Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reason Magazine)   The giant iceberg beneath the pointy tip of partisan gerrymandering   (reason.com) divider line
    More: Interesting, Democracy, United States, Plurality voting system, Political party, Gerrymandering, Primary election, Supreme Court of the United States, Election  
•       •       •

3482 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Jun 2020 at 4:28 PM (2 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



57 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-06-29 9:46:09 AM  
Fantastic article. Redistributing is hard. It's one of those shifting sands problems where everyone thinks they have a firm grasp on gerrymandering until you actually dive into the process and try to do it better.
 
2020-06-29 11:00:19 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-29 11:14:03 AM  
California had massive issues with "buddymandering".  The maps had to be approved by the state legislature, which made sure everybody had good safe seats.

When the California Citizens Redistricting Commission went through...we found that California had actually been gerrymandered in the Republicans' favor.  Because, even though demographics shifted, keeping the same folks in office was more important than giving good representation.
 
2020-06-29 1:09:21 PM  
*moneyed interests exerting control over the public sector*

Libertarians: 'this is fine. in fact we believe it's a fundamental right.'

*resulting in a dysfunctional government*

Libertarians:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-06-29 1:55:38 PM  
95% of the problems with gerrymandering are republicans.
 
2020-06-29 2:56:21 PM  
So we have an article written by a guy from Maryland, who goes on about gerrymandering in Wisconsin.

Seems legit.
 
2020-06-29 2:59:42 PM  
How Pennsylvania wound up fixing it.
https://www.ft.com/content/ab82b45e-e4​4f-11e8-a8a0-99b2e340ffeb

Fark likes this link better. The biggest takeaway is that you have to sue in State court.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.inqu​i​rer.com/philly/news/politics/pennsylva​nia-gerrymandering-supreme-court-map-c​ongressional-districts-2018-elections-​20180219.html%3foutputType=amp
 
2020-06-29 3:44:10 PM  
Michigan here. We voted for a pretty solid system to protect it. Only took republicans not being in office, but we got there. If D's take all branches in Nov, this better be top priority in the first 2 years. More than anything else. If not, they get what they deserve.

/dnrtfa
//who does?
 
2020-06-29 3:54:30 PM  

AsparagusFTW: Michigan here. We voted for a pretty solid system to protect it. Only took republicans not being in office, but we got there. If D's take all branches in Nov, this better be top priority in the first 2 years. More than anything else. If not, they get what they deserve.

/dnrtfa
//who does?


The states make their own decisions on voting, not the federal government. A case on gerrymandering made it to SCOTUS a few years ago, and they sent it back to the state, I forget which one.
 
2020-06-29 4:32:16 PM  
Gerry:

cdn3.whatculture.comView Full Size


Buddy:
static2.srcdn.comView Full Size
 
2020-06-29 4:33:47 PM  
The header picture is friggin bonkers.  I love it.
 
2020-06-29 4:34:29 PM  
Or we could (and you'll have to bear with me here) USE STATEWIDE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION instead of single-seat districts.
 
2020-06-29 4:35:43 PM  
About two hundred paragraphs too long for a Reason article on a coined phrase.
 
2020-06-29 4:37:12 PM  
1) shortest splitline algorithm spits out several proposed maps
2) humans are allowed to edit them to make them intelligible/geographic but no district may change metrics like
- area overlap with computer's district
- perimeter/area ratio
By more than a value determined by testers to prevent corruption of districts.
 
2020-06-29 4:38:37 PM  
Reason? Let me guess, the Invisible Hand™ will make sure that gerrymandering is eventually fair and benefits everyone using a theoretical example that hasn't actually manifested into reality through multiple generations.
 
2020-06-29 4:39:28 PM  

Forty-Three: So we have an article written by a guy from Maryland, who goes on about gerrymandering in Wisconsin.

Seems legit.


Maryland itself is essentially gerrymandered, comprised of land that Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware and the District of Columbia didn't want.
 
2020-06-29 4:40:20 PM  
We have a census every ten years.  Seems like we could add a question like "What cardinal direction is the community that feels closest to yours".  Congrats, now you can pop all the answers into a computer and get a network graph.  Now split it up into X number of districts.

Or if we are still anti-math, just realize that best is the enemy of good and split it up geographically.  Yes, communities will be divided.  But it is better than what we have.
 
2020-06-29 4:40:38 PM  

Zagloba: Or we could (and you'll have to bear with me here) USE STATEWIDE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION instead of single-seat districts.


This.
 
2020-06-29 4:41:50 PM  
Everyone should copy Maryland. I know it looks crazy, but it works.
Fark user imageView Full Size

A Republican Governor but Maryland votes blue in national elections. The Covid-19 curve is trending down but testing is ramping up.
Fark user imageView Full Size

Clearly something about that gerrymandered "broken pterodactyl" is working.
 
2020-06-29 4:45:09 PM  
If a smallish state consisted of a coastal region with a tourism industry, a largish city with an industrial base, some rural farming regions, and a mountainous region, it would make good sense for the distracting to split up so that to a significant extent each of those regions has at least one of their own representatives, and that the representatives for those regions of course be divided up according to population.

Sometimes that might mean certain districts would be heavily R and others heavily D. That's not gerrymandering, not just because there are "safe" seats.

What you don't want is where you engineer slight majorities for one party by packing another district with a supermajority for the other party.  However, that result can potentially happen for "innocent" reasons.

Ultimately, I just want those who draw the lines to remain ignorant of how many Rs and Ds are present within the lines they are drawing. There are other things they can know, other aspects of demographics. Because it really is a good thing to cluster people with similar interests just as long as it isn't being done with a mind to counting partisan voting preferences.
 
2020-06-29 4:45:34 PM  
Also the Maryland Republicans believe the map is gerrymandered in the Democrats' favor.
🤔
But there's a Republican Governor.
 
2020-06-29 4:48:09 PM  
Vote Blue to end the GOP Kakistocracy.

If the Democrats take the majority they get to redraw the Districts, they will also end Citizens United and the dark money influencing our Government.

The Democrats will be for the People, as we the People will demand that the Government is explicitly for the People.

STOP THE COUP VOTE BLUE!
 
2020-06-29 4:49:28 PM  

To Wish Impossible Things: We have a census every ten years.  Seems like we could add a question like "What cardinal direction is the community that feels closest to yours".  Congrats, now you can pop all the answers into a computer and get a network graph.  Now split it up into X number of districts.

Or if we are still anti-math, just realize that best is the enemy of good and split it up geographically.  Yes, communities will be divided.  But it is better than what we have.


How is this not able to be drawn with a computer and basic commands inputs in an afternoon? Number of people in each district must equal X. Program sets priority for proximity of map proportions(keeping it from having thin bands that stretch across 3/4 of the state. I guarantee you after that the maps look alot more like states boundaries and less like the drawings of a toddler.

Your demographics, historical representation, geography, all of that. None of it farking matters. What matters is that a majority of the people inside the area vote for the individual that represents the majority of the people in that area. That's all. Land doesn't get a vote, people do.
 
2020-06-29 4:50:22 PM  

wademh: If a smallish state consisted of a coastal region with a tourism industry, a largish city with an industrial base, some rural farming regions, and a mountainous region, it would make good sense for the distracting to split up so that to a significant extent each of those regions has at least one of their own representatives, and that the representatives for those regions of course be divided up according to population.


I don't really get this.  What about all the demographics that aren't divided up by geography.  If there were some way to section off Doctors into their own district, would that make any more sense?  "They've had similar life experiences, so they deserve their own type of representation" works for any other group of vaguely-similar people, but it's only ever applied to geographic areas.
 
2020-06-29 4:52:18 PM  
Re: Maryland

Yes. It's gerrymandered to all hell. But to say, "Maryland Democrats behave much like Texas Republicans, and so on. " completely disregards the fact that there lots of Democrats leading or pushing initiatives to resolve the absurdity that is District 3 while there is no equivalent GOP activity in this direction in TX.
 
2020-06-29 4:58:20 PM  

Zagloba: Or we could (and you'll have to bear with me here) USE STATEWIDE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION instead of single-seat districts.


There's no perfect here. If you use at-large, then voters have to pick many people for many seats. For example, in California, if we have 45 House seats picked at large, every Californians have to choose among 100+ candidates for the 45 seats every two years. Most won't know who any of them are, and only the super well-funded can afford to blast the whole state with literature to enough name recognition. And even then, they will only go after those in the denser areas: The Bay Area, LA/OC/SD areas. People out in Siskiyou and other barren counties will get zippo representation because they can't pay out as much as what a city block's worth of residents in tony Beverly Hills.

And, in a way, the US senate should play the role of statewide representation, but I think that the number should be proportional to population. California should have more than 2 senators and Wyoming should have just 1 (if any: they can share that senator with Montana, for example).
 
2020-06-29 4:59:49 PM  

RevCarter: Re: Maryland

Yes. It's gerrymandered to all hell. But to say, "Maryland Democrats behave much like Texas Republicans, and so on. " completely disregards the fact that there lots of Democrats leading or pushing initiatives to resolve the absurdity that is District 3 while there is no equivalent GOP activity in this direction in TX.


If the other states copy us now, they can use the fact there's a Republican gov to trick the other Republicans into going for it and end up with nationally blue states.
 
2020-06-29 5:02:42 PM  

mrwknd: they will also end Citizens United and the dark money influencing our Government


Citation needed
 
2020-06-29 5:06:40 PM  
FRFA: Unfortunately, algorithms are far less adept at incorporating formulas for a fourth aspect of good districting, one that has been called intelligibility. People want at least a fighting chance to describe their district in words, and to guess correctly whether someone lives in it based on knowing where his or her residence is.
Because few of us are willing to jettison intelligibility entirely, fully algorithmic districting is unlikely to arrive anytime soon.


Bull shiat.
First, algorithms don't do the incorporating, programmers do.
Second, it's not difficult at all, you just need to use a set of priorities rather than dictating what the computer does.
1. determine things that shouldn't be crossed such as rivers, and neighborhoods boundaries.
2. pick a starting point within a neighborhood.
3. moving outward in a width-first manner count people without crossing the boundaries in 1.
4. ensure boundaries go down streets or rivers
5. Determine rules for picking a new starting point once the target number is reached.
6. Run several times with different starting points and have computer choose best map based on smallest average perimeter of district.
 
2020-06-29 5:09:41 PM  
Reason article?

I'm very skeptical about the value of clicking on that.
 
2020-06-29 5:12:36 PM  

Visual Howlaround Title Sequence: 95% of the problems with gerrymandering are republicans.


Of course.
One side says "We want everyone to have a voice."
The other side says "We want only our voice." *

*Otherwise known as FYIGM
 
2020-06-29 5:12:46 PM  
Hidden in this long article lies one of the greatest short explanations of what gerrymandering actually is:

"Officials had succeeded in picking their voters, rather than letting voters pick their officials."
 
2020-06-29 5:25:34 PM  

GhostfacedFiddlah: wademh: If a smallish state consisted of a coastal region with a tourism industry, a largish city with an industrial base, some rural farming regions, and a mountainous region, it would make good sense for the distracting to split up so that to a significant extent each of those regions has at least one of their own representatives, and that the representatives for those regions of course be divided up according to population.

I don't really get this.  What about all the demographics that aren't divided up by geography.  If there were some way to section off Doctors into their own district, would that make any more sense?  "They've had similar life experiences, so they deserve their own type of representation" works for any other group of vaguely-similar people, but it's only ever applied to geographic areas.


Gee, I don't know, maybe because ... follow me here ... districts are geographically defined. And further, that allows for convenience of having your representative be somewhat local to you, at least to the extent possible.

Local representation has a long standing tradition. It's neighbors getting together to appoint a representative. This doesn't mean splitting the representation independently between the farmers and the local store keepers. They may have very different interests in some ways but are generally united in hoping their region prospers.
 
2020-06-29 5:26:43 PM  

lindalouwho: AsparagusFTW: Michigan here. We voted for a pretty solid system to protect it. Only took republicans not being in office, but we got there. If D's take all branches in Nov, this better be top priority in the first 2 years. More than anything else. If not, they get what they deserve.

/dnrtfa
//who does?

The states make their own decisions on voting, not the federal government. A case on gerrymandering made it to SCOTUS a few years ago, and they sent it back to the state, I forget which one.


Congress is explicitly authorized to "make or alter" regulations on the "Times, Places, and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives" (except for the "Places of chusing Senators") as per Article 1, Section 4, Clause 1 of the Constitution.

This power has been used at various times to mandate an Election Day as the Tuesday after November 1, to mandate single member districts, and to restrict gerrymandering (specifically requirements for compactness, contiguity, and equal populations) along with various laws around election finance etc.

The case in question wasn't rejected because the Federal government has no power over Gerrymandering, but because there are currently no Federal laws in place about it.
 
2020-06-29 5:28:12 PM  

lindalouwho: AsparagusFTW: Michigan here. We voted for a pretty solid system to protect it. Only took republicans not being in office, but we got there. If D's take all branches in Nov, this better be top priority in the first 2 years. More than anything else. If not, they get what they deserve.

/dnrtfa
//who does?

The states make their own decisions on voting, not the federal government. A case on gerrymandering made it to SCOTUS a few years ago, and they sent it back to the state, I forget which one.


State governments have both an executive seat and a legislature...
 
2020-06-29 5:30:12 PM  

lostcat: Reason article?

I'm very skeptical about the value of clicking on that.


Other than a large dose of BSAB and "Democrats only care because they are losing" the ideas aren't bad.
 
2020-06-29 5:32:33 PM  
Could go party vote apportionment.

I'll take my state, the state of Missouri.

There are 163 Missouri House seats, 34 Missouri Senate seats, 8 US House seats, and 2 US Senate seats.

Individuals from the party can do all their campaigning as normal and primaries will not change at all. Before the General Election each party will declare their 'slate' of candidates in order for each legislative roll. So the Democrats would name 163 of their members for the MO House, 17 for the MO Senate, 8 US Reps, and 1 US Senator (2 US Senators would never been handled in the same General election).

Election comes around and everybody in the state gets to vote for the party of their choice for State Rep, State Senator, US Rep, and US Senator (if one is up for election). The percentage of the vote is apportioned by party vote and the party slates fill those positions in ranked order based upon percentage of the entire state's vote earned.

Let's just say everybody voted straight party for all roles. The Republicans get 50%, Democrats get 38%, Libertarians get 8%, Greens get 2%, and the remainder went to minority parties. This would be the results:
MO House (currently GOP controls 113 seats)
-83 GOP
-63 Democrats
-14 Libertarians
-3 Greens

MO Senate (currently GOP controls 23, but only half are up for election every 2 years)
-9 GOP
-7 Democrats
-1 Libertarian

US House (currently GOP has 9 seats)
-5 GOP
-4 Democrats
-1 Libertarian

US Senate (both Senate seats are GOP)
-1 GOP

So apportionment would really really really help third parties and give more strength to the minority party.

For reference, Hillary won 38% of the vote in 2016 which is why I pegged the Democratic vote at 38%. A lot of libertarian-leaning Republicans in Missouri so I guessed that giving the Libertarian party a shot at getting some legislative seats would draw a lot of Republicans.
 
2020-06-29 5:41:36 PM  
Ah, the old familiar saw of libertarians:
"As long as the current system works well enough for me, there is no point in trying to make things better. Since everyone is selfish trying to fix it will just put into place a different selfish plan that might not work as well for me."

psssssst. Hey, Libertarians.

It is possible that other people are both smarter and more altruistic than you.

/I know. I'm starry eye dreamer cause I think its possible for people to put other's well being equal or before themselves
 
2020-06-29 5:42:55 PM  

Elegy: Fantastic article. Redistributing is hard. It's one of those shifting sands problems where everyone thinks they have a firm grasp on gerrymandering until you actually dive into the process and try to do it better.


I think you could solve a lot of the problem with one rule.

All cities can only have ONE district that is both within and beyond its limits.
 
2020-06-29 5:44:09 PM  

dericwater: If you use at-large


I didn't say "at-large". At-large is a minority representation suppression tactic.

I said "proportional". Which means that a voter either chooses a party slate ("list" systems), or chooses a single candidate under rules that determine how over-quota ballots are apportioned ("single transferable vote" systems), or chooses a short list of preferred candidates ("short" meaning maybe 5 in all cases, even if the district has 50+ seats).
 
2020-06-29 5:52:10 PM  

Purple_Urkle: Also the Maryland Republicans believe the map is gerrymandered in the Democrats' favor.
🤔
But there's a Republican Governor.


That's not inconsistent. Since I assume MD's Gov is elected by statewide popular vote.

And you can't gerrymander statewide elections.

While a single case/election cycle isn't an example, if you kept having one party winning the governorship and another party handily winning the legislative that could be indicative of gerrymandering.
 
2020-06-29 6:16:43 PM  
Arizona's non-partisan commission which the republicans recently tried to sue out of existence claiming it was unconstitutional or some shiat.  Has done a pretty good job.    Having said that use the goddamn algorithm.
 
2020-06-29 7:33:07 PM  

jayphat: To Wish Impossible Things: We have a census every ten years.  Seems like we could add a question like "What cardinal direction is the community that feels closest to yours".  Congrats, now you can pop all the answers into a computer and get a network graph.  Now split it up into X number of districts.

Or if we are still anti-math, just realize that best is the enemy of good and split it up geographically.  Yes, communities will be divided.  But it is better than what we have.

How is this not able to be drawn with a computer and basic commands inputs in an afternoon? Number of people in each district must equal X. Program sets priority for proximity of map proportions(keeping it from having thin bands that stretch across 3/4 of the state. I guarantee you after that the maps look alot more like states boundaries and less like the drawings of a toddler.

Your demographics, historical representation, geography, all of that. None of it farking matters. What matters is that a majority of the people inside the area vote for the individual that represents the majority of the people in that area. That's all. Land doesn't get a vote, people do.


I'm all for that as well, but some claim its unfair if districts aren't more based on people's perceptions rather than geography.  So a division based on dividing a state among geographic lines - e.g split a state in half among the shortest line so half the population is on one side, half the other, rinse & repeat, may divide traditional demographics.  Take for example areas of the south where  African Americans heavily make up what used to be the cotton belt.  A strict division may dilute their vote.  Some say this is wrong.

But if you ask people what neighboring community they feel closest to, it could keep demographic groups together.  Some would say this is a good thing.  Others would say it doesn't matter.
 
2020-06-29 7:33:45 PM  

madgonad: Could go party vote apportionment.

I'll take my state, the state of Missouri.

There are 163 Missouri House seats, 34 Missouri Senate seats, 8 US House seats, and 2 US Senate seats.

Individuals from the party can do all their campaigning as normal and primaries will not change at all. Before the General Election each party will declare their 'slate' of candidates in order for each legislative roll. So the Democrats would name 163 of their members for the MO House, 17 for the MO Senate, 8 US Reps, and 1 US Senator (2 US Senators would never been handled in the same General election).

Election comes around and everybody in the state gets to vote for the party of their choice for State Rep, State Senator, US Rep, and US Senator (if one is up for election). The percentage of the vote is apportioned by party vote and the party slates fill those positions in ranked order based upon percentage of the entire state's vote earned.

Let's just say everybody voted straight party for all roles. The Republicans get 50%, Democrats get 38%, Libertarians get 8%, Greens get 2%, and the remainder went to minority parties. This would be the results:
MO House (currently GOP controls 113 seats)
-83 GOP
-63 Democrats
-14 Libertarians
-3 Greens

MO Senate (currently GOP controls 23, but only half are up for election every 2 years)
-9 GOP
-7 Democrats
-1 Libertarian

US House (currently GOP has 9 seats)
-5 GOP
-4 Democrats
-1 Libertarian

US Senate (both Senate seats are GOP)
-1 GOP

So apportionment would really really really help third parties and give more strength to the minority party.

For reference, Hillary won 38% of the vote in 2016 which is why I pegged the Democratic vote at 38%. A lot of libertarian-leaning Republicans in Missouri so I guessed that giving the Libertarian party a shot at getting some legislative seats would draw a lot of Republicans.


Congrats, you just described the parliament system.
 
2020-06-29 7:58:31 PM  
The democrats gerrymandered their primary through the mail in vote system here... neighbors that have lived here for decades all received ballots with incorrect us and pa house selections (some in the same household)... and if you noticed the pattern, it looked like the powers that be were favoring particular candidates.
 
2020-06-29 8:31:35 PM  

GhostfacedFiddlah: wademh: If a smallish state consisted of a coastal region with a tourism industry, a largish city with an industrial base, some rural farming regions, and a mountainous region, it would make good sense for the distracting to split up so that to a significant extent each of those regions has at least one of their own representatives, and that the representatives for those regions of course be divided up according to population.

I don't really get this.  What about all the demographics that aren't divided up by geography.  If there were some way to section off Doctors into their own district, would that make any more sense?  "They've had similar life experiences, so they deserve their own type of representation" works for any other group of vaguely-similar people, but it's only ever applied to geographic areas.


Acktually....

Most democracies do not use geography as the sole arbiter of who represents a certain constituency. The UK does, which is where we got it from. So do France, Canada, and IIRC, Australia, and their political systems are f*cked up because of this.

I like the mixed member proportional system as seen in Germany and New Zealand as a good transition. They use geographical districts but alleviate the stupidity with a second vote for which party you like lost ideologically.
 
2020-06-29 8:32:29 PM  

dericwater: Zagloba: Or we could (and you'll have to bear with me here) USE STATEWIDE PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION instead of single-seat districts.

There's no perfect here. If you use at-large, then voters have to pick many people for many seats. For example, in California, if we have 45 House seats picked at large, every Californians have to choose among 100+ candidates for the 45 seats every two years. Most won't know who any of them are, and only the super well-funded can afford to blast the whole state with literature to enough name recognition. And even then, they will only go after those in the denser areas: The Bay Area, LA/OC/SD areas. People out in Siskiyou and other barren counties will get zippo representation because they can't pay out as much as what a city block's worth of residents in tony Beverly Hills.

And, in a way, the US senate should play the role of statewide representation, but I think that the number should be proportional to population. California should have more than 2 senators and Wyoming should have just 1 (if any: they can share that senator with Montana, for example).


I'd be ok with that too.
 
2020-06-29 8:33:09 PM  

wademh: GhostfacedFiddlah: wademh: If a smallish state consisted of a coastal region with a tourism industry, a largish city with an industrial base, some rural farming regions, and a mountainous region, it would make good sense for the distracting to split up so that to a significant extent each of those regions has at least one of their own representatives, and that the representatives for those regions of course be divided up according to population.

I don't really get this.  What about all the demographics that aren't divided up by geography.  If there were some way to section off Doctors into their own district, would that make any more sense?  "They've had similar life experiences, so they deserve their own type of representation" works for any other group of vaguely-similar people, but it's only ever applied to geographic areas.

Gee, I don't know, maybe because ... follow me here ... districts are geographically defined. And further, that allows for convenience of having your representative be somewhat local to you, at least to the extent possible.

Local representation has a long standing tradition. It's neighbors getting together to appoint a representative. This doesn't mean splitting the representation independently between the farmers and the local store keepers. They may have very different interests in some ways but are generally united in hoping their region prospers.


Yeah, it's pretty stupid.
 
2020-06-29 8:34:01 PM  

madgonad: Could go party vote apportionment.

I'll take my state, the state of Missouri.

There are 163 Missouri House seats, 34 Missouri Senate seats, 8 US House seats, and 2 US Senate seats.

Individuals from the party can do all their campaigning as normal and primaries will not change at all. Before the General Election each party will declare their 'slate' of candidates in order for each legislative roll. So the Democrats would name 163 of their members for the MO House, 17 for the MO Senate, 8 US Reps, and 1 US Senator (2 US Senators would never been handled in the same General election).

Election comes around and everybody in the state gets to vote for the party of their choice for State Rep, State Senator, US Rep, and US Senator (if one is up for election). The percentage of the vote is apportioned by party vote and the party slates fill those positions in ranked order based upon percentage of the entire state's vote earned.

Let's just say everybody voted straight party for all roles. The Republicans get 50%, Democrats get 38%, Libertarians get 8%, Greens get 2%, and the remainder went to minority parties. This would be the results:
MO House (currently GOP controls 113 seats)
-83 GOP
-63 Democrats
-14 Libertarians
-3 Greens

MO Senate (currently GOP controls 23, but only half are up for election every 2 years)
-9 GOP
-7 Democrats
-1 Libertarian

US House (currently GOP has 9 seats)
-5 GOP
-4 Democrats
-1 Libertarian

US Senate (both Senate seats are GOP)
-1 GOP

So apportionment would really really really help third parties and give more strength to the minority party.

For reference, Hillary won 38% of the vote in 2016 which is why I pegged the Democratic vote at 38%. A lot of libertarian-leaning Republicans in Missouri so I guessed that giving the Libertarian party a shot at getting some legislative seats would draw a lot of Republicans.


This would be ok too.
 
2020-06-29 8:34:46 PM  

12349876: Elegy: Fantastic article. Redistributing is hard. It's one of those shifting sands problems where everyone thinks they have a firm grasp on gerrymandering until you actually dive into the process and try to do it better.

I think you could solve a lot of the problem with one rule.

All cities can only have ONE district that is both within and beyond its limits.


Explain how that works with New York City.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.