Partisan gerrymandering — the practice of drawing voting districts to give one political party an unfair edge — is one of the few political issues that voters of all stripes find common cause in condemning. Voters should choose their elected officials, the thinking goes, rather than elected officials choosing their voters. The Supreme Court agrees, at least in theory: In 1986 it ruled that partisan gerrymandering, if extreme enough, is unconstitutional.
Yet in that same ruling, the court declined to strike down two Indiana maps under consideration, even though both “used every trick in the book,” according to a paper in the University of Chicago Law Review. And in the decades since then, the court has failed to throw out a single map as an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander.
Gerrymandering
Gerrymandering
Quanta Mag | How to Quantify (and Fight) Gerrymandering
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8534
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Gerrymandering
It's condemned by both sides thoroughly because it's not a real issue.
And it's most "extensive practice" is tied to the civil rights era- you get rid of gerrymandering, and the number of black representatives in congress drops like a rock as a large number of them enjoy seats solely because of court-mandated gerrymandering.
And it's most "extensive practice" is tied to the civil rights era- you get rid of gerrymandering, and the number of black representatives in congress drops like a rock as a large number of them enjoy seats solely because of court-mandated gerrymandering.
Re: Gerrymandering
Would you provide a source re "court mandated gerrymandering".
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8534
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Gerrymandering
Fortson v Dorsey in 1965 required strict-equipopulous redistricting while Thornburg v Gingles in 1985 mandated minority-majority districts. I'm sure there are other cases.Typhoon wrote:Would you provide a source re "court mandated gerrymandering".
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8534
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Gerrymandering
There have been two election cycles in the last 30 years where the Democrats won a plurality of votes but didn't capture the majority of congressional seats- 1996 and 2012.
In '96, their plurality amounted to around 60 thousands votes from a pool of approximately 100 million votes cast. In 2012 it amounted to the Democrats getting an amount of votes about 1% greater than that of the Republicans.
Even if we switched to a proportional representation system applied to all states, the Republicans would've kept the majority in the congress. Instead of 242 to 193, it likely would've looked like 222 to 213.
Before anyone cries foul on a missing twenty seats, go back in time and apply the same system: there were years in recent past (like 1984) where Republicans missed out on 25-30 seats....this is not a new phenomena no matter who is in charge of the map.
In '96, their plurality amounted to around 60 thousands votes from a pool of approximately 100 million votes cast. In 2012 it amounted to the Democrats getting an amount of votes about 1% greater than that of the Republicans.
Even if we switched to a proportional representation system applied to all states, the Republicans would've kept the majority in the congress. Instead of 242 to 193, it likely would've looked like 222 to 213.
Before anyone cries foul on a missing twenty seats, go back in time and apply the same system: there were years in recent past (like 1984) where Republicans missed out on 25-30 seats....this is not a new phenomena no matter who is in charge of the map.
Last edited by NapLajoieonSteroids on Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Gerrymandering
this is the same in australia.
if you dislike who wins its called Gerrymandering, if you like who wins its called Protecting Minorities.
if you dislike who wins its called Gerrymandering, if you like who wins its called Protecting Minorities.
ultracrepidarian
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8534
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Gerrymandering
Earlier I said it was not a real problem, which thinking about it is a bit too glib; it may be more appropriate to say it's more of an antique practice which creates annoyances. It is why you can always find a consensus on its wretchedness (as long as we don't toss out the results where one party or another benefits from it.)
Re: Gerrymandering
in my local experience it can only help if the election is close , it never saves a bad party which has eroded its own base and lost the swinging voters.
this is why its not as big a concern as the bitter partisans on the losing side might rant about during the post election venting period
this is why its not as big a concern as the bitter partisans on the losing side might rant about during the post election venting period
ultracrepidarian
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8534
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Gerrymandering
Our trouble is, on that long list of troubles obviously, is how tough it has become to remove congressmen from office. House of representative incumbents have a >95% chance of being reelected. Once they are in, that's it, unless they get caught up in something stupid and the national media picks up on it.
This arrangement is not good for anyone and we could, among other things:
- use ordinal balloting
- establish term limits and the like to cycle people through instead of encouraging lifelong careers
- adopt nonpartisan blanket primaries for elections in one-party areas
With gerrymandering, it would be harder to act in such a way if you increased the number of representatives (though that comes with its own problems)
or adopted certain, agreed upon procedures incl./algorithm to divvy up the map.
Thing is, there is nonpartisan way to solve gerrymandering- and there's no way in hell that whatever is adopted will not be manipulated.
It's one of those iron rules of...errm ...iron: any algorithm which can be manipulated will be & anything attached to politics will be used politically.
This arrangement is not good for anyone and we could, among other things:
- use ordinal balloting
- establish term limits and the like to cycle people through instead of encouraging lifelong careers
- adopt nonpartisan blanket primaries for elections in one-party areas
With gerrymandering, it would be harder to act in such a way if you increased the number of representatives (though that comes with its own problems)
or adopted certain, agreed upon procedures incl./algorithm to divvy up the map.
Thing is, there is nonpartisan way to solve gerrymandering- and there's no way in hell that whatever is adopted will not be manipulated.
It's one of those iron rules of...errm ...iron: any algorithm which can be manipulated will be & anything attached to politics will be used politically.
- Nonc Hilaire
- Posts: 6260
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am
Re: Gerrymandering
What is ordinal balloting?
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”
Teresa of Ávila
Teresa of Ávila
- Zack Morris
- Posts: 2837
- Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
- Location: Bayside High School
Re: Gerrymandering
Surely Nap knows better than to make silly suggestions like this and understands the deep reasons why the system was designed as it is. The American electoral process is perfect and must remain immutable.NapLajoieonSteroids wrote: - use ordinal balloting
- establish term limits and the like to cycle people through instead of encouraging lifelong careers
- adopt nonpartisan blanket primaries for elections in one-party areas
Re: Gerrymandering
Rank your choices in order.Nonc Hilaire wrote:What is ordinal balloting?
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Re: Gerrymandering
I have a better simpler solution Nap Make air conditioning illegal in the district of Corruption. The Captial had none until the 1930 Before that Congress only met for a few months a yearsNapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Our trouble is, on that long list of troubles obviously, is how tough it has become to remove congressmen from office. House of representative incumbents have a >95% chance of being reelected. Once they are in, that's it, unless they get caught up in something stupid and the national media picks up on it.
This arrangement is not good for anyone and we could, among other things:
- use ordinal balloting
- establish term limits and the like to cycle people through instead of encouraging lifelong careers
- adopt nonpartisan blanket primaries for elections in one-party areas
With gerrymandering, it would be harder to act in such a way if you increased the number of representatives (though that comes with its own problems)
or adopted certain, agreed upon procedures incl./algorithm to divvy up the map.
Thing is, there is nonpartisan way to solve gerrymandering- and there's no way in hell that whatever is adopted will not be manipulated.
It's one of those iron rules of...errm ...iron: any algorithm which can be manipulated will be & anything attached to politics will be used politically.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
- Nonc Hilaire
- Posts: 6260
- Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am
Re: Gerrymandering
Thx.Doc wrote:Rank your choices in order.Nonc Hilaire wrote:What is ordinal balloting?
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”
Teresa of Ávila
Teresa of Ávila
Re: Gerrymandering
we call it 'preferential voting' and you can either fill it out youself or let your main preference chose for youNonc Hilaire wrote:Thx.Doc wrote:Rank your choices in order.Nonc Hilaire wrote:What is ordinal balloting?
if you do fill it all out yourself it does stop parties from horse trading odious coalitions on you and that does weaken their gerrymandering power.
in my recent election the centre right tried to do a deal with the xenophobic right but preferential voting let the population put the latter party last and ruin that plan, so they lost badly.
ultracrepidarian
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8534
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Gerrymandering
We could also do well with beating back single member district-ing in some areas and go back to multimember districts. Ordinal balloting/ranked ballots, whatever you'd like to call it, would work better in that sort of set up. Those areas which remain single member districts could adopt alternative voting as a method to try and keep competition fresh.
- NapLajoieonSteroids
- Posts: 8534
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:04 pm
Re: Gerrymandering
Throw in paying appellate and supreme court justices in potatoes and I think we have solved half the nonsense.Doc wrote:I have a better simpler solution Nap Make air conditioning illegal in the district of Corruption. The Captial had none until the 1930 Before that Congress only met for a few months a yearsNapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Our trouble is, on that long list of troubles obviously, is how tough it has become to remove congressmen from office. House of representative incumbents have a >95% chance of being reelected. Once they are in, that's it, unless they get caught up in something stupid and the national media picks up on it.
This arrangement is not good for anyone and we could, among other things:
- use ordinal balloting
- establish term limits and the like to cycle people through instead of encouraging lifelong careers
- adopt nonpartisan blanket primaries for elections in one-party areas
With gerrymandering, it would be harder to act in such a way if you increased the number of representatives (though that comes with its own problems)
or adopted certain, agreed upon procedures incl./algorithm to divvy up the map.
Thing is, there is nonpartisan way to solve gerrymandering- and there's no way in hell that whatever is adopted will not be manipulated.
It's one of those iron rules of...errm ...iron: any algorithm which can be manipulated will be & anything attached to politics will be used politically.
Re: Gerrymandering
That would be very fitting since much of the time we seem to get Mr. Potato Head justiceNapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Throw in paying appellate and supreme court justices in potatoes and I think we have solved half the nonsense.Doc wrote:I have a better simpler solution Nap Make air conditioning illegal in the district of Corruption. The Captial had none until the 1930 Before that Congress only met for a few months a yearsNapLajoieonSteroids wrote:Our trouble is, on that long list of troubles obviously, is how tough it has become to remove congressmen from office. House of representative incumbents have a >95% chance of being reelected. Once they are in, that's it, unless they get caught up in something stupid and the national media picks up on it.
This arrangement is not good for anyone and we could, among other things:
- use ordinal balloting
- establish term limits and the like to cycle people through instead of encouraging lifelong careers
- adopt nonpartisan blanket primaries for elections in one-party areas
With gerrymandering, it would be harder to act in such a way if you increased the number of representatives (though that comes with its own problems)
or adopted certain, agreed upon procedures incl./algorithm to divvy up the map.
Thing is, there is nonpartisan way to solve gerrymandering- and there's no way in hell that whatever is adopted will not be manipulated.
It's one of those iron rules of...errm ...iron: any algorithm which can be manipulated will be & anything attached to politics will be used politically.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
-
- Posts: 16973
- Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am
Re: Gerrymandering
-The White House cannot be Gerrymandered
-The Senate cannot be Gerrymandered
-Governorships cannot be Gerrymandered
-Most state legislator seats cannot be Gerrymandered
Mostly a non-issue
-The Senate cannot be Gerrymandered
-Governorships cannot be Gerrymandered
-Most state legislator seats cannot be Gerrymandered
Mostly a non-issue
Censorship isn't necessary
Re: Gerrymandering
SCOTUS Blog | Opinion analysis: Court strikes down N.C. districts in racial gerrymandering challenge
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Re: Gerrymandering
Nature | With algorithms in hand, scientists are looking to make elections in the United States more representative.The SCOTGUS announced that it would hear Gill vs. Whitford, a partisan gerrymandering case from Wisconsin, raising the possibility that it could rule on the constitutionality of political parties drawing state districts to their overwhelming advantage. While the Supreme Court has overturned race-based gerrymandering before, to date it has not struck down a plan because of its partisanship.
Seriously?
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Re: Gerrymandering
The states get to decide on how they draw the congressional districts. Thus assuring that a party that neglects a given state from the national level will suffer at the national level.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Re: Gerrymandering
My understanding is that in many states, the majority party has the right to draw the congressional districts.Doc wrote:The states get to decide on how they draw the congressional districts. Thus assuring that a party that neglects a given state from the national level will suffer at the national level.
The 12th District looks like a fractal.
This strikes me as a conflict of interest and it the reason, I will speculate, as to why the SCOTUS agreed to hear the case.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.