If we ever got fair maps should VRA districts be abolished?

[Dr. MB]

I think it’s a necessary condition of getting a truly fair system - or at least relax the requirements a bit. For example in Alabama you could get a single heavily gerrymandered district which is 65% black and the rest of the districts would be Republican or you could get two Dem-voting districts which are about 50-50 and much more compact and therefore fair.

Or like in Chicago where the current map is one of the ugliest in the country. Just because the neighborhoods there are segregated doesn’t mean congressional maps should be.

[S019]

No, representing minority interests is important, and in many cases fair maps involve increasing minority representation (for instance, see the California maps)

[Dr. MB]

No, representing minority interests is important, and in many cases fair maps involve increasing minority representation (for instance, see the California maps)

You’re not actually representing all minority interests, just the interests of racial minorities who live in majority minority areas. If you truly want this then why not have racial lists like New Zealand?

[If my soul was made of stone]

Compactness shouldn't be the be-all end-all of redistricting. Preserving communities is very important even when race isn't involved, and the VRA requirements do serve a purpose in giving more of a direct voice to minority groups that would otherwise often be lost in the shuffle among a broader demographic slice. Plenty of majority-minority districts that aren't particularly ugly can be drawn either way.

I agree with you that sometimes the current interpretation of the VRA promotes uncompetitiveness, but that can be fixed without scrapping the entire enterprise.

[Padfoot]

I tend to agree with the OP to a certain extent.  Maybe if individual districts were less racially monolithic then there would also be less of a stark partisan divide on race. 

[lfromnj]

African american segregation is mostly forced although immigrant segregation has a pretty strong self selection part to it considering that different immigrants often self group with their selves such as Il 4th having a northern Puerto Rican side and Southern Mexican side
(Yes ik Puerto Ricans aren't immigrants its just an important point.) I highly doubt even white racists care whether Puerto Ricans and Mexicans are together or separated.

[Girlytree]

The VRA requirements have hurt minority representation.

Also, why do we have this idea that minorities are to by default vote against whites and vice versa? Isn’t that a little counterproductive?

[smoltchanov]

In such (unlikely) case - of course. VRA districts are almost always a monstrosity (invented to fight another monstrosity - partisan gerrymandering).

[Neptunium]

Why not, too many ugly districts come from VRA.

[jimrtex]

I think it’s a necessary condition of getting a truly fair system - or at least relax the requirements a bit. For example in Alabama you could get a single heavily gerrymandered district which is 65% black and the rest of the districts would be Republican or you could get two Dem-voting districts which are about 50-50 and much more compact and therefore fair.

Or like in Chicago where the current map is one of the ugliest in the country. Just because the neighborhoods there are segregated doesn’t mean congressional maps should be.

What is a fair system?

[Torie]

Not if the Pubs control where the lines go, no, particularly for blacks, but still also for Hispanics in most places. Pubs like Hispanic precincts in Pub districts in just the right amount, because the Dem margins divided by the total population in many Hispanic precincts are so low. A perfect example of that is my TX-07 that I drew in my Pubmander. I sought out such precincts like a ravenous wolf.

Back when it was the Dems who screwed minorities in many places by spreading them around in just the right amount to elect white Dems. But that can't happen any more politically. Their black and Hispanic base won't stand for it.

Fair to me means minorities can elect candidates of their choice in this context.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What people refer to as "VRA districts" are not required by the VRA, were actually not common until after the 1990 Census decades after its passage, and have nothing to do with electing Black/Hispanic members to Congress.

Please actually look up what the VRA does and how we ended up with those type of districts before speaking on things.

[jimrtex]

Not if the Pubs control where the lines go, no, particularly for blacks, but still also for Hispanics in most places. Pubs like Hispanic precincts in Pub districts in just the right amount, because the Dem margins divided by the total population in many Hispanic precincts is so low. A perfect example of that is my TX-07 that I drew in my Pubmander. I sought them out such precincts like a ravenous wolf.

Back when it was the Dems who screwed minorities in many places by spreading them around in just the right amount to elect white Dems. But that can't happen any more politically. Their black and Hispanic base won't stand for it.

Fair to me means minorities can elect candidates of their choice in this context.

I perceive what you are saying is that COI are not always defined by geography, and that distinct COI should have representation chosen by the community.

This can be achieved by permitting voters to enroll in a community, and weight the vote of the community's representative by the size of the community.

[Del Tachi]

No, of course not.  Minority representation should be a huge consideration for any truly *fair* map.

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

This is what always gets missed. Bringing up Tim Scott or Lauren Underwood is a total red herring, it's not about simply electing black Representatives, or even requiring black majority districts.

For example it'll be basically impossible to keep OH-11 majority black after redistricting especially with Ohio's rules on redistricting. That's not a violation of the VRA, nor is there a requirement that long snaky districts be drawn to create black majority seats.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I feel like it should be kept only for when a very compact district can be drawn. After a certain point though, trying to bacon-strip a place like the south side of Chicago or fajitas in South Texas to get as many 50% + 1 districts as possible becomes ridiculous.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No, of course not.  Minority representation should be a huge consideration for any truly *fair* map.

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

Exactly.

[jimrtex]

No, of course not.  Minority representation should be a huge consideration for any truly *fair* map.

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

Can you define what you mean by a community?

Presumably a community is a group of persons who have some shared characteristics. What characteristic do you consider salient?

[Del Tachi]

No, of course not.  Minority representation should be a huge consideration for any truly *fair* map.

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

Can you define what you mean by a community?

Presumably a community is a group of persons who have some shared characteristics. What characteristic do you consider salient?

I’m not well-versed in what the courts have ruled in regards to this question.  But my layman’s principle is basically that no racial, ethnic or linguistic minority (given it is compact enough) should be drawn into districts in such a way that unnecessarily dilutes their ability to vote as a bloc.  In places where these minorities are large and compact enough, this can mean the creation of opportunity districts to allow the election of candidates of choice.

[jimrtex]

No, of course not.  Minority representation should be a huge consideration for any truly *fair* map.

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

Can you define what you mean by a community?

Presumably a community is a group of persons who have some shared characteristics. What characteristic do you consider salient?

I’m not well-versed in what the courts have ruled in regards to this question.  But my layman’s principle is basically that no racial, ethnic or linguistic minority (given it is compact enough) should be drawn into districts in such a way that unnecessarily dilutes their ability to vote as a bloc.  In places where these minorities are large and compact enough, this can mean the creation of opportunity districts to allow the election of candidates of choice.

If what makes an individual a member of a community is not their place of residence but rather other characteristics, such as their race or ethnicity, why base electorates solely on place of residence?

If the black community is choosing their representative, why let other persons who live in proximity interfere in their choice of representative?

[Girlytree]

No, of course not.  Minority representation should be a huge consideration for any truly *fair* map.

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

Can you define what you mean by a community?

Presumably a community is a group of persons who have some shared characteristics. What characteristic do you consider salient?

I’m not well-versed in what the courts have ruled in regards to this question.  But my layman’s principle is basically that no racial, ethnic or linguistic minority (given it is compact enough) should be drawn into districts in such a way that unnecessarily dilutes their ability to vote as a bloc.  In places where these minorities are large and compact enough, this can mean the creation of opportunity districts to allow the election of candidates of choice.

If what makes an individual a member of a community is not their place of residence but rather other characteristics, such as their race or ethnicity, why base electorates solely on place of residence?

If the black community is choosing their representative, why let other persons who live in proximity interfere in their choice of representative?

Hmmm let me think...

Maybe because that’s SEGREGATION and it’s BAD? Ever thought of that?

[jimrtex]

No, of course not.  Minority representation should be a huge consideration for any truly *fair* map.

The point of VRA districts is to allow minority communities adequate representation.  That will always be a valid criterion, no matter how (un)polarized racial voting patterns become. 

Can you define what you mean by a community?

Presumably a community is a group of persons who have some shared characteristics. What characteristic do you consider salient?

I’m not well-versed in what the courts have ruled in regards to this question.  But my layman’s principle is basically that no racial, ethnic or linguistic minority (given it is compact enough) should be drawn into districts in such a way that unnecessarily dilutes their ability to vote as a bloc.  In places where these minorities are large and compact enough, this can mean the creation of opportunity districts to allow the election of candidates of choice.

If what makes an individual a member of a community is not their place of residence but rather other characteristics, such as their race or ethnicity, why base electorates solely on place of residence?

If the black community is choosing their representative, why let other persons who live in proximity interfere in their choice of representative?

Hmmm let me think...

Maybe because that’s SEGREGATION and it’s BAD? Ever thought of that?

You state, "that is segregation." It is unclear what the pronoun "that" refers to.

Del Tachi wrote that the purpose of VRA is to "allow minority communities adequate representation." What did he mean by "minority community", or if you believe there are such things as "minority communities" what are they?

[Del Tachi]

Del Tachi wrote that the purpose of VRA is to "allow minority communities adequate representation." What did he mean by "minority community", or if you believe there are such things as "minority communities" what are they?

To revisit this, my initial post made the point that minority communities "compact enough" are deserving of protection.  Geographic compactness is obviously a (major) aspect of what defines a community or place.

[jimrtex]

Del Tachi wrote that the purpose of VRA is to "allow minority communities adequate representation." What did he mean by "minority community", or if you believe there are such things as "minority communities" what are they?

To revisit this, my initial post made the point that minority communities "compact enough" are deserving of protection.  Geographic compactness is obviously a (major) aspect of what defines a community or place.

Do we agree that a community is comprised of a group of individuals?

In mathematical terms, if the universal set is all eligible voters in a state (if we are discussing a state legislature) how are you defining subsets that are communities?

Why not just let each voter choose their community? Each community could then choose their own representative, and exercise a vote proportional to the size of their community.

If a community were too large it would be divided. If a community were too small its members could choose a new community.