Book Report Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Book Report - Essay Example Of course, all history books such as Bickerstaff’s Lines in the Sand are subjective, one way or the other. Even Bickerstaff openly admits that his book is not objective. He notes that by way of selecting which stories are to be included or excluded in his narrative substantially implies that his book is â€Å"to some extent subjective† (Bickerstaff ix). The inclusion and exclusion or the presence and absence of certain storyline make the storytelling quite personal; personal in the sense that it leads the writer to choose among the many scenes or events that appear connected or relevant to his objective or main outline. Despite the subjectivity of his book, Bickerstaff argues that he writes it, to some degree, in an â€Å"accurate and dispassionate† manner. Moreover, Bickerstaff states that he has attempted to write the book without taking a partisan side to the two contending parties, saying that he has no intention to â€Å"demonize or lionize anyone† (i x). Congressman Tom DeLay is the central character of Bickerstaff’s book. In Bickerstaff’s narration, it appears that Mr. DeLay has played an important role in the realization of Texas redistricting. The organization called Texans for a Republican Majority or TRMPAC was organized mainly by Mr. DeLay; and TRMPAC has become a major force in financially supporting would-be Republican representatives in the Texas House. Mr. DeLay’s TRMPAC primarily aims to achieve a political majority in the legislative body of the State of Texas. In Mr. DeLay’s mind-set, TRMPAC will be successful in its objective if it also supports and pursues a plan in redistricting Texas. In doing so, the political majority by the Republican Party will not be far from possible in attaining such ambition or vision. Back in 2001, however, Mr. DeLay favored a kind of redistricting that is drawn on the â€Å"basis of neutral factors, consisted of compact districts, and preserved communities of interest† (Bickerstaff 287, emphasis mine). Such kind of redistricting is far from partisan in character; the neutrality of this redistricting design makes it possible for the American people, especially the voters, to choose whomever they like. In general, the outcome of the election depends largely on the voting public rather than the political party itself. Bickerstaff argues that Cong. DeLay chose for this redistricting project because of the situation that was more favorable to the Democrats: the Democratic Party was the political majority while the Republican Party was the political minority. There are three fundamental reasons for pursuing redistricting in the Texas House, at least in the eyes of Cong. DeLay. First, since Mr. George W. Bush, who belonged to the Republican Party, overwhelmingly won in the Presidential race in the State of Texas, it is rational that its representatives in Congress â€Å"should do the same† (qtd. in Bickerstaff 85). However, the representatives from the Democratic Party, who dominated the congressional delegation at that time, failed to buy that fallacious argument. Second, redistricting in the State of Texas is an act of â€Å"political fairness† (qtd. in Bickerstaff 85). Mr. DeLay argues that the reason why Republican representatives garnered only a smaller number of seats in the Texas House, despite its greater percentage of vote from Texans, is because of the â€Å"way the lines are drawn† (Bickerstaff 86). What Mr. DeLay refers to â€Å"lines [that] are drawn† is the1991 district lines prominent in Texas. And third, the