• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

SCOTUS rules on redistricting: Independent commissions allowed

Its about time. Honestly, I hope that independent commissions are adopted nationwide for this kind of thing. I would love for districts to be much more compact and continuous. The mathematics for doing so is quite a fun topic. But yes, we need to do a lot more to prevent those in power from gerrymandering their way into permanent incumbency.

jK8VFZx.jpg
 
Interesting judge that Kennedy fellow. We have these commissions in CA, I am not aware of major issues with them.
 
From the summary of the ruling:

The Elections Clause and 2 U. S. C. §2a(c) permit Arizona’s use of a commission to adopt congressional districts. Pp. 15–35.
(a) Redistricting is a legislative function to be performed in accordance with the State’s prescriptions for lawmaking, which may include the referendum
Click to expand...

So if state's allow their people to pass laws by referendum, then it's okay for the people to pass a law on how redistricting can work.
---

In general, gerrymandering is a pox on our system. Having incumbents with a vested interest in maintaining their seat seems like a poor choice of people to have drawing district maps.
 
MovingTarget said:
Its about time. Honestly, I hope that independent commissions are adopted nationwide for this kind of thing. I would love for districts to be much more compact and continuous. The mathematics for doing so is quite a fun topic. But yes, we need to do a lot more to prevent those in power from gerrymandering their way into permanent incumbency.

jK8VFZx.jpg
Click to expand...

Independent commission or no, somebody is getting screwed in either of those scenarios. Doesn't everyone deserve representation?

I'd prefer a move to a proportional system for the House.
 
BoberFett said:
Independent commission or no, somebody is getting screwed in either of those scenarios. Doesn't everyone deserve representation?

I'd prefer a move to a proportional system for the House.
Click to expand...
I'd prefer a proportional system as well. That is the whole point, isn't it?
 
BoberFett said:
Independent commission or no, somebody is getting screwed in either of those scenarios. Doesn't everyone deserve representation?

I'd prefer a move to a proportional system for the House.
Click to expand...

That is part of why I posted that graphic. In both scenarios, somebody is getting hosed. It is the entire point.

Everyone deserves representation, but in coming up with district lines, you need to ensure that the least amount of bias is introduced into that process. That is why independent commissions are a good idea compared to legislators doing it themselves. If anyone has a better idea than independent commissions, I'm all ears.

You mention a proportional system. How would that process work?
 
MovingTarget said:
That is part of why I posted that graphic. In both scenarios, somebody is getting hosed. It is the entire point.

Everyone deserves representation, but in coming up with district lines, you need to ensure that the least amount of bias is introduced into that process. That is why independent commissions are a good idea compared to legislators doing it themselves. If anyone has a better idea than independent commissions, I'm all ears.

You mention a proportional system. How would that process work?
Click to expand...

One method would be to use statewide elections instead of districts. In your photo, all candidates would run and then you would take the top 3 democrats and top 2 republicans.

That method also helps minority parties. For example, if the popular vote was 50/38/12%, you would take the top 2/2/1 candidates.
 
Computer programs can analyze census data and generate close to 90-95 of districts based on set criteria. Geographical features, municipalities, community election districts

Then let the commission tweak the other 5-10% needed
 
cabri said:
Computer programs can analyze census data and generate close to 90-95 of districts based on set criteria. Geographical features, municipalities, community election districts

Then let the commission tweak the other 5-10% needed
Click to expand...

Oh now why would politicians want a computer to do that? That would take the fun out of gerrymandering to keep themselves elected.
 
JSt0rm said:
gop is getting wrecked in the courts. How does it feel?
Click to expand...

Well, they got the death penalty decision. I'm not too familiar with the merits of the specific case. But two justices flat out said that the DP is unconstiutional now. It wouldn't surprise me if this begins to tip with all the focus on the broken criminal justice system.
 
Blackjack200 said:
Well, they got the death penalty decision. I'm not too familiar with the merits of the specific case. But two justices flat out said that the DP is unconstiutional now. It wouldn't surprise me if this begins to tip with all the focus on the broken criminal justice system.
Click to expand...


Considering we have actually put innocent men to death (proven beyond any doubt) it should be gone.
 
JSt0rm said:
Considering we have actually put innocent men to death (proven beyond any doubt) it should be gone.
Click to expand...

I agree, but there is no way the court is going there until a majority of people oppose it. Just the way it is.

Like, amazing coincidence that they figured out that gay people had the right to marry all along after the major public opinion shift on that issue.
 
Genx87 said:
Oh now why would politicians want a computer to do that? That would take the fun out of gerrymandering to keep themselves elected.
Click to expand...

Most GOP Congresscritters and their state-level brethren have an aversion to math anyway. They wouldn't trust it to begin with.

:colbert:
 
MovingTarget said:
That is part of why I posted that graphic. In both scenarios, somebody is getting hosed. It is the entire point.

Everyone deserves representation, but in coming up with district lines, you need to ensure that the least amount of bias is introduced into that process. That is why independent commissions are a good idea compared to legislators doing it themselves. If anyone has a better idea than independent commissions, I'm all ears.

You mention a proportional system. How would that process work?
Click to expand...

no such thing as independent commission.

CA tried it, and it was nothing but a side show to make it look independent, when it was as rigged as always.
 
what.. whoa.. didn't know this was spelled out in the 17th amendment?!

so basically jury nullification of the Constitution?

I'm all fixing wacko GOP schemes, but if it's in the Constitution then we should go thru the due process of amending the Constitution. (ie: 2/3's congress and 3/4 states approval)

if a another wacko GOP gets appointed to the Supreme court, who knows what could happen to the 1st Amendment!
 
michal1980 said:
no such thing as independent commission.

CA tried it, and it was nothing but a side show to make it look independent, when it was as rigged as always.
Click to expand...

how?
the AZ commission is composed of 2 repubs, 2 dems, and an independent.

what happened in CA?
 
JEDI said:
how?
the AZ commission is composed of 2 repubs, 2 dems, and an independent.

what happened in CA?
Click to expand...

I'd like to know this too. A commission like in AZ balances the competing interests of competing parties much more so than typically exists in most states' legislatures. It also removes the incentives to redraw lines so that you get yourself reelected. It isn't perfect, but it seems better than what we have now. Personally, I'd like to see some mathematical formulas detailing how the districts should be drawn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top