put together be put into the record without objection? Is that okay, Mr. Chairman?

THE SPEAKER: Members, you've heard Mr. Alonzo's motion to place copies of his written remarks into the journal. Is there objection? There's no objection.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Giddings, for what purpose?

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Alonzo?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I will.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Representative Alonzo, just a quick question. What does your map do in terms of -- is this a statewide map?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: It is but what we've done in -- just so you'll know, ma'am. In all the plans that Representative Marinez-Fisher has presented, what we've done every time we made a presentation we focus on certain part of the State. This is the same plan that Representative Martinez-Fischer presented for the Coastal Bend, for south Texas, for San Antonio. This is just talking about Dallas and what it does in Dallas to create an opportunity for three districts in Dallas County and three districts, I mean in two districts in Tarrant County.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. In Dallas County, does it preserve the African American districts 110, 109, 111, does it preserve those districts?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Okay. So there's no retrogression --

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: No, ma'am.

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: -- in terms of African Americans districts in Dallas.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: That is correct. Yes, ma'am.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Rodriguez, for what purpose?

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: One question.

THE SPEAKER: Will you yield, Mr. Alonzo?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I will.

THE SPEAKER: Gentleman yields.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Mr. Alonzo, this -- basically your amendment what it does for Dallas County is that you believe, as I believe I think, that we could do better in Dallas County in terms of Hispanic representation; is that correct?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: That is correct.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: This will maximize the number of Hispanics I think is due to in Dallas County; is that correct?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: That is correct.

REP. EDDIE RODRIGUEZ: Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Johnson, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE ERIC JOHNSON: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Alonzo?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I will.

REPRESENTATIVE ERIC JOHNSON: What does your proposed map do to District 100 in terms of black voting age population?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: I cannot tell you specifically but what we tried to do is as I answered Ms. Giddings district did not minimize whatever we have at the moment.

REPRESENTATIVE ERIC JOHNSON: So, explain that one more time. I'm sorry.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Ms. Giddings asked earlier if we maintained the district that we have as it relates to African American districts. And the answer is yes.

REPRESENTATIVE ERIC JOHNSON: Well, she didn't ask about District 100. That's the district I'm asking about.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: And the reason I'm answering that way is because your district is an African American district and I am answering the same way.

REPRESENTATIVE ERIC JOHNSON: Okay.

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Giddings, for what purpose?

REP. HELEN GIDDINGS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, just for a comment. Apologies to District 100, I just inadvertently left that off. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Members, Mr. Alonzo has asked for permission to place his written remarks in the journal and there was no objection. So they will be so placed in the journal.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Thank you for that opportunity and members --

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you Mr. Chairman, members. This is for a continuation of a dialogue and I understand -- I think we have in Dallas County drawn a fair and legal map and in Tarrant County as well and I want to defend that and I'm going to move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Carter, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: I'd like to ask a question of Representative Alonzo.

THE SPEAKER: Let him take the floor and he will yield. Okay. Chair recognizes Representative Alonzo. Will you yield, Mr. Alonzo?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Yes, I will.

THE SPEAKER: He will yield, Ms. Carter.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Thank you. Representative Alonzo, what does this map do to Republicans in the Dallas County?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: I think we try to be as fair as possible.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: And who maybe paired under your map in Dallas County.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: I do not have that in front of me, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: You don't know. This is your map, correct?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: But you don't know whom you paired under Dallas County, under your own map?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: I do not have that in front of me. No.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Okay. But you admit that it must pair at least four members of Dallas county; is that correct?

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: That is probably true, yes.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: And has this map gone through the committee process? Yes or no.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Has this map gone through the committee process.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: No.

REPRESENTATIVE STEFANI CARTER: Okay. Thank you.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Mr. Speaker, I would ask that you vote against the motion to table. And before I leave the mike, I know there's been a lot of discussion as far as whether it's retrogression or not. And what I would like to add, Mr. Speaker, there was discussion and there was reticence back and forth about whether it was retrogression or not. It is my contention that there is under the 150 plan. And MALDEF submitted a letter to the House of Representatives regarding that and I would like to ask that it be submitted as part of the record.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Alonzo, has asked that the letter be submitted as part of the record. Is there any objection? There being none, if you will hand it to the clerk it will be made part of the record.

REP. ROBERTO ALONZO: Please, vote no on the motion to table.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Alonzo sends up an amendment. Mr. Solomons moves to table. The vote is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote no. Clerk, please, ring the bell. All voted? Everyone voted? There being 97 ayes and 45 nays, the motion to table prevails. Members, we are now on plan 200. Clerk, please read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez-Fischer.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Mr. Walle.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, speaker, members. We believe that the Solomons' committee substitutes on redistricting plan fails Harris County by splitting communities of interest and disrupting neighborhoods. H.B. 150 as it is currently drawn violates Federal law and the Texas Constitution. Again, as we've mentioned plenty of times this evening, Article 3, Section 26 of the Texas Constitution requires that the State to cut as few county lines as possible while still complying with the equal population -- while still complying with equal population between districts for the Texas House of Representatives. This Texas Constitution requirement is often referred to as the whole county line rule. The Texas Constitution also forbids discrimination on the basis of race and national origin. Using the ideal district size for House of Representatives district. Harris County, county lines can be maintained without breaking -- without breaking any of the county rules. In addition to that, when we reduce the amount of members from 25 to 24, it dilutes -- we believe it dilutes minority representation in Harris County. H.B. 150 uses the whole county rule in such a fashion as to allocate only -- again 24 districts, for Harris County. Resulted in a creation of no new Latino opportunity districts. To further of avoiding the creation of a new Latino majority district in Harris County. H.B. 150 packs existing Latino districts. H.B. 150, therefore, violates Article 1, Section 3A and Article 2, Section 26 of the Texas Constitution. Furthermore, the MALC plan in contrast, for Harris County complies with the one person, one vote standard and the whole county line rule. It creates an extra Latino majority seat compared to the current plan and two more than H.B. 150. It also maintains existing minority opportunity districts without packing existing districts to maintain partisan advantage or incumbent sections. In short, the MALC plan balances the needs of the communities of interest and the constitution mandates to promote and protect minority voting strength.

UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Alvarado, for what purpose?

REP. CAROL ALVARADO: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Would you yield, Mr. Walle?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes, I yield.

THE SPEAKER: Gentleman yields.

REP. CAROL ALVARADO: Representative Walle, I'm not sure of your comments of Harris County being reduced to 24 seats. But also the breaking up of communities of interest, can you talk about some of those. I know there are several but some of those that stick out. For example, maybe the Heights or some of the other areas that break up communities of interest?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well, what the -- initially with the initials amendment for Harris County you have four representatives that were going to represent Harris County. In particularly in the Heights neighborhood of Houston. With the amendment to the amendment, that breaks it down to three representatives that would potentially represent the Heights. So in essence it takes out all of Representative Farrar's area of the Heights which was wholly in her district and breaks it up into three districts. So that community of interest which is the Heights is broken up into three state rep districts.

REP. CAROL ALVARADO: Okay. Would you say that the vast majority of growth in Harris County is -- can be accredited to the minority community?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yeah, it will be the Latino community, Asian community, and the African American community that has exploded in Harris County.

REP. CAROL ALVARADO: And how many minority opportunity districts are created under H.B. 150?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well, that's the issue. The argument is that they've created one additional Latino district. But in Harris County what you have is retrogression because what you do is at one level you pack all the majority Latino districts. By doing that you dilute the opportunity for other Latinos that -- where the growth has been in the suburban areas. Where African Americans, Asians and Hispanics have grown in the suburban areas and you dilute the opportunity of those areas such as Representative Vo's current district an opportunity for those folks to elect somebody of their choice.

REP. CAROL ALVARADO: And that was my next question. The coalition districts or Latino majority districts, that being Representative Hochberg and then the coalition district was Representative Vo, that those are pretty much destroyed.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: No. Those are pretty much eliminated. And the argument is that you create -- by keeping it at 24 you create another Latino district which is far from the truth because you have Representative Scott Hochberg that represents a lot of Latino residents but their candidate of choice is Representative Hochberg. You have Representative Vo that has a coalition district that chooses to elect Representative Vo and then you basically wipeout an opportunity for those community members to elect somebody that have been -- that are doing very well in Harris County.

REP. CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: For what purpose, Mr. Hochberg?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Walle?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Definitely.

THE SPEAKER: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you. Mr. Woolley -- Mr. Woolley, I mean Walle -- I get you two confused all the time. You are talking about my district, about Mr. Vo's district and there has been some discussions that for some reason my district is not a protected district, have you heard those? It's obviously been paired and destroyed so, somebody must have felt that it wasn't -- it didn't merit voting rights protection. Have you heard that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I've heard that and many of us beg to differ. We want to -- we believe that your current district is a protected district. We also believe that Representative Vo's district is a protected district.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Do you know that when district 137 was created the analysis -- there was an analysis that said that the plan that created it successfully draws a majority Hispanic VAP district in southwest Harris County and called it a multiethnic district with significant blacks, Hispanics and Asian populations. Do you know who called it that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I don't.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Would you be surprised to know that that was the redistricting board who called it that in justifying their plans to the Justice Department?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I think those comments were -- now I'm being reminded of your comments from earlier discussions, that was the comments that were made by the LRB.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: And it was considered to be a Hispanic performing district even though with a Hispanic population, voting population of a little over 50 percent. And do you realize that now under -- that my current district has a Hispanic voting age population of about 60 percent?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: And so, how could it possibly not be a protected district?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And that would be the argument for the litigation, quite frankly, because we believe that your district is in its current form is a protected district because obviously the majority of the voters in that district are Latino but they continue to elect you and I want -- that does delve into splitting of district of the of the areas that you represent currently were, if I'm correct, they draw a line through apartment complexes to try to dilute minority representation and for me that --

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Yeah, and in fact there was a VTD. Despite all of the discussions about not cutting the VTD's earlier today about other districts. There was a VTD that was cut that as you point out goes directly down the center of an apartment complex. So you would actually have to find out the unit number of the person of the apartment complex before you knew whether it was in my district or in district that is currently represented by Ms. Davis?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: That's correct. And I would add that, how do you -- how do you match. How do you defend that cutting a whole apartment complex?

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: I don't think you can. And they also cut the Sharpstown community in half which is also been a clear community of interest that is about 7000 single family homes which is larger than some of the towns that we here discussed that nobody even consider cutting.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Correct. And we have this additional redistricting going on in the City of Houston. City of Houston elections where there is an effort to bring back those communities of interest so that the Latino community in southwest Houston can elect somebody from their community in southwest Houston because the traditional areas of Latino growth in north and east end are just not the case. It's been shown in your district, in southwest Houston. It's been shown in all over the county but right now there is an effort the Latino community has come together for southwest Houston so that they elect a city council member from their community. And what this does too is --

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: For what purpose, Mr. Vo?

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Would the Representative yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Representative, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I yield.

THE SPEAKER: He yields.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Representative Walle, are you aware that District 149 is a majority minority district?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Right now District 149 is composed of 90 percent --

THE SPEAKER: Time is -- excuse me, Mr. Sheets raises the point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Mr. Speaker, extension for time.

THE SPEAKER: Pardon, Mr. Vo?

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Extension of time, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Members, Mr. Vo has asked for consent for extension of time. Is there objection? There is objection. Members vote aye, vote nay from your desk. Clerk ring the bell. It's a vote on a motion to extend time. Vote aye, vote nay. It's a record vote. All voted? There being 92 ayes, 36 nays the gentleman's time is extended.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Thank you members.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Vo.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Representative Walle, you know that the District 149 is a majority minority district right now?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes, sir.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: And it has about 20 percent Asians, 20 percent Hispanic and 20 percent African Americans. And you know my -- the people of District 149 have every election has sent me back here to the legislature for the last four sessions now?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: That's correct and we are glad to have you.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: And you also know that it is a community of interest because we have people from District 149 came up two weeks ago to come up here and testify and one is that the Asian community to be represented and there were like a hundreds and hundreds of emails sent to the members of the redistricting committee, too. So that clearly shows that District 149 is a district of community of interest, right?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: That's correct. And I would add that because of your -- obviously the initial election that you had, you were elected by a very small margin and every successive election you increased the margin of your victory and that's to your credit because you worked your district, representing as an Asian American from Vietnam your story is very compelling. And there's a reason why your voters have continually sent you back here to Austin to fight for their interest. But not just so much for the interest of Asian Americans but all your constituents because you have several dozen languages that are spoken in your district.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Exactly. The district that I represent has a portion of the Alief School District and we have 72 different spoken language within that school district. And outside the elected there was another Asian American who was elected in the school board and last year there was another Asian American who was elected to the city council.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: That's the testament of the strength of the -- of the Asian community. And what I don't understand about this map, and let me be clear. As why they would go after the lone Asian American from Harris County, one of two Asian Americans in the State of Texas. One of two. And they are going after eliminating your district and I just -- I don't think it passes constitutional muster. That they would try to eliminate your district and then at the same time say that we are creating another Latino district with Representative Scott Hochberg's district. When it already is a protected district.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Under this proposed plan right here. Under House Bill 150, District 149 would be eliminated and the Asian community will be represented by four different districts under this proposed plan. So you can tell that the Asian boards will be diluted, right?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: All right.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you, Representative.

REPRESENTATIVE HUBERT VO: Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Representative Farrar, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Would the gentleman yield?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Walle?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes.

THE SPEAKER: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Mr. Walle, a moment ago Mr. Vo asked for an extension of time. You are aware that Mr. Vo's district was eliminated in this plan, correct?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: That's correct.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Yet 36 members of this body voted against the extension of his time. Are you aware of that?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: How do you think that will bowed in the court challenge?

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well, I think that it doesn't bowed well. That we wouldn't extend the amount of time because this is very personal, let alone for us in Harris County where we -- we are eliminating Representative Hubert Vo who has done an excellent job representing his constituents.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: And who represents in effect the minority opportunity district.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And it's an effective minority opportunity district because there's no single majority minority and he's been able to win elections this last election cycle by several thousand votes, I believe. And I think it's a travesty that we wouldn't give him the opportunity to try to defend his district.

REPRESENTATIVE JESSICA FARRAR: Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes, Mr. Solomons to speak against it.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. We think that the map in Harris County is legal and I know the Harris County delegation worked on an amendment for Harris County, we think that's legal. And so I would move to table.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Walle to close. Gentleman has yielded the floor. Mr. Solomons, do you -- would you come back up? Hang on Mr. Walle --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Sure.

THE SPEAKER: For what purpose, Mr. Walle? Just a few questions. Okay. Will you yield, Mr. Solomons?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I yield.

THE SPEAKER: Gentleman yields.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Chairman Solomons, one of the things that concerns us in Harris County is why we would move from 25 to 24 and basically eliminating an opportunity district like the one that Representative Vo represents where there is no single majority minority and that those folks had continued to send him back here.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, Mr. Walle we have discussed that at length today. We discussed it in -- earlier on at length and two, I also laid out -- when I laid out the bill and discussed Harris County. We talked about whether or not we thought those were protected districts and we don't think they are protected districts and --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Why do you think they are not protected.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We don't think they are protected under the Voting Rights Act and that's what my legal people tell me, and number one. And number two, since we've already discussed this at length, I don't know that I really -- not to be disrespectful at all but I think we've talked about that quite a bit already today during -- when I first laid out the bill and during some processes and besides that Harris County went back in the backroom and basically after reaching some agreement and trying to go through the process there was an agreement by many of the Harris County delegation in drawing a map as it was and I don't think it's illegal --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- we disagreed.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: We disagreed but I don't think -- we were not informed that a 24 map was going to be submitted. Okay. That map was submitted to you without any of the other democratic members from Harris County being informed of such map. And that's the issue that many of us from Harris County have. Is that we were not informed that those maps had been submitted, signed off, on a 24 map. When we were trying to negotiate to get a 25 map. And for us, we take that very personally because one, you are eliminating Representative Hubert Vo and pairing him with Representative Hochberg. And at the same time packing the other Latino other majority minority districts. So for us, the process wasn't clean for us.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I appreciate your opinion.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And I'm glad you are taking it. The community -- why do we try to pack a lot of majority minority districts in Harris County?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I don't know that we are packing as you would suggest minority districts. From minority --

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Let me rephrase my question. Why do we try to overpopulate nearly every minority majority district in Harris County?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: As you-all well know the Hispanic population in Harris County did not settle in one or two particular districts. They are spread it and assimilated throughout Harris County, number one. Number two, as I suggested before I respect your opinion and I respect your situation in connection with how you feel about the 24 versus 25 and we have discussed that quite a bit. So far. And we've created a record on that for your discussion to do whatever you wish to do about that. We think the Harris County map is legal the one that proposed by the committee and we think the map that was -- as it was rearranged for Harris County after a two and a half hour delay or so is legal and that's why we have what we have today.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: I appreciate your time today.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, I appreciate your time.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Walle to close.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. And I apologize for the delay. And I know it's late but for many of us from Harris County the notion that we would reduce one of our delegation from 25 to 24 and for us is unacceptable. We've had a -- particularly for a bipartisan delegation to have 25 members is very important for us. We have a lot of diversity. A lot of diversity of opinion in Harris County and to dilute our delegation from 24 -- from 25 to 24 is something that doesn't set well with us. It definitely doesn't sit well with me. And I know there's been a lot of debate back and forth on this issue but for us it's very personal, particularly for Representative Hubert Vo and Representative Hochberg that has served us, this body with respect and kindness and somebody that both of them that we deeply respect and their close personal friends and we don't hear anybody -- I know there's a lot of pairings going on all over the State but these folks are dear friends. And we just -- doesn't sit well with us tonight. And I move to against the motion to table.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Walle sends up an amendment. Mr. Solomons moves to table. The vote is on the motion to table. It's a record vote. Vote aye, vote no. Clerk, please, ring the bell. All voted? All members voted? There being 98 ayes, 45 nays, the motion to table prevails. Members we're now on plan 201. Following amendment. Clerk, please, read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Martinez-Fischer.

THE SPEAKER: Plan 201. Chair recognizes Representative Martinez-Fischer.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. This is an amendment that I want to lay out and I want to discuss. I will be withdrawing the amendment. I will not ask the body for a vote on it. But it's a continuation of discussion that Chairman Solomons and I have regarding the whole county rule. I do not believe that the Texas Constitution requires us to maintain a whole county rule if that means we deny the addition of minority opportunity districts. I'm not a fan of that. Chairman Solomons says he's been very minimal in his what I call cuts, he calls them spillovers. You know we will let someone else decide who is right. But when I count the spillovers, to use his term in House Bill 150, I find 17 spillovers or 17 county breaks and so what this amendment does is it draws a statewide map using the same number of spillovers, county breaks, 17. And when you do that, you can still draw an overall statewide map that increases minority opportunity and, yes, because it's a whole county it may also impact a district that has a minority opportunity if you adhere to the principle of not breaking county rules. But for the purposes of demonstration and looking at our whole county map, we can take Spanish surname voter registration, at 50 percent or more, and increase it from Solomons' 30 to our 32. We can take Hispanic voting age population of 50 percent or more, and look at Solomons' where his map gives 34 seats following his exact same number of cuts we can do 37. If we look at the African American voting age population of 50 percent or more, Solomons' map does two we can do three and still adhere to 17 cuts or spillovers. If you look at combined African American, Hispanic voting age population of 50 percent or more. We can take Solomons' map that has 53 members and produce 59. If you look at one of the harder maps to draw which is Hispanic citizen voting age population or HC map, using 17 cuts -- Solomons' map will give you 30 districts and we'll give you 31. So again, it's only a result of the dynamic growth of the minority community that you can do this even under some of the most restrictive adherence to the county line rule that Chairman Solomons is so eloquently defended today over and over again, has acknowledged that that's what he believes the state constitution obligates him to do. We certainly know that discussion will continue over and we will have the Federal interpretation of the State constitution. But it's just using his rule, you can still draw the maps with minority opportunity. I don't think it's perfect --

THE SPEAKER: Representative Aliseda, for what purpose?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Would the gentleman yield?

THE SPEAKER: Would you yield?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: I will yield right after my lay out. Just give me a second.

THE SPEAKER: Not at this time, Mr. Aliseda.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: All right.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: And so, this is not a perfect construct. This is not the way we should be drawing maps. If we can grow the State with minority opportunity I believe it's permissible under the interpretation of the constitution and under Federal law and under preemption that you can make breaks to grow minority communities. But even working under the Solomons' rule, working under his rules of engagement we can still do a better job. And so with that, you know, I wanted to make sure that was part of the purposes of the record. I do intend to withdraw this map. Be happy to take a question from Representative Aliseda but I will not be asking for a vote on this.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Aliseda, gentleman yields.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Mr. Martinez-Fischer, how many versions of your map have we heard tonight?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Well, this is my second Amendment.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: But there's been other maps we heard tonight bare your name on them. I assume they are different versions of your very first map; is that correct?

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: There are eight amendments. Seven of them are the same maps with whatever region that was part of the debate. So if it was -- whether it was Coastal Bend or the valley or Harris or Dallas or Fort Worth metro, there were some DTD tweaks to make it a separate stand alone amendment.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: All right. I've sat at my chair and let y'all make a record. But I would like to state my objection to all those maps and including this one. And the reason is every one of them for some reason has messed with my district which is currently represented by a Hispanic Republican. And this particular map that you are trying to lay out and intending to withdraw in fact turns me from a district that is, predominantly Hispanic into a predominantly Anglo district. So I'm trying to show that -- I'm not sure that partisan politics were involved in drawing your maps in addition to minority politics. But with respect to this map, I think that is what happened here.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And I'm sorry, there is a little bit of background noise here. Did you say that this map, this amendment changes the complexion of your district?

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: Completely.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: And I believe if you listen to what I said --

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: And I agree with you, it does.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: -- but it does so when you draw a map specifically under the rules that Chairman Solomons has laid out of not breaking whole counties. This is the effect, in this amendment it happens to be yours. In other amendments it happens to be the denial of minority districts in West Texas, denial of minority districts in Nueces County, a denial of districts in Hidalgo County and Cameron county. And so, yes, I agree with you. When you do maps based on whole counties with a purpose other than looking to grow minority opportunities it does impact.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: My observation about this map as well as the other maps, the other intended purpose appears to be some kind of partisan politics which apparently you and your comrades have not wanted to here, up to this point.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Do you see any comrades up here, Representative Aliseda.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I take that back. I'm sorry. Members of your party.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: Well, let me tell you it seems to me that you are the only one taking the mike talking about partisan politics. And I will have you know that if you look at the maps for the West Texas Hispanic opportunity districts, I would go take a look at some of that election data. I'm not going to talk about the partisan politics because I don't care about partisan politics when it comes to creating minority opportunity districts because if minorities are truly representing those minority opportunity districts we don't have to worry about politics, Representative Aliseda.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I disagree with you.

REPRESENTATIVE ARMANDO WALLE: The comrades and I, Representative Aliseda, do not have to worry about partisan politics.

REP. JOSE ALISEDA: I would disagree with you. Every one of these maps, each one of them seems to fool with a Republican district and make it into a Democrat district. And it also has the same effect as the increasing minority representation but it crosses county lines and does not take into account incumbency and does not take into account the incumbent's party. And that's why I would object to every one of these. And in the last one in effect takes me and makes me a Republican --

THE SPEAKER: Representative Sheets raises the point of order. The gentleman's time is expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained. Chair recognizes Representative Martinez-Fischer to close.

REP. TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank Representative Aliseda because I couldn't make the point better myself. When you adhere to the whole county lines you change the complexity of the districts. Whether I disagree that every single map effected his district, I whole heartedly agree that this amendment effected his district but that's what happens all over the State of Texas, when you limit the growth to county lines. And so, I couldn't have had a better witness to make that case for me. So I want to thank him for that. And with that Mr. Speaker and members, thank you for indulging me but I certainly would like to withdraw amendment 201. Thank you.

THE SPEAKER: The amendment is withdrawn. Members, we are now on plan 202. The clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Turner.

THE SPEAKER: Members, we are getting close to reaching the end of the day, Mr. Solomons has been telling us about all day. You say "at the end of the day." We're close to the end of the day. Chair recognizes Representative Turner.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I think there's an amendment to add to this amendment.

THE SPEAKER: Following amendment to the amendment. Clerk, please, read the amendment to the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment to the amendment by Turner.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Turner.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Let me explain what this amendment to the amendment 202 does. It increases the black voting age population to 40.3 percent from 39.6 percent to prevent retrogression issues. This as it relates to District 100. The amendment effects District 100, 101, 103 and 108 as follows. It moves the non black population from District 100 to District 101 and 108. It moves the Hispanic population from District 100 to 103, and transfers the black population from District 103 to District 100. And the total population effected is 2708 individuals. And it's acceptable to the author.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons. Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Turner sends up an amendment to the amendment. It's acceptable to the author of the amendment. Is there any objection to the adoption of amendment to the amendment. There being no objection. Amendment to the amendment is adopted. Chair recognizes Mr. Turner.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. Recognizing the lateness of the hour, let me just say this. Other than for today you have not heard much conversation from African Americans with respect to this entire redistricting process. There has been very little input provided to this committee process as it relates to African Americans. I will tell you that this is a statewide map being presented by the Texas Legislative Black Caucus. Let me also say to you that the Texas Legislative Black Caucus is highly diverse. There are 17 members of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus, there are Democrats and Republicans. This map is not a political map. It has nothing to do with Democrats or Republicans. It has nothing to do with whether you are progressive, a liberal or a conservative. Nothing at all. And if you will notice most, most of the members of the Legislative Black Caucus, I would say 16 of 17 have signed onto this amendment. It doesn't matter to us whether you are Democrat or a Republican. It doesn't matter to us whether you are conservative or whether you are liberal. What does matter to the members of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus is that we remain visible and viable in the State of Texas. That we do not want to be treated as if we do not exist. And we do not want to be ignored. And so in this particular amendment which is a statewide amendment, we are just as much interested in maintaining a James White as we are interested in maintaining a Dawnna Dukes or Harold Dutton or Senfronia Thompson. What we find in House Bill 150 is that it negatively and adversely impacts on African American representation in the State of Texas. And that we find 150 to be retrogressive and we find that the input has been very, very limited. So let me tell you what it does. Plan 202, the Texas Legislative Black Caucus statewide amendment to the Black Legislative Caucus plan -- the main overwriting goal was to increase and maintain minority representation statewide. There are 38 Hispanic majorities above 50 percent total population in plan 202. There are 13 African American opportunity districts above 38 percent in plan 202. There are 13 districts with the combined black and Hispanics population above 50 percent, two of which are currently held by the Texas Legislative Black Caucus members, Representative Dukes and Representative McClendon. There is one Asian plurality opportunity district, District 26 in Fort Bend County. In total there are 63 minority opportunity seats statewide plus one Asian plurality district. In Harris County the plans pairs Representative Legler and Representative Hernandez-Luna but protects Representative Hochberg and Representative Vo. This plans creates eight open seats statewide. In West Texas the plan does not take aim at any particular members but presents a configuration which is similar to what is presented in plan 153 which was passed by the committee. The main exception is in Lubbock where minority representation is enhanced in District 84. In east Texas the population in reduction necessitated the pairings and configurations as presented in this plan. This plan utilizes the MALC proposal No. 2 from Bexar County which maximizes minority representation. And this plan utilizes a MALC proposal for south Texas by adding one district in the Rio Grande Valley. Unlike the committee plan, the Texas Legislative Black Caucus plan satisfies the constitutional and statutory requirements for redistricting. Unlike the committee plan, the TLBC plan will satisfy the preclearance requirements of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. The TLBC plan protects the rights of African American voters in Texas as it must to pass legal muster, the committee plan doesn't. The TLBC recognizes that the legal requirements are not just about numbers, they are about the reality of each plan as it will effect the rights of voters. The TLBC plan respects those rights, the committee plan does not. The TLBC maintains the core of existing districts. It honors existing political structures and alliances. It respects the realities for the hard-working citizens of our state who volunteer their time and energy. The committee plan does not. So when you look at what is presented in plan 202 it is about maintaining African American districts --

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose? REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Oh, I was waiting until the gentleman from Harris County finishes his remarks.

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Turner?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: I will yield. And I will say with the adoption of 202 it makes House Bill 150 much more responsive. It does not make it retrogressive and it's one that I think all of Texas will benefit regardless of your political persuasion affiliations. Having said that I will yield. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Thank you. Let me thank you for your plans. I do recognize that the work that you have put into this and that the members of the -- the American caucus and the Legislative Black Caucus have put into it to make sure that we could draw a plan, that I believe, after looking at it would certainly pass legal muster but seems to be fair to the citizens of the State and that's what really I think is the ultimate test for me.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: I will agree. I will tell you and I stand to be corrected. It is the only plan that has been presented today that carries bipartisan support. It is the only plan that protects the rights of people whether you are Democrats or Republican. And it is the only plan today --

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Sheets raises the point of order. The gentleman's time has expired. Point of order is well taken and sustained.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Well, that was very quick.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Solomons in response.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Representative Solomons, I know with his infinite wisdom will find it to the best advantage of the State of Texas to come and endorse this plan. And ask for your acceptance of this plan. I would be surprised, shocked, and quite embarrassed if he asked that this motion to be tabled.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: In fact I was going to say --

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: With all due respect to -- well, thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. With all due respect to the efforts of Mr. Turner and the concerns that they have. I do believe that the map that the committee has proposed is not retrogressive. It is legal and I am going to move to table.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker --

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Dutton, for what purpose? REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Solomons?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, sir.

THE SPEAKER: Gentleman yields. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Mr. Solomons, do you have any -- are there any legal challenges that exist in Mr. Turner's plan versus the plan that's on the floor today?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sorry, do I have any what? REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Have you taken a look at Mr. Turner's plans?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yeah. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: And does it -- in your estimation are there any legal challenges that you see in his plan that might not be in your own plan?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, plan 202 and let's see, 202 has -- and he amended it. The idea that we are -- you know he amended variety of counties and some issues about in 202 in particular he split counties. It's a black caucus statewide proposal and I understand that. And I think there are some legal issues in connection with how he splits communities of interest and also the county lines. He tries to increase the number of SSVRs -- REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Let me ask you this then, Mr. Solomons. The number of minority opportunity districts in your plan versus Mr. Turner's plan, can you speak to that?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I can speak to the fact that our plan is legal. We believe it's legal, the attorneys tell me it's legal. Everybody that's associated with the plan itself that the committee proposed on its face was legal. To the best of their knowledge. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Well that's not my question though, Mr. Solomons. Let me ask it again. Perhaps you didn't understand me. My question is, in both plans in your plan and in Mr. Turner's plan, I assume since you have looked at them and examined them that you recognize that each of those plans create minority opportunity districts have you not?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: They attempt to, but it also splits county lines, too. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Okay. We're going to -- I'm going to get to that because your plan also splits county lines, too. I think it was already figured out, haven't we?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We split county line one time. It was absolutely necessary. We had some spillover areas in the State as you well know. We stayed within county lines where we needed to stay within county lines to adhere to the Texas constitution. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: But I think you'll agree with me that the constitution doesn't make exception for one time or thousand times does it?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, it basically does say that if you have to do it, that it is absolutely necessary. The idea is not to break county as a guide to all of us in connection with what the current law is. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: So, here we are at 1:37 in the morning and you finally admit that there is some exceptions to the county line rule.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, no we've been talking about this all day about the county line rule. Everybody knows and everybody can look at the map over here, Mr. Dutton, and see that we have split one place that is absolutely necessary. And the issue is, the issue is there are spillovers areas because of the U.S. Census data what you do. You try to adhere to the Texas Constitution and the county rule. And I'm not going to admit that we did anything wrong. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Okay. I didn't think that you would. But let me ask you the question that I asked you about the minority opportunity district in your plan. How many minority opportunity districts exist in the plan that you brought forth?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I want to say we basically had -- if I recall, we had minority opportunity districts, hard to gauge that I know that we went from 29 to 30 for Hispanic minority opportunity districts. We have a number of -- number of black voter protected districts in the State through mostly in the urban areas most, obviously. In Dallas County and Harris County. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: My question is -- and maybe you don't know the answer, Mr. Solomons. But my question has to do with the total number of minority districts in your own plan.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: On the face of it right now as you said it's 1:40 in the morning. It's kind of hard for me to judge exactly and I don't have that available data right here in front of me. I think the map is pretty self-explanatory what we have and what we don't have. And I would assert still that we are not going to break county line rules in violation of Texas Constitution. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: But when you think it's necessary.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: -- that is absolute, when you absolute -- absolutely necessary and you know we are going to -- REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Well, I think in Mr. Turner's plan he's indicated that there are 63 minority opportunity districts. And do you know whether your plan has more than 63 or fewer than 63?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Right now off the top of my head no. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: So you no idea. You don't even know if you have --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm not advised at 1:40 in the morning. No, sir. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Well, unfortunately, Mr. Solomons, this plan is going to be here tomorrow. And so I think it's probably incumbent upon all of us -- if you've gotten tired maybe we ought to move to adjourn until we can all come back with fresh mind.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Well, if you want to ask me tomorrow when I close and we try to pass on third reading, I will assume you are going to ask that question again and perhaps I'll be a little fresher and to be able to give you some exact numbers if you like or a better explanation for you Mr. Dutton. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: I may get to ask you in a deposition too, Mr. Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sorry, what? REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: I might get to ask you that in a deposition as well.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I'm sure you will. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Yeah. And so, you're opposing Mr. -- your motion to table is based on what?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: For plan 202 in particular it splits a number of counties unnecessarily. Splits Nueces four ways. Splits Cameron county, splits (*inaudible) -- county, splits Victoria county and just plan 202 alone. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: And you believe that it does what in terms of legal --

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I think that violates the Texas constitution. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: And do you place again the Texas constitution above the Voting Rights Act for example?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I know that we are taken an oath to uphold the Texas Constitution. We're guided by the Texas Constitution. And since the State of Texas is not as we discussed earlier adopted anything differently and since there is no Federal law by the Supreme Court that says that I should do something different, the committee did what we thought we were supposed to do based on what our attorneys advised us. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: I'm not trying to say an answer, Mr. Solomons, because I think there is enough Federal law that tells you what you need to do. And I'm not sure what you mean when you say that there is no Federal law telling you what not to do. My question though had to do with where -- were there any conflicts between Federal law and the Texas Constitution in your plan?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: No. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: There were no conflicts at all.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: We tried to adhere to the Voting Rights Act as we understand the Voting Rights Act to be. We are trying to adhere to the Texas Constitution and all laws applicable for redistricting. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: So, in your plan, you never were faced with a choice between the Texas Constitution and Federal law or the U.S. Constitution.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: I would restate that we tried to adhere to all districting laws that we understand that law to be in doing this redistricting plan. The committee passed out a plan for proposal for this body and we think it's legal. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Mr. Solomons, you have said that about 8,000 times today. And so, I got it. I'm not asking you that. Okay. That's not what I'm asking. What I'm asking you is were there any conflicts in your plan between Federal law, either the U.S. Constitution and Federal statutes and the State's statutes on the State Constitution?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Not that I'm aware of. REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON, JR.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for questions.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, ma'am.

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Davis, for what purpose?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Would the gentleman yield for questions?

THE SPEAKER: Do you yield, Mr. Solomons?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Yes, I do.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And as you were talking about this plan you indicated that there was a problem with the splitting of counties and districts and communities of interest. In your plan, are you aware that you split up added communities that were not in districts that were in Dallas County?

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: It's kind of hard for me to hear right now because -- I'm sorry, Ms. Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: You mentioned that one of the problems with plan 202 had to do with it violated communities of interest in many instances. And in your plan in Dallas County you violated that same rule. Why does it work for you to do it in Dallas county versus this plan?

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Sheets raises the point of order that the gentleman's time has expired. The point of order is well taken and sustained.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker.

THE SPEAKER: What's your inquiry, Ms. Davis.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Where is Mr. Sheets?

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Sheets is back there.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Where?

THE SPEAKER: He has a standing motion to --

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: I figure he at least has to show his face since he has such a good time piece.

THE SPEAKER: Chair recognizes Mr. Turner to close.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Thank you Mr. Speaker and members. Let me just quickly say that this is not a political substitute to 150. And it's important to know even at 1:45 in the morning that this is an amendment to maintain, protect African American representation in the State of Texas.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman yield for a couple of questions?

THE SPEAKER: Ms. Davis, would you like the gentleman to yield?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Yes, I would like for him to yield.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Turner, would you yield?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: I'll be more than happy to yield.

THE SPEAKER: Mr. Turner, yields.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you, Mr. Turner, I want to make sure that we really illustrate what this plan 202 does. How many districts are we creating? Are you able to tell me versus the plan before us?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Yes, in total there are 63 minority opportunity seats statewide. Plus one Asian plurality district. They are 13 African American opportunity districts above 30 percent and there are 13 districts with a combined black and Hispanic -- above 50 percent, two of which are currently held by black caucus members, Representative Dukes and Representative McClendon.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: And with this plan, Mr. Turner, doesn't it allow us to even look at other districts around the state so that we can have those African Americans across the state represented that currently don't feel they are being represented in some of these districts.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: That's correct. And as far as in the Lubbock area that provides even an opportunity there. I think in Bexar County there is an opportunity there. That is also a part of 202.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: And, again, you indicated this is not a political map. What was the basis of us trying to offer a map with a plan to create what?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: To make sure that there is no retrogression. That is number one. There are presently 17 African American legislators on the floor of the Texas House and we come from both parties. This bill does not pick one against the other. It is not about trying to eliminate the Republicans who are part of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus. It is not about trying to remove Democrats. And of those 17, I believe 16 have signed onto this amendment. So it's not about we -- it's not about trying to pit one party against another. We simply don't want a regression or a decrease in the number of African Americans that are on the floor of the Texas House or have an opportunity to serve in the Texas Legislature.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Mr. Chairman, as it relates to the whole redistricting process and maps and things that have been drawn, I know we had a question earlier about who drew the maps in south Texas. To the extent that we as a Legislative Black Caucus, what was our concern by having a map drawn because of the input -- lack of the input into the process; is that not correct?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Well, it seemed as though the discussion was one sided. Where African Americans were not included in any appreciable sense in the discussion as relates to the redistricting process. And so, what we have done is that we have put together a map a statewide map that is reflective of the demographics in this State and that protects African American representation without really impending on anyone else. And that's what this does. And I think what we were finding is that the way this debate and the discussions were going we did not want to participate in our own demise.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: And at this point, this map does protect us from the -- from the retrogression; is that correct?

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: That is correct.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Thank you.

REP. SYLVESTER TURNER: Members, I would ask that you take a favorable look at 202. And, again, I think it's important as we debate this topic -- we certainly as African American members don't want to participate in our own demise. And when you listen to the discussion that has been taking place over the last several weeks on redistricting, African Americans have not been a part in any real viable way a part of that discussion. The amendment before you clearly represents what our interests are, interests that need to be protected and, therefore, we would put forth this plan and ask for favorable consideration now or down the road. Having said that, I would ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Turner sends up an amendment, Representative Solomons moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Vote aye, vote nay. Clerk ring the bell. Show Mr. Solomons voting aye, show Representative Turner voting no. Have all voted? Show Mr. Zedler voting aye, show Mr. Aliseda voting aye. Have all voted? Being 96 ayes, 48 nays motion to table prevails.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: We're moving to plan 226. The following amendment. The Clerk will read the amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Alvarado.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, I am respectfully disagreeing with my desk mate here on the proposed H.B. 150 and I'm offering the amendment because I do feel that H.B. 150 does not accurately reflect Texas' growth or its diverse population. What this amendment does is that it increases, maximizes minority majority opportunity districts and it also addresses the Harris County issue that you've heard many of us talk about which keeps Harris County at 25 districts as opposed to the 24. The map creates a total of 57 districts where voters can elect a candidate of choice. And it also creates five new coalition districts and protects a majority Hispanic district and a coalition district that would otherwise be combined in Harris County. In regards to Harris County, nearly 100 percent of the growth in Harris County is attributed to the minority community, meaning the Hispanic community, African American community, and the Asian community. Yet, there is no new minority opportunity district that is created in fact a Latino majority district is wiped out as well as a coalition district that is completely wiped out.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Walle, for what purpose?

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Would Representative Alvarado yield for some questions?

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Yes, I do.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Representative Alvarado, thank you for your amendment. And you mentioned the explosion of the Latino growth and particularly Harris County from -- and we've had the discussion about the -- the 24 map that we currently have, do you believe that is retrogressive in reference to Latino -- minority interest in general.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: It absolutely is and I still think there has not been a very clear or a very satisfactory explanation as to why Harris County is taken to 24. There is no precedence for rounding in terms of rounding down for Harris County. The last couple of decades Harris County has been rounded up whether it was here on the floor in the legislature or in the LRV process.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: And it's your view -- with the current 25 map, that would be proposed that would fall within the deviation of getting us to whole twenty five.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Yes. Is well within the deviation and -- the I know that the Democrats in the Harris County delegation have voiced strong opposition to taking Harris County to 24. We do have some bipartisan support back home. Our Mayor who is a Democrat and our county judge who is a Republican have expressed their interest in keeping Harris County at 25.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Right. And I just actually pulled up that letter from Judge Ed Emmett and Mayor Anise Parker, they support a 25 map. At -- which actually can be an incumbent protection map.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: That is correct and I think you or somebody raised the point earlier that there was a good portion of the Harris County delegation that did not have input into the first map that was drawn at 24 and there has been discussion back and forth on how they were told to draw a map of 24. That dialogue and that debate has gone back and forth.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: So the notion that this was a member driven, particularly in Harris County, a member driven process, is it your view that it wasn't a member driven process because of certain segment of our delegation submitted a 24 map and we were still debating on if we were going to do 25.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: That is correct. And I know that we did work on something this evening and we are trying to work with what we have but in the initial process, yes, that is correct.

REP. ARMANDO WALLE: Okay. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Mr. Speaker would the gentle lady yield?

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Ms. Alvarado, do you yield?

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Yes, ma'am.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Ms. Alvarado, what do you do in District 111 in this map?

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: District -- which one was that?

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: District 111.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: You are paired with Representative Anderson and I understand that is -- there's one precinct that could address that and resolve that.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: I'm sorry?

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: You were paired with Representative Anderson and I'm told that by one or two precincts if we address those that will resolve that issue.

REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS: Okay. Do you have an amendment to the amendment that would address that?

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Yes.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against the Alvarado amendment? Chair recognizes Representative Solomons in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, members. Respectfully, I rise to move to table my desk mates plan 226 map. Would want to talk about couple of things that involves the committee map. The committee map actually increases the number of minority majority districts to 30. Increases the likelihood that members of the Hispanic community in those districts maybe elect representatives of their choice. There are two minority majority districts with two black age voting populations about 50 percent. The committee maintains two districts with BVAP's exceeding 50 percent. Two districts in the committee map exceeding 50 percent. Every map that I've seen trying to draw more minority Hispanic or Black districts did so by breaking county lines. Ms. Alvarado's amendment is problematic because it does create 25 districts in Harris County. We believe it violates three sections in the Texas Constitution which requires us to divide between the counties as nearly as maybe. When we divide the Harris County by the ideal district, you get 24.4 districts and 24.4 is closer to 24 than 25. So we felt we must draw 24 districts in Harris County. Now Ms. Alvarado statewide map does create a 25 seats in Harris County but it also does a variety of pairings around the State including in Dallas County, by pairing -- well, around Dallas county, but Branch and Sheets, Beck and Cook and variety of other folks throughout the process. And it is an entirely new statewide plan. And I am going to move to table the -- Ms. Alvarado's amendment.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Alvarado to close.

REPRESENTATIVE CAROL ALVARADO: Mr. Speaker, I close.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Alvarado sends up an amendment. Representative Solomons moves to table. This is on the motion to table. Clerk ring the bell. Show Representative Solomons voting aye, Representative Alvarado voting no, show Representative Branch voting aye. Have all voted? Being 100 ayes, 44 noes. The motion to table prevails. Members, we are on plan 232. Following amendment. Clerk will read amendment.

CLERK: Amendment by Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: Thank you, members. I'm going to try to be brief and get some time back. What I want to do is put this information in the record. And then just ask the chairman to do what he's going to do and we can go. But what this amendment does and it's a statewide amendment. The substitute creates a number of opportunity and coalition districts where Hispanic, African American, and Asian voters can elect the candidate of their choice from 56 to 59. A sharp contrast with House Bill 150 which reduced that number to 51. The core communities of all existing minority opportunity districts are maintained and the substitute -- the number of minority opportunity districts is increased to 49 compared to 47 in House Bill -- the committee substitute to House Bill 150. District 105 and 138 in addition to the new 27 in lost Nueces districts are in both plans. Latinos are responsible for 65 percent of the State's population growth and this substitute increases the number of Latino opportunity districts from 35 to 36 while cutting less county lines than the committee substitute to House Bill 150. And cuts the number of Latino opportunity districts -- which cuts the number of Latino opportunity districts to 34. Additionally, the substitute strengthens three existing Latino districts 35, 78 and 137 to insure the effectiveness in contrast with HB 150 and the way it treats those same districts. This substitute increases the number of perspective coalition districts and areas of rapid minority growth to 10. Again, in contrast to the elimination of five minority coalition districts in CSHB 150. Substitute corrects the construction of H.B. 149 as to Vo district and also a pairing between 26.6 VAP and Anglo 49 and the neighboring Hispanics H.B. 137 on CSHB 150 pairing that will clearly violate the Voting Rights Act. I would dispense with the reading of this and ask the members to allow me to put this information into the journal.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, Representative Coleman moves to move the rest of his written testimony into the journal. Is there any objection? Chair hears none. So ordered. Chair recognizes Representative Solomons.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, Mr. Coleman knows I as well need to put some things in the record. So, Mr. Coleman's statewide proposal of the amendment, the way we are looking at it the amendment is problematic because it reduces the number of Hispanic majority seats based on SSVR's from 29 in the current map to 27 under the proposal. And contrast to the committee map creates 30 SSVR Hispanic majority seats. This map also creates nine pairings of the incumbents compared with eight of the committee map or seven if it's been reduced by an amendment which I don't think it has been. But the legal issues seem to be that it reduces the number of BVAP majority districts to one and reduces the number of SSVR, Hispanic majority districts from 29 to 27. We think the committee map is not only legal, it's not retrogressive and I know some folks probably disagree with that but we believe it is not retrogressive and we are going to -- I'm going to have to move to table respectfully.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Coleman to close.

REPRESENTATIVE GARNET COLEMAN: I disagree with everything that Burt just said and I ask you to vote no on the motion to table.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Representative Coleman sends up an amendment, Representative Solomons moves to table. It's on the motion to table. Clerk ring the bell. Show Representative Coleman voting no, show Representative Solomons voting aye, show Representative Branch voting aye. Have all voted. Being 101 ayes, 45 nays, motion to table prevails. Members, anyone wishing to speak on, for, or against House Bill 150? Chair recognizes Representative Christian to speak in opposition.

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, chairman, members, committee. Many times we in this place find ourselves for and against. Being for something or against something should never, ever allow us to extend any dishonorable statements. Any insinuation of dishonesty, attacks against the integrity of any member in this place. Our people have sent us here to represent them. Pete Laney, former speaker, I'll always admired his statement before every vote was, members, vote your district. That's what our job is. And we've done the job today. But this hour of the night, our constituents should be proud of everyone in this building. Committee has been most honorable. I'm a pretty loud guy. I'm not bashful about saying my opinion. I know Burt, our chairman, I served as vice chairman on the committee under him and we agreed the vast majority of the time but we disagreed. Chairman Solomons is an honorable man. He has done an honorable job in this process and I commend him for the job he has is done and his committee has done. If at any time I have ever been a part of a broadcast as I do on the YouTube, facebook, twitter, that honestly I don't know anything about. These kids know the computer and internet much better than I do. But to disagree is not dishonorable. The work this committee has done should be commended. The integrity with which Chairman Solomons has conducted this entire time is honorable. And should be respected and applauded. But to disagree is also honorable if it's done in an honorable means. And tonight I stand here commending and honoring the committee, its good work. Honoring the chairman of his leadership but disagreeing with the map. And, quite frankly, back to the statement that's speaker Laney said many times. It just does not do the best for my district. This map divides my district into four separate, former represented districts. I right now go far north in an area where 78 percent of my supposedly new constituents I've never met. I don't believe it was necessary for my and 14 other member districts to be taken in that direction. I think there was a better alterative. But I respect the process. I lost. We need to come to the point -- I remember Bob Bullet many times would -- the stories that I've heard of him he would get quite cranky with the people in his office and a few expletives that are not appropriate in any arena. And after he used those expletives telling those around how low they were in their opinions, he would say okay, guys, gals let's go have dinner. And then they would go have a good time. That's the honorable way we in Texas should do business. Honorably agree, honorably disagree. And it's with that that I respectfully come tonight with a question in my mind after 15 years or so a decade and a half of being a State Representative that partisan politics is appropriate.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Geren for what purpose?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Would the gentleman yield?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Certainly.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: Mr. Christian, I agree with most of what you're saying but if the map was broke, why didn't you do something to fix it?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Mr. Geren, we did offer a means to fix it. In fact the -- we met tonight the majority of the legislators from our part of the state had a plan for East Texas that we do agreed on.

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: Did we get to vote on it Mr. Christian?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Sir?

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: Did we get to vote on it, Mr. Christian?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: No, sir. I'm sorry that you did not. In fact --

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: Thank you, Mr. Christian.

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: We did apply. Asked for the opportunity to do that and the conditions for us presenting our East Texas process or east Texas map had several requirements that we did not feel as a majority of the East Texas representatives we could abide by. That's what disappoint me about the system that we have in this map. The majority of your east Texas representatives tonight, seven to be exact, wanted to present a plan. And the conditions that were given for us to do such did not reach the agreement of both those that would approve our presentation nor for us of the conditions we had to meet. And one of the conditions was to approve the map as a whole. And we as seven Representatives from deep east Texas flat did not approve of this map as a whole. We don't feel it does the best for Texas. Doesn't mean we don't respect the process, the committee or chairman or anybody else. It's just not right for our constituents. So, tonight members, I thank you for the opportunity to stand before you. I commend the chairman, the committee, and their good work.

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Geren, for what purpose?

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: Would the gentleman yield one more time.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Mr. Christian, do you yield?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: Certainly.

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: Mr. Christian, there was nothing -- there was any -- was there anything that would prohibit you from having an amendment tonight that said you had to sign on to the whole plan?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: It was an agreement verbally that we would stand and approve the map.

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: In order to have an amendment in front of this body?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: That is correct.

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: I think there were a lot of amendments -- were there not a lot of amendments tonight that were up, that were either approved or voted down but no -- was Mr. Rodriguez required to approve the plan if his went on?

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: I hope not.

REP. CHARLIE GEREN: And I don't believe yours would have been either. I wish you would have thrown yours out there so we had -- so we could have looked at it.

REP. WAYNE CHRISTIAN: We would have but the conditions for which we were going to be allowed to was just not agreeable. And those conditions were legitimate put before us and we considered the alteratives and the options we had to present our map. And again, that was not the purpose I came before you tonight in disagreeing with this with this to bring this up. The reason I stand before you is to apologize to the chairman, to the committee, if ever, I or I anything I have ever been included with has dishonored this body or that committee or the chairman. They have handled it correctly. They won. That's honorable. I lost. I hope that's also honorable too. But I will not stand before you tonight and say that I agree with this map. It did not allow, I believe, my opinion the representations for the people of my district and of east Texas and I will vote no on approving this map. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Giddings to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE HELEN GIDDINGS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have basically stayed away from the back mike and saved my brief remarks until this time. To my good friend, Chairman Solomons, that I've worked on being aye with since I came in the door and since he came in the door, and to the hard-working members of this redistricting committee. Not only are they members of this committee and members of the House but many of them I consider to be very, very good friends. I want to thank them for the time, the many hours that they spent and I want to acknowledge their hard work. Having said that, our goal as a legislature should be to achieve as near as possible equal district population and equal access and because of the Voter Rights Act pay special attention to opportunity districts for minorities. And I think it's important to note in the State of Texas that the Voting Rights Act came into being under a Texan, Lyndon Baines Johnson in 1965. I think it is also important to note that the extensions, the last extensions of the Voting Rights Act, the family luhamer, Rosa Parks, Coretta Scott King act, was signed into law on July 27, 2006 by another Texan by the name of George W. Bush. One a Democrat, the other a Republican. I was very pleased to have had the opportunity to speak with governor, President at that time Bush and asked his support of the extension of the Voter Rights Act for Texas which I did not think he was going to do but interestingly enough he did. Not only did he do that but I had a personal invitation to attend the signing of that bill. And I did attend. And so, it's interesting that Texas has a direct connection from a Democratic President in the beginning and a Republican President in the end with the Voting Rights Act. With House Bill 150, with all due respect, I'm not sure, I don't believe that we achieved access for minorities. As you know Mr. Chairman I was very, very interested in this process from the very beginning. I talked to you basically on day one. You told me to prepare my map submit it to the committee, clerk, which I did. And submit -- to the general counsel, who was right across the hall, which I did. I joined with two of my colleagues several of my colleagues as a matter of fact, Representative Davis, Representative Mallory Caraway, and I believe Representative Alonzo and others. And we also submitted maps and none of those maps, of course, were in fact accepted as we attempted to represent the people in south and southwest Dallas County. Here is why and where I think the map is problematic. I think we do very little by way of creating influence districts which I think is critical in terms of the Voting Rights Act, number one. And number two, I think there is a racial disparity impact in the African Americans have less representation and fewer opportunity seats than could have or should have been created or achieved which I also think is in conflict with the Voting Rights Act. Number three, I think that communities of interest were preserved in nonminority districts but the same standard of tests was ignored in minority districts. Communities of interests were unnecessarily disturbed both as a function of geography, shared interest or political cohesiveness. And as an example I used district 109 which is one of the highest voter performing districts in this state. And as you well know, Mr. Chairman, it is the highest voter performing district in Dallas County. And it was the only district in Dallas county that had an overage. But we didn't just go in and take out the overage in District 109. We in fact took some away and added some and brought in another city and divided a city none of which was necessary. As one of the colleagues who shall remain anonymous said to me when we talked about this, when I decided that I had too many shoes and I give some of them away to the Goodwill, I don't acquire new ones, I just leave them the extra ones. And that would have been the thing to do to make this district remain a district where there is a shared community of interest, where there is political cohesiveness. We cross county lines to keep some districts intact. But not -- and there was no consistency and further I don't think it speaks well for us that in some cases we couldn't seem to find out who drew certain lines in the map. And I think it would have been far better if those persons who served on this committee had drawn all of those lines at least in one case. The vice chair said that he didn't know who drew the lines, and the chair I think did not answer the questions. In the final analysis, as harsh as it might sound from this microphone, under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act the legislature always bears the responsibility of establishing the absence of a racially discriminatory purpose. That is the burden that we bear. I'm not really sure that we met that burden particularly as it relates to African American districts. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Villarreal to speak against.

REPRESENTATIVE MIKE VILLARREAL: First I want to recognize my chairman and his great work this evening from morning to this evening, well morning until morning. Sometimes I can talk to Burt and we will be having conversations and I'll stop and ask him are you mad at me? And he'll say, no, it's just the way I communicate. And sometimes it's hard as hell but I want to say that tonight, you know, for about fourteen hours or so, he's been up here at the front mike taking all of our amendments and being -- well he's just kept his cool and done a great job and so thank you. I want to recognize him for that. He has given us all a chance to bring our ideas forward. To speak our peace, to represent our districts and thank you. I also want to thank the many people who make up his team Bonnie, Addy, Geraldo, on the speaker's staff, Ryan this is definitely a team effort and I can't wait until we get to go home. Before I get off the front mike though I do want to address a couple of points. I've been thinking a lot about this redistricting process. And I want to first say that there are some things that I think we do really well. And it can be a model and our model for the rest of the country. The way this body is hardwired in many ways to be bipartisan, to elect a presiding officer with a coalition, always, on the House floor of Democrats and Republicans to run the process in a way where you see Republican chairman and Democratic chairman or you see a committee with a chairman who is of one party and a vice chairman who is on the other. I think those kinds of important procedures help us make decisions that are right for all of Texas. We could do a lot better than in this area of redistricting and we need to do better. Because our state is changing rapidly and it is so important that we create a map that really does reflect the changing demographics of our state. This isn't like any other state that may be a small and changing 5 percent, 8 percent, every decade. We're a large diverse state that is growing even more diverse. We grew more than 20 percent over the last decade. We grew more than double digit figures the previous decade. We got to make sure that this body is responsive to the larger state. We do that through this redistricting process. I'm going to be voting against this map because I believe while it has been fair in some regards being a creation of the members, being a member driven map, there -- I don't think it has been fair in its attempts to reflect where we are today in Texas, demographically. We could have drawn another Hispanic opportunity district in south Texas. We didn't do that. We ended up, in my opinion, decreasing in fact the number of Hispanic opportunity districts by one. Finally, there are some important and effective minority coalition districts in Harris County. One that has been totally eliminated and another that has been weakened to nonexistence. I know we'll have a chance to debate this and try that in the courts. I had hoped that we could somehow do both. The process that is sensitive to incumbents while also protecting Voting Rights Act and living up to what I think is ultimately fair for the entire state in reflecting today's demographics. I know from ten years ago when my district was eliminated by the LRB that this is a process. It's going to continue. And that the most important thing during this first stage is, you know, to not lose one's head. And I think we've kind of accomplished that but it is an ongoing process. I hope that when the dust settles in the end we produce a map that is better balanced. Respects our constituents' interests and maintaining a relationship with their incumbents but better reflects the demographics of Texas. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Hochberg to speak in opposition.

REPRESENTATIVE SCOTT HOCHBERG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I'll try to take a very short amount of time. It should be no surprise to anybody that I'm voting against House Bill 150. Let me first not only thank Burt for his courtesy, always being a gentleman the way he has led this debate today. You do the house proud, even when we disagree. And let me also thank I think the speaker really for setting the tone and allowing us to fight our battles and go off in the back for however many hours that was and maintain his patience. It means a lot to all of us. Ten years ago I went through this process and I came out at the end -- I'm actually better off this time because last time I was paired with two other members not just one. And that district was sliced and diced and it is ably represented by three members of this house in different parts. But at the same time the LRB created a new district of the left over pieces. The parts that nobody wanted. And I moved over there and ran and had the honor of winning. And it's two communities, one is the old Sharpstown subdivision. 6,000, 7,000 thousand homes. One of the areas called Gulfton which nobody knew what to do with. In fact Gulfton is all of our newcomers. It's an area that used to be swinging single's apartment complexes and Patricia, you remember the bottom dropped out of the market and it suddenly became the place where people who had nothing could move in cheap. Tremendous challenges in that area. And nobody really wanted this district because there was a lot of area of nonvoters. Huge numbers of people. In fact, when I took that area, another person in politics who represented that area in another office said -- don't even go over there because they don't vote anyway and just don't do anything for them. I didn't treat it that way. We've worked with that area, it's got a long way to go but it does have a voice now and if it was held together it would continue to have a voice. I see what happens to it on our city councils. Where it is chopped into three pieces and nobody is responsible for any of it. I would be against this map if I wasn't paired. The way that area was treated. Were not only does the map cut the area. It cuts a single apartment complex in two. So, in order to know who represents you, you're going to have to get a unit number to figure out whether you are at this side or that side of the line. That defies all concept of communities of interest. When we talk about and wring our hands about participation and elections going down, about specific engagement going down, about people being sceptical that's the kind of stuff that I think that drives our constituents up the wall. How can they be in this district you mean I got to figure out where in the complex they are calling me from in order to know to know whether they're a constituent or not? Same thing with the Sharpstown subdivision. It's bigger than a lot of the towns we protect and we ought to protect. Chopped off, not because there was another community of interest but because it was a convenient way to achieve a partisan goal. I think we can do better than that. I think maybe the computers have gotten us to the point where we can draw districts without having to talk to people about what's really together and what's really apart and I hope as the process goes on that we make improvements that keep some of these areas together because it's tough for all of us if people disconnect from the process and when we have such complications and trying to figure out how to help them. And this process is supposed to empower people not unempower people. I'm going to vote against House Bill 150 with respect to the chairman and look forward to continuing working with you and I imagine that we will meet each other in another venue as this process goes on. Thank you, members.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Solomons to close.

REPRESENTATIVE BURT SOLOMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members. I think Mike is already the vice chair, thanked the speaker. And I want to thank the speaker and his staff, Geraldo, Ryan, and Bonnie, and Chris and Hali and Dave, Hanna, and Jeff Archer and the entire committee and Mike in particular as vice chair in working with the committee. I can assure you that when I first came here in 1995 I would never in million years thought I was going to be a chairman of redistricting. It is what it is. And it's hard to please everybody, in every area in every district and it's a very personal process for every member individually. It is especially hard for me because I know so many of you so well. And redistricting has gotten to be pretty much it looks like in some case ways from what I can tell a bunch of numbers and legalities. And maybe it should be improved in some way but it is what we have right now. And it is redistricting, is what it is. It's very difficult process. We had a great committee. I want to -- I'm sorry I couldn't answer every question the way some people wanted me to answer them. I just try to do the best I could. But at the end of the day and I want that to be the last note for the day as its been our new phrase for the session. I want to thank all of you for your courtesies. You all have been great in working with each other as much as possible. And you've been great with me and with the members of the committee and with the staff and it means a lot. And I'll keep it short and I will just move passage. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Question occurs on the passage to engrossment the House Bill 150. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed nay. Record vote has been requested. Imagine that. Record vote is granted. Clerk, ring the bell. Have all voted? There being 92 ayes, and 52 nays and five present not voting. House Bill 150 is passed to engrossment. Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst for an announcement.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: Thank you members, the Public Health Committee will not meet until upon adjournment tomorrow. Thank you.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Kolkhorst.

REPRESENTATIVE LOIS KOLKHORST: I'm sorry, that will be today. Later in this day, today. Upon adjournment Public Health Committee. The calendar today, later today.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Chair recognizes Representative Dutton.

REP. HAROLD V. DUTTON JR.: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and members, the Committee on Urban Affairs will meet sometime later on today and I will make an announcement from the front mike at the time and place of that meeting.

CLERK: Following bills on first reading and referral of bills on the committee. H.B. 3859 by Laubenberg. Relating to the creation of the Club Municipal Management District No. 1; providing authority to levy an assessment and issue bonds. S.C.R. 10 by Ellis. Designating February 21 through 27 of each year from 2011 through 2020 as Barbara Jordan Freedom Week.

REPRESENTATIVE JOE STRAUS: Members, it is the chair's intent to come in at 11:00 o'clock tomorrow. Any other announcements? That will be 11:00 a.m. No other announcements. Representative Orr moves that the House stands adjourned until 11:00 a.m. tomorrow in memory of Johnson County Sheriff's Clifton Taylor. House stands adjourned.