Why is gerrymandering allowed?

[archives]

I am in no way asking this as a defense of gerrymandering but what is the alternative? Let's say we're talking about California (although it can be any state) and let's say we have 50 districts (just an arbitrary number). By what system can we use to determine those 50 districts that the most people will think is fair?

Usually it's fighting over whether a district leans more Republican or Democratic. But we have districts here that are like 80%+ Democratic so no Republican is going to win but there are still massive fights because we redistrict based on race. Should this area be allowed to have a majority Asian population? Should this district be allowed to have a majority LatinX population? And so forth. In California we passed a ballot measure to take redistricting out of the hands of politicians into an 'independent' body. Great in theory. Yet there are still massive fights and claims of racism etc.

One can argue there is no good way to redistrict but independent bodies are the best of all other options. But simply saying 'no gerrymandering', while sounding very good in theory, needs to have an alternative.

If you want a chuckle you ought to check out what is happening in New York State. The Democrats, who own State Gov't, came up with an over zealous redistrict map that virtually erased all Republican districts. It was rejected even in a Democrat Court, who in a hurry, assigned an independent entity to draw the maps, which eventually resulted in five surprising GOP Congressional victories. Currently, the Legislature has won a case to redraw the maps once again, hoping to eliminate the GOP gain. It's comical

I think it can be done, least in New York, where you have easily identifiable areas, rural/urban, but it going to happen

 

[cawacko]

If you want a chuckle you ought to check out what is happening in New York State. The Democrats, who own State Gov't, came up with an over zealous redistrict map that virtually erased all Republican districts. It was rejected even in a Democrat Court, who in a hurry, assigned an independent entity to draw the maps, which eventually resulted in five surprising GOP Congressional victories. Currently, the Legislature has won a case to redraw the maps once again, hoping to eliminate the GOP gain. It's comical

I think it can be done, least in New York, where you have easily identifiable areas, rural/urban, but it going to happen

Wow, I had not heard that and it does sound like comedy!

I'll admit I voted for the ballot measure that took redistricting out of the hands of politicians here and the responsibility given to an independent body. I think the results are better than politicians doing it but its clear it is no panacea.

 

[BartenderElite]

I am in no way asking this as a defense of gerrymandering but what is the alternative? Let's say we're talking about California (although it can be any state) and let's say we have 50 districts (just an arbitrary number). By what system can we use to determine those 50 districts that the most people will think is fair?

Usually it's fighting over whether a district leans more Republican or Democratic. But we have districts here that are like 80%+ Democratic so no Republican is going to win but there are still massive fights because we redistrict based on race. Should this area be allowed to have a majority Asian population? Should this district be allowed to have a majority LatinX population? And so forth. In California we passed a ballot measure to take redistricting out of the hands of politicians into an 'independent' body. Great in theory. Yet there are still massive fights and claims of racism etc.

One can argue there is no good way to redistrict but independent bodies are the best of all other options. But simply saying 'no gerrymandering', while sounding very good in theory, needs to have an alternative.

I would qualify my own sentiments that gerrymandering AS IT IS CURRENTLY DONE should not exist, and is inherently undemocratic.

It should not be a partisan exercise, based solely on the party in power at a given time.

 

[cawacko]

I would qualify my own sentiments that gerrymandering AS IT IS CURRENTLY DONE should not exist, and is inherently undemocratic.

It should not be a partisan exercise, based solely on the party in power at a given time.

The question then is what do we turn to? The independent bodies that some states have done or something else?