The Map, the Myth, and the Math: What Texas’s New District Plan Really Shows

When the public hears racial inequality claims in politics, like Texas Rep. Vince Perez (D, El Paso, District 77) saying “Latino citizens count for one-third, Black citizens for one-fifth, of a white resident,” the words sound urgent and even righteous. But rhetoric without precision is not public service; it is stagecraft. When numbers are presented without the actual mechanics of representation, they do not enlighten anyone. They construct a narrative.

The problem is that legislative power in a democracy is tied not to residents, but to eligible voters. If you compare the wrong groups, for example eligible minority voters to the total white resident population, you are not describing the electoral reality. You are telling a half-truth dressed as moral outrage.

The Numbers That Actually Matter

Using Texas’s own redistricting data and U.S. Census Bureau estimates, we looked at three different measures of population:

•Total Population (Residents): Everyone counted in the Census, regardless of age or citizenship

•Voting-Age Population (VAP): Adults 18 and older, regardless of citizenship

•Citizen Voting-Age Population (CVAP): Adults 18 and older who are U.S. citizens and therefore eligible to vote

The differences are not small:

•Total Population (Residents): Hispanics ~41%, Whites ~40%, Blacks ~12%

•Voting-Age Population (Adults): Hispanics ~35%, Whites ~44%, Blacks ~12%

•Eligible Voters (CVAP): Hispanics ~32%, Whites ~53%, Blacks ~14%

This CVAP gap is decisive. While Hispanics are the largest share of Texas residents, their share of eligible voters is significantly smaller because of citizenship rates and age distribution. White Texans, conversely, make up a smaller share of the population but a majority of eligible voters. Black Texans shift less, but still differ between total and eligible population.

If you ignore these differences, you might conclude that the maps undervalue certain groups. In reality the voting-eligible breakdown is not the same as the raw resident breakdown.

Why This Matters to You

Whether you are Republican, Democrat, or politically independent, the way you are represented starts here. District lines are legally drawn to balance total population, but the political influence within those districts depends on who can actually vote.

If you care about fair elections, you cannot measure voting power by counting people who cannot legally cast a ballot. Doing so is not just sloppy, it is misleading. And misleading data fuels bad policy, misplaced outrage, and deeper political division.

The Lens of Human Insight

Philosopher Bernard Lonergan described knowing as a process: experience, understanding, judgment, and decision. First, you take in the facts. Then you ask the right questions. Then you weigh the evidence and decide what is true. Finally, you act.

Applied here, Lonergan’s Generalized Empirical Method means holding claims to the right standard. Measure eligible voters against eligible voters, not residents against voters, and judge the statement by that reality. Yet too often, public debate on redistricting stops at the first stage, the raw experience of hearing a demographic number. People hear someone like Texas Rep. Vince Perez deliver a racially framed statistic, nod along as if every word is unquestionable truth, and shake their heads at all the right beats. It becomes a political call-and-response. Agreement by reflex is not understanding, and understanding without judgment is not civic responsibility.

What the Chart Shows

The bar chart accompanying this text makes it clear:

• White Texans: 40% of residents, 53% of eligible voters

• Hispanic Texans: 41% of residents, 32% of eligible voters

•Black Texans: 12% of residents, 14% of eligible voters

These shifts between total population and CVAP are not gotchas. They are reality. And reality does not disappear because it is politically inconvenient.

Note: Figures shown in the chart focus on White (non-Hispanic), Hispanic, and Black. Other racial and ethnic groups account for the remaining share of Texas’s total population of approximately 29.15 million in the 2020 Census.

Why This Matters for Public Debate

When elected officials, elephants, donkeys, or otherwise, cite figures without saying whether they mean residents, adults, or eligible voters, they are not informing the public. They are constructing a narrative. That is not transparency; it is advocacy dressed as fact. In the case of PLANC2308, the claim that Latino and Black “citizens” are worth only fractions of a White “resident” collapses under scrutiny, because the meaningful comparison is citizen to citizen, not citizen to resident.

The Public’s Right to Clarity

The PLANC2308 map, submitted in July 2025, is public record. Any citizen with an internet connection can find the same data. And they should, because clarity is not the privilege of insiders; it is the lifeblood of self-government. Without accuracy and transparency, redistricting debates devolve into a contest of who can craft the most viral soundbite.

Sunlight is not optional. Accuracy is not negotiable. If you want equality at the ballot box, start by telling the public the truth about who is actually holding the ballots.

Sources

•Texas Legislative Council. PLANC2308 District Population Analysis with County Subtotals, July 29, 2025.

•U.S. Census Bureau. 2020 Decennial Census.

• U.S. Census Bureau. Citizen Voting Age Population (CVAP) Special Tabulation, 2019–2023 American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates.