Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The case for unsafe election districts
latimes.com ^ | September 27, 2005 | By John H. Bunzel,

Posted on 09/27/2005 1:22:28 PM PDT by .cnI redruM

IT IS NOTHING less than a scandal that 90% of the seats in Congress and the California Legislature are not competitive. It is also why Democrats, who have long championed a level playing field in elections as an important progressive goal, should be leading the call for an end to the "incumbent protection racket."

Democrats strongly supported the concept of "one person, one vote" established in 1962 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Baker vs. Carr, a ruling that also required equal representation in all legislative bodies in order to reflect the interests and wishes of the people in a fair and balanced manner.

The reality has been just the reverse. The court-ordered mandate to reflect the popular will has been subverted by the openly self-serving agreement between Democrats and Republicans to create safe election districts that would protect every incumbent from a serious competitive race. As Ed Kilgore, vice president for policy of the Democratic Leadership Council, has put it, "politicians are choosing voters, rather than voters choosing politicians."

****************************************

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS: ahnold; california; electionreform; gerrymandering
I respect immensely what the Gov. of California is trying to do with Prop. 77. I think his mechanism is wrong. What needs to happen is the passage of a law that requires all electoral districts to be external polygons. That wouldn't nuke partisan Min-Maxing, but it would reduce the extent to which a legislature could be rigged.
1 posted on 09/27/2005 1:22:30 PM PDT by .cnI redruM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

go ahead libs all over the country make us conservatives' day by reinstituting geographic election districts.


2 posted on 09/27/2005 1:26:21 PM PDT by JohnLongIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnLongIsland

When you see a map where 80% of the country is "Red", that has to imply the libs would be hammered if the current Gerrymanders were undone.


3 posted on 09/27/2005 1:29:06 PM PDT by .cnI redruM ("They're thin and they were riding bicycles" - Ted Turner on NK malnutrition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

"When you see a map where 80% of the country is "Red", that has to imply the libs would be hammered if the current Gerrymanders were undone."

Unless of course there were differences in population densities and/or vote margins, which there are.


4 posted on 09/27/2005 1:36:31 PM PDT by Moral Hazard ("Now therefore kill every male among the little ones" - Numbers 31:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
It is also why Democrats, who have long championed a level playing field in elections as an important progressive goal...

LOL! Thats a real knee slapper! They almost had me going, as they encourage illegal aliens and felons to vote, vote multiple times, and commit massive vote fraud in general.

5 posted on 09/27/2005 1:46:57 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator (This space outsourced to India)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator

Another good election reform. Valid picture ID as proof of US citizenship at every polling place!


6 posted on 09/27/2005 1:50:48 PM PDT by .cnI redruM ("They're thin and they were riding bicycles" - Ted Turner on NK malnutrition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

districts should be based on population clusters...this could be determined by statistical clustering.

If you've got a state of so many people, and you get only so many districts, then the computer can tell you how that state breaks down into natural, geographic groups of that size.

Geographical and population compactness should determine the cluster more than anything else.


7 posted on 09/27/2005 1:52:24 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp; Carry_Okie
Democrats strongly supported the concept of "one person, one vote" ...

I would rant, but you both do it so much more eloquently. :-)

8 posted on 09/27/2005 1:58:36 PM PDT by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

Polygonal districts would shake up Congress once, but at the end of the day most of those new districts would be as uncompetitive as the ink blots they replaced.

Representative government is unfeasible when the unit of representation covers hundreds of thousands of people. Each California Assembly member represents around 450,000 people. Each US House member represents around 700,000. Outside of a very few cities there are no remotely homogenous communities of that size. Circle, polygon or gerrymander, most will end up sharing a representative with other communities they have nothing in common with and you can't both be represented.


9 posted on 09/27/2005 2:01:04 PM PDT by CGTRWK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
Democrats strongly supported the concept of "one person, one vote" established in 1962 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Baker vs. Carr, a ruling that also required equal representation in all legislative bodies in order to reflect the interests and wishes of the people in a fair and balanced manner.

No surprise that the LA Slimes fails to mention the thrust of the legislation: legal gerrymandering,

Baker v Carr has dramatically changed both local and state politics. It is and will be the undoing of California. Any solution that Prop 77 proposes can easily be challenged under this misguided attempt to overrepresent minorities as compensation for past injustices,

10 posted on 09/27/2005 2:52:10 PM PDT by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
"It is also why Democrats, who have long championed a level playing field in elections as an important progressive goal, should be leading the call for an end to the "incumbent protection racket.""
Until the 1970- 71-72 redistricting cycle, neither side paid much attention to redistricting. The Republicans were content to be a permanent minority and the Democrats were only too happy to keep them that way. Nevertheless, in 1964 and 1965 when he rammed through the Civil Rights Laws, ( with Republican votes and Democrat filibustering) it is said that Lyndon Johnson lamented that by signing those bills he lost the South for the Democrats forever. Quickly the rodents realized he was right and they started to use redistricting as a tool to artificially stay in power. Now they don't like redistricting. That's too too bad isn't?
11 posted on 09/27/2005 2:56:39 PM PDT by jmaroneps37 (The quisling ratmedia: always eager to remind us of why we hate them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl; Carry_Okie

So far, today... I'm too spent to rant... I have rant fatigue... Don't explain and don't complain! Nobody will believe it and nobody wants to hear it anyways!!! Ha Ha Ha!!!


12 posted on 09/27/2005 3:28:40 PM PDT by SierraWasp (The only thing that can save CA is making eastern CA the 51st state called Sierra Republic!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl

Well dead people are people too :)


13 posted on 09/27/2005 3:30:10 PM PDT by .cnI redruM ("They're thin and they were riding bicycles" - Ted Turner on NK malnutrition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: calcowgirl; SierraWasp; Carry_Okie

And just where was my ping?


14 posted on 09/27/2005 11:22:51 PM PDT by FOG724 (It's ilk season!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
What needs to happen is the passage of a law that requires all electoral districts to be external polygons.

The approach I've suggested elsewhere would be to define a "Gerrymander Quotient" for a map as something like the square of the perimeters of all regions. At the scheduled time for redistricting, any interested person could submit proposed redistricting plans. The plan with the lowest Gerrymander Quotient would then be used until the next redistricting.

15 posted on 09/27/2005 11:52:22 PM PDT by supercat (Don't fix blame--FIX THE PROBLEM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: supercat
That would be a good start. I don't think you can stop gerrymandering per se, but you can sub-optimize it.
16 posted on 09/28/2005 5:17:53 AM PDT by .cnI redruM ("They're thin and they were riding bicycles" - Ted Turner on NK malnutrition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FOG724
And just where was my ping?

Ooops. Sorry. :-) Rant away! lol.

17 posted on 09/28/2005 3:37:01 PM PDT by calcowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson