Ohio Outlaws Gerrymandering

[HomerJS]

This may be the best thing for Democracy in a long time

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-gerrymandering_563a5c76e4b0411d306f487e

On November 3, Ohio voters approved by a margin of 71% to 29% a constitutional amendment that will greatly reduce, or even eliminate, the gerrymandering of state legislative districts beginning in 2021

 

[fskimospy]

This may be the best thing for Democracy in a long time

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-gerrymandering_563a5c76e4b0411d306f487e

Unfortunately it's just for the state legislature, and it doesn't ban it so much as make it less likely. The good news is that they can now follow it up with a ban on gerrymandering for federal offices as well. To see how badly gerrymandered Ohio is, here's the electoral map where Republicans got 55% of the statewide vote:

Now that's some pro-level gerrymandering right there.

 

[Sonikku]

Why don't they just do it on county lines?

 

[theeedude]

Competition is good for improving quality. They should pass same amendment for Federal districts as well.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Unfortunately it's just for the state legislature, and it doesn't ban it so much as make it less likely. The good news is that they can now follow it up with a ban on gerrymandering for federal offices as well. To see how badly gerrymandered Ohio is, here's the electoral map where Republicans got 55% of the statewide vote:

Now that's some pro-level gerrymandering right there.

Although it was to their political disadvantage, it's good to see Republicans widely supporting the elimination of gerrymandering in Ohio. Now if Illinois Democrat's would only do the same.

 

[fskimospy]

Although it was to their political disadvantage, it's good to see Republicans widely supporting the elimination of gerrymandering in Ohio. Now if Illinois Democrat's would only do the same.

If you're worried about Democrats and gerrymandering you'll be happy to know that it's actually been Democrats have led the way in eliminating gerrymandering in the US:

California, Washington, and New Jersey, all heavily blue states that could definitely benefit from gerrymandering have taken concrete steps to eliminate it. Arizona is usually a red state, but gerrymandering was eliminated there by a ballot initiative, over the vehement objections of their Republican controlled legislature. Idaho technically does it by a commission, but it's one appointed mostly by the heads of each legislative body, which kind of misses the point.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

If you're worried about Democrats and gerrymandering you'll be happy to know that it's actually been Democrats have led the way in eliminating gerrymandering in the US:

California, Washington, and New Jersey, all heavily blue states that could definitely benefit from gerrymandering have taken concrete steps to eliminate it. Arizona is usually a red state, but gerrymandering was eliminated there by a ballot initiative, over the vehement objections of their Republican controlled legislature. Idaho technically does it by a commission, but it's one appointed mostly by the heads of each legislative body, which kind of misses the point.

Good...and I'm glad to see Red states are doing this as well. Just waiting for Illinois to belly up.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Although it was to their political disadvantage, it's good to see Republicans widely supporting the elimination of gerrymandering in Ohio. Now if Illinois Democrat's would only do the same.

Umm if you look at that map I'd guess the Democrats are all for this.

 

[fskimospy]

Good. Just waiting for Illinois to belly up.

Why are you concerned about Illinois? In 2014 Democrats got 51.5% of the House vote and got 55% of the House seats, giving them about a 3.5% greater share of the seats than their vote would merit.

Considering there are only 20 seats in Illinois though, the change of even a single seat from Democrat to Republican would have made Republicans overrepresented in Illinois' congressional delegation by 1.5% as compared to Democrats. This hardly seems like much of a problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Illinois,_2014

Since you are very concerned about gerrymandering though, allow me to point you to some situations that you should probably focus on first:

In Michigan, Republicans got 64% of the House seats while LOSING the popular vote by about 2% with 47.5% of the vote. They got about 17% more representation than their vote total would dictate.

In Pennsylvania, Republicans got 72% of the House seats with only 55% of the vote, making them also represented by about 17% in excess of their vote total.

If the elimination of gerrymandering is your primary concern, it seems like those states would be better places to start, no?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Umm if you look at that map I'd guess the Democrats are all for this.

Of course they are...they automatically win a "fairer" number of seats. I'm just glad to see broad Republican support despite the likely outcome.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Why are you concerned about Illinois? In 2014 Democrats got 51.5% of the House vote and got 55% of the House seats, giving them about a 3.5% greater share of the seats than their vote would merit.

In 2014 Democrats got 39 of 59 (66%) of the state Senate seats and 71 of 118 (60%) of the state House seats. Your either being deliberately dishonest or you're really bad at math.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_General_Assembly

 

[fskimospy]

In 2014 Democrats got 39 of 59 (66%) of the state Senate seats and 71 of 118 (60%) of the state House seats. Your either being deliberately dishonest or you're really bad at math.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_General_Assembly

Ah yes, it wouldn't be a DSF thread without an immediate accusation of dishonesty!

You realize I included a link, right? It was about federal gerrymandering, which is the more commonly talked about one. Even if you were too lazy to click the link, the fact that we were talking about 20 seats instead of almost 200 should have clued you in.

But yes, Illinois state house seats are gerrymandered! Funny thing is that they are still less gerrymandered than the examples I gave. So assuming you aren't being deliberately dishonest (look, I can do it too!) about your concern over gerrymandering, why are you more concerned with Illinois than with the other examples I listed? My guess is that you're trying to do the old false equivalency thing. While it's true that both parties do attempt to gerrymander their states when they get the opportunity, it's mostly being done by Republicans today.

 

[Cozarkian]

Umm if you look at that map I'd guess the Democrats are all for this.

See that long horizontal blue line at the top? According to the article that was created to push two Democrat legislators into the same district so they had to run against each other.

And the ninth district (the infamous “snake by the lake”) stretches from Toledo to Cleveland. It is the product of a successful effort to force Democratic representatives Dennis Kucinich and Marcy Kaptur into the same district.

 

[Atreus21]

This may be the best thing for Democracy in a long time

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-gerrymandering_563a5c76e4b0411d306f487e

How is gerrymanydering "eliminated"? Aren't redistricting efforts ordinarily subjected to court review for exactly this purpose?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Ah yes, it wouldn't be a DSF thread without an immediate accusation of dishonesty!

You realize I included a link, right? It was about federal gerrymandering, which is the more commonly talked about one. Even if you were too lazy to click the link, the fact that we were talking about 20 seats instead of almost 200 should have clued you in.

But yes, Illinois state house seats are gerrymandered! Funny thing is that they are still less gerrymandered than the examples I gave. So assuming you aren't being deliberately dishonest (look, I can do it too!) about your concern over gerrymandering, why are you more concerned with Illinois than with the other examples I listed? My guess is that you're trying to do the old false equivalency thing. While it's true that both parties do attempt to gerrymander their states when they get the opportunity, it's mostly being done by Republicans today.

You've spun the numbers dishonestly. Despite Democrats having only 51.5% of the popular vote in the 2014 House election, they still ended up controlling 60% of the total seats. And I see that you didn't mention the Senate imbalance as well (66%)...for obvious reasons. The effects of gerrymandering are alive and well in Illinois.

I understand that gerrymandering may be worst in other states...but ffs just stop with the crap.

 

[fskimospy]

You've spun the numbers dishonestly. Despite Democrats having only 51.5% of the popular vote in the 2014 House election, they still ended up controlling 60% of the total seats. And I see that you didn't mention the Senate imbalance as well (66%)...for obvious reasons.

Ok, now I really need to know. Are you being deliberately dishonest or are you unable to read my posts? I've done no 'spin', I just reported literal, unquestionable facts. You're going to have to accept that.

You appear very confused about what we are discussing, despite me telling you repeatedly and providing links. I of course wouldn't have mentioned the Illinois state senate because it had literally nothing to do with what I was talking and linking about. This is not complicated.

Before you say anything else dumb I would go back and read my previous post and follow the link. Then ask yourself if we're talking about the same thing. (hint: we aren't).

I understand that gerrymandering may be worst in other states...but ffs just stop with the crap.

So if you understand that gerrymandering is worse in other states what is the purpose of your fixation on Illinois? Wouldn't you want to fix the worse problems first?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Ok, now I really need to know. Are you being deliberately dishonest or are you unable to read my posts? I've done no 'spin', I just reported literal, unquestionable facts. You're going to have to accept that.

You appear very confused about what we are discussing, despite me telling you repeatedly and providing links. I of course wouldn't have mentioned the Illinois state senate because it had literally nothing to do with what I was talking and linking about. This is not complicated.

Before you say anything else dumb I would go back and read my previous post and follow the link. Then ask yourself if we're talking about the same thing. (hint: we aren't).

So if you understand that gerrymandering is worse in other states what is the purpose of your fixation on Illinois? Wouldn't you want to fix the worse problems first?

I'm discussing the effects of gerrymandering in Illinois, what are you discussing? I now see that I misunderstood you initially, but the facts I presented at the state legislature level are far more robust than just 20 US House seats, and they speak to the issue much more credibly. You essentially presented one highly selective fact from one particular race in one election and twisted it to somehow "prove" that gerrymandering isn't that bad in the State of Illinois. I get it that some other states may be worse...but damn, just stop with all the horse shit.

 

[Nebor]

The only thing worse for the Republican Party than ending gerrymandering would be mandatory voting.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

The only thing worse for the Republican Party than ending gerrymandering would be mandatory voting.

Not really it will simply make them change to views their voters want which is a good thing.

 

[Jhhnn]

I'm discussing the effects of gerrymandering in Illinois, what are you discussing?

You're diverting away from the subject, Ohio. If you want to broaden that then gerrymandering in general should be discussed, not just Illinois. They're not even among the worst-

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-most-gerrymandered-congressional-districts/

Repubs best efforts in that regard are coming back to haunt them with Teatard Reps from extremely conservative & utterly safe districts. They never even saw it coming.

 

[Jhhnn]

The only thing worse for the Republican Party than ending gerrymandering would be mandatory voting.

Pretty much. That's why they opposed motor voter, ACORN & why they're all hot & bothered over strict voter ID. Their chances of winning are, in general, diminished by larger turnout. They exploit a cadre of zealous voters who do so like punching the clock at work & have perfect attendance, too.

 

[Jhhnn]

Not really it will simply make them change to views their voters want which is a good thing.

They can't change. It's like feeding the bears. They'll eat you if you have no food for them.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

They can't change. It's like feeding the bears. They'll eat you if you have no food for them.

Bit extreme there Captain

 

[dmcowen674]

On November 3, Ohio voters approved by a margin of 71% to 29% a constitutional amendment that will greatly reduce, or even eliminate, the gerrymandering of state legislative districts beginning in 2021 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ohio-gerrymandering_563a5c76e4b0411d306f487e

It will never happen.

Way too much time between now and 2021 that they will find a way to negate this vote.

 

[Nebor]

Not really it will simply make them change to views their voters want which is a good thing.

So what would be worse for the Republican Party?