He see evidence of the same degree of polarization commonly seen nationwide. He makes the striking observation that there is no middle in Texas politics. This is a curious thing to say because most people in the United States - those who vote in general elections - are in fact moderate. But that's not what drives politics. Politics is driven instead by primary election voters, and they tend to be on either extreme of the political spectrum.
- Click here for the article.
Mark P. Jones, a political scientist at Rice University, periodically engages in an exercise that graphically demonstrates the state of Texas politics.
Weighing every recorded vote they cast, he charts state and federal legislators from the most liberal to the most conservative. A glance at his latest rankings makes one thing strikingly clear — there is virtually no middle left in Texas politics.
Cleverly drawn political districts, closely fought party primaries and polarization among candidates, voters and political financiers have combined to drive moderates out of the state’s Legislature and its congressional delegation.
Being on the extreme of an ideological spectrum is the least dangerous place for most Texas politicians. Republicans brag if they’re on one end of that seesaw; Democrats do the same on the other end.
The middle, however, is perilous. And on the latest charts from the good professor, it is empty.
Though there is debate on this, the general argument is that this is the result of redistricting, and especially the practice of partisan gerrymandering.
That’s where redistricting comes in. The political districts from which all of these people are elected were drawn in a way that minimizes competition in November general elections. With a few exceptions — that 23rd Congressional District where Hurd and Gallego are set for a rematch is one — the parties have a very small chance of flipping seats in November.
The most dangerous challengers come from within the parties, during the primary elections. The voters in those elections, not surprisingly, are more likely to be either liberal or conservative and less likely to be either party’s version of a moderate.
A conservative Republican is better positioned in a Republican primary than a more moderate one. And that candidate in a Republican district ordinarily doesn’t have to worry about appealing to moderates in the general election — the district has more Republicans than Democrats in it by design.
Maps drawn to create November races where Republicans and Democrats are more evenly balanced would tend to favor moderate candidates over time — Republicans who could appeal to conservative Democrats and vice-versa.
These maps were drawn to protect Republican majorities in the Legislature and the congressional delegation, just as the maps drawn by Democrats 10 years earlier were intended to protect those majorities.
Instead of appealing to the middle in November, they appeal to liberals in the Democratic races in March and conservatives in the Republican primaries.
And the distances between the people who get elected grow.
