Remember the Alamo?

The apparently-not-disinterested Houston Chronicle is comparing Tom DeLay's gerrymandering in Texas to the Alamo, and Democrat Chet Edwards of Waco to its brave Texan defenders. Not as bad as an Israeli right wingnut comparing the new Disengagement Commission to the Nazi-backed Judenrat, but still a bit overstated. Then again, this is Texas, where "A Helluva Good House Race" can pass as an editorial headline, and the stakes are as high as the Big Sky.

Not only does the Cook Political Report list it in the "Toss-up" column, but the electorate of the 17th include a certain Mr. and Mrs. Bush. As hard as Edwards and Republican newcomer Arlene Wohgemuth try to define themselves, the election may be decided on broader concepts. Republicans see the battle as a referendum on their favored son in the White House, casting their bid to oust the incumbant in terms of national leadership. Democrats are rallying voters who are angry at the redistricting plan, and want to show the powers in Austin that 60% Republican registration doesn't guarantee them a victory.

Each candidate has raised about $1.5 million, but Wohlgemuth has less than half a million dollars on hand, while Edwards, with strong PAC funding, has over a million, having faced no primary.

InstantReplay is sympathetic to both sides; a lot more is at stake here than the pork that Edwards can bring home from his Appropriations and Budget committee seats. The President's Republican neighbors will be chagrined if they can't send an ally to the House. Likewise, Democrats who did all that was politically possible to stop the redistricting plan are hoping for a moral victory over a sleezy political act. The Republicans aren't entirely to blame for the cutthroat districting; Democrats engaged in it freely when they were in control. The sheer number of new seats made this decade's process the toughest fight in Austin since the Texas War of Independence. The Republicans may have won this battle, but ultimately the voters of Texas will lose the war.

Texas and forty-nine other states need to pass constitutional amendments to end gerrymandering. Call it the "Common Sense Amendment": new districts will be created by a nonpartisan commission and must include entire communities wherever possible and may not be more than twice as long one way as the other, with necessary exceptions. This type of tinkering is not unprecedented, and though it would likely be as rankorous and unpleasant as the current process, the results would be fairer to many voters. The current system, it has been said, allows politicians to choose their voters instead of voters choosing their politicians. Making districts shaped like lumps instead of lines would make reelection a bit more of a challenge, and would force candidates to represent a geographical region - as the Founding Fathers intended - not an ethnic or socioeconomic group carved out to fit the needs of tribally-minded legislature.