the high problem of the geographic cut of congr. district

[Colbert]

i have read than republican have cut those district to make unpossible a victory of DP in house of representative elections


the vicious result is than in a large majority of districts, the game is played before the day. A tons of unbeatable republican districts, another (but less) ton of unbeatable democratic districs.


So people of the political minority of those districs don't vote because they know the winner before the election



my question : is there a possibility of re-cutting the districts, to make them coherent geographically and less or more equal in terms of population ?




(please, forgive my bad english)

[JerryArkansas]

It is possible to do so, but unlikely.  Both parties gerrymander(that's what it's called) all of the time.  The only way to get rid of it is to pass laws which take redistricting out of the hands of partisans, which is done in several states.

[Colbert]

thank for the answer

[jd1433]

i have read than republican have cut those district to make unpossible a victory of DP in house of representative elections


the vicious result is than in a large majority of districts, the game is played before the day. A tons of unbeatable republican districts, another (but less) ton of unbeatable democratic districs.


So people of the political minority of those districs don't vote because they know the winner before the election



my question : is there a possibility of re-cutting the districts, to make them coherent geographically and less or more equal in terms of population ?




(please, forgive my bad english)

Payback time for the Dem's gerrymandering for 7 decades.

But seriously the Civil Rights Act and the fact that almost the entirety of the Dem base is now basically housed deep inside Metro areas means that they'll always have problems taking the house back unless they Gerrymander little slivers into their metro area repeatedly around the country (which wont happen in the reign of queen dick outside of a handful of states).


That also means that a house map designed around neat county/natural borders would likely still favor the GOP considerably. When you run up massive numbers in less than 5% of your states counties than your always going to have the problem with your excess margin "being wasted" on that race and not contributing to other races where you could use those extra votes.

[muon2]

i have read than republican have cut those district to make unpossible a victory of DP in house of representative elections


the vicious result is than in a large majority of districts, the game is played before the day. A tons of unbeatable republican districts, another (but less) ton of unbeatable democratic districs.


So people of the political minority of those districs don't vote because they know the winner before the election



my question : is there a possibility of re-cutting the districts, to make them coherent geographically and less or more equal in terms of population ?




(please, forgive my bad english)

Payback time for the Dem's gerrymandering for 7 decades.

But seriously the Civil Rights Act and the fact that almost the entirety of the Dem base is now basically housed deep inside Metro areas means that they'll always have problems taking the house back unless they Gerrymander little slivers into their metro area repeatedly around the country (which wont happen in the reign of queen dick outside of a handful of states).


That also means that a house map designed around neat county/natural borders would likely still favor the GOP considerably. When you run up massive numbers in less than 5% of your states counties than your always going to have the problem with your excess margin "being wasted" on that race and not contributing to other races where you could use those extra votes.

Not as much as you might think. Your avatar state of MN is a good example. The districts are reasonably drawn based on geography, and the plan doesn't rely on slivers from the cities outward. The result is two solid D, two solid R, and four swing districts ranging from D+1 to R+2. The MN delegation is a good reflection of that, with the bonus of one Dem in a solid R+6 district.

[jd1433]

i have read than republican have cut those district to make unpossible a victory of DP in house of representative elections


the vicious result is than in a large majority of districts, the game is played before the day. A tons of unbeatable republican districts, another (but less) ton of unbeatable democratic districs.


So people of the political minority of those districs don't vote because they know the winner before the election



my question : is there a possibility of re-cutting the districts, to make them coherent geographically and less or more equal in terms of population ?




(please, forgive my bad english)

Payback time for the Dem's gerrymandering for 7 decades.

But seriously the Civil Rights Act and the fact that almost the entirety of the Dem base is now basically housed deep inside Metro areas means that they'll always have problems taking the house back unless they Gerrymander little slivers into their metro area repeatedly around the country (which wont happen in the reign of queen dick outside of a handful of states).


That also means that a house map designed around neat county/natural borders would likely still favor the GOP considerably. When you run up massive numbers in less than 5% of your states counties than your always going to have the problem with your excess margin "being wasted" on that race and not contributing to other races where you could use those extra votes.

Not as much as you might think. Your avatar state of MN is a good example. The districts are reasonably drawn based on geography, and the plan doesn't rely on slivers from the cities outward. The result is two solid D, two solid R, and four swing districts ranging from D+1 to R+2. The MN delegation is a good reflection of that, with the bonus of one Dem in a solid R+6 district.

I wouldn't point to pretty much the one remaining state in the country where Dems (DFL) are actually running halfway decent in many rural and small towns areas as evidence of anything nationally.

Also it's not like they're not getting progressively weaker in rural parts of MN like the rest of the country, they're just a little bit behind.



Back to the point: It's simple math. If you plop some metro into a state and the first 10 miles in each direction from city center is 85% Dem and 15% GOP and you draw district lines there with no slivers protruding out, you've taken away so much margin from the rest of the state. Take a perfect bellwether 50-50 state and make 1 very tiny geographic spot house 80% of your excess margin and watch as your delegation is more often than not going to the other party.

[muon2]

Back to the point: It's simple math. If you plop some metro into a state and the first 10 miles in each direction from city center is 85% Dem and 15% GOP and you draw district lines there with no slivers protruding out, you've taken away so much margin from the rest of the state. Take a perfect bellwether 50-50 state and make 1 very tiny geographic spot house 80% of your excess margin and watch as your delegation is more often than not going to the other party.

Not many states are as extreme as IL where half the Dem votes come from one county.

So instead look south of MN to bellwether IA. Like MN they have a neutrally-drawn map that uses geographic principles. The congressional delegation has moved back and forth over the decade from 1D-4R in 2004 to 3D-2R in 2006/8/10 to 2D-2R in 2012 to 1D-3R this year. Their map is fair and competitive allowing a relatively equal number of both sides to prevail. In more urban OH, a neutral map that reflects a 50-50 state can be drawn with reasonable geographic principles, as was demonstrated in their 2011 competition.