The only way gerrymandering will ever end is if all districts are drawn using the same algorithm. The program which implements the algorithm should be open source, and the data should be available to all for inspection. The good news is such a program already exists.
The data to be used would have to be determined, but one thing that should NOT be in the data is political affiliation. At a minimum inputs would be census data (population) and zip code.
This will bring howls from both Republicans and Democrats, but that’s too bad.
Michigan’s Voters Not Politicians TV spot is one of the best I’ve ever seen.
The Chamber of Commerce at present is doing Facebook Obama is coming for you bits, but I expect the Elders of Soros TV spots momentarily.
I like the idea of a fair and neutral algorithm. What’s really needed is a Constitutional amendment mandating the criteria: equal population, compact, contiguous, minimal city/county splits, competitive and proportional. The FEC should have a redistricting committee, composed of 1 nominee by the Speaker of the House, 1 by the Senate Majority Leader, and 1 each by the minority leaders of each party. The maps should be approved unanimously.
I don’t know if its an amendment that is needed (that would easily take 10 years to accomplish, and I don’t think we can wait that long), but some legislation would be necessary for sure. I am in agreement with most of your criteria, although I am unsure what you mean by competitive and proportional?
How would a uniform algorithm end gerrymandering?
As I interpret Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution, the federal Congress would have to enact a law mandating such an algorithm. In today’s environment, the GOP would call the shots as to how that algorithm would be developed and implemented. It would be similar to the Kavanaugh nomination. The Dems could bring in all the experts they wished, and the GOP would ramrod their choice through anyway.
And it’s doubtful the states would support such a move to begin with.
What am I missing here? How do you envision your proposal would manifest?
If an algorithm is used that does not take into account political affiliation that would be the end of gerrymandering as I understand it. I assume that congress would have to enact such a law, but IMO the parties would both be against any such law. The goal of all in congress seems to be ‘get re-elected at all costs’, both parties do this. It would have to be public opinion that would drive the passing of the appropriate legislation. You seem to be assuming that it would only be the Republicans who are against this… IMO that is not true, given the opportunity the Dems have gerrymandered too.
The Dems have a real shot to win control of the governorships in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa and retain the governor’s mansions in Minnesota and PA. There are also ballot measures on fair districting in MI and OH on the ballot (the one in OH is a bit suspect though).
I think something has fundamentally changed in the party on voting rights and districting. People are tired of the rigging and Democratic voters want districts that allow people equal and fair representation. Iowa and PA now have that. It’s time for the rest of the midwest to make this a point. The federal courts will not protect the people. Voters and state courts have to do it.
The Dems need to step up if they win back the governorships in all these states. And what I mean by that is set their Attorneys General loose on the outgoing Republicans who were involved in gerrymandering. Drag their filthy un-American asses into court if there is evidence (which we know there is) that they unlawfully sought to disenfranchise minorities or any group they thought would hurt the Dems.
There needs to be a price paid all over this country for these criminals. And that’s exactly what Republican leaders are: Criminals.
I really hope if Ds win they put near the top of the priority list, forcing state to use certified computer programs to lay out the boundaries of electoral constituencies. For sure for federal since I think the federal ought to have that power over states for federal positions. Hopefully for state positions too but I can imagine that might take getting state positions back to majority D. And fixing the EC high up there too.
Yes! Without any penalty, the Republiscums will continue to repeat their evil efforts. Heck, if outgoing legislators fear no penalty, even jail, why would newly elected Republisums not do the same?
If you’re proposing federalizing redistricting, that absolutely requires a constitutional amendment.
Would be something if Democrats in Michigan win the governorship and both houses of the legislature for the first time in forever, yet redistricting gets handed off to a bipartisan commission. Still, it’s for the best in the long run.
No need to federalize. A federal mandate to require states to select their own bipartisan commission (according to a formula-x Dems, y republicans, z independents and an equal number of citizens and academics.
The states elect who they choose, according to the formula. No amendment needed…
Ewwwww!
You can’t mandate that from the federal government. The federal government has no control over how states pick their representatives.
They aren’t. They are telling them they MUST select them, not how.
That is a distinction without a difference in a legal sense. The federal government does not have that power. It is constitutionally reserved for the states as the representatives. To change that, you’d need the federal government to have new powers which is only possible through a constitutional amendment.
But…then they won’t be nice to the us!