|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On July 19 2017 01:03 zlefin wrote:
So, on gerrymandering, what are the main solutions? I know there's making non-partisan redistricting commissions (thoug hI'm not quite sure how you make them non-partisan)
I'm not really sure how districts should be setup; it's hard to think of say a deterministic algorithm that would do a great job at setting up districts. and there's a lot of different ways to setup districts that have merit, which means there's a lot of potential choice, and where there's potential choice there's usually a way to take political advantage of it.
there's also some issue that the most obvious methods of setting up districts may have a natural effect similar to gerrymandering.
The most reasonable (and popular) solution I've heard is to draw the district lines algorithmically.
|
On July 19 2017 01:22 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2017 01:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 19 2017 01:03 zlefin wrote:
So, on gerrymandering, what are the main solutions? I know there's making non-partisan redistricting commissions (thoug hI'm not quite sure how you make them non-partisan)
I'm not really sure how districts should be setup; it's hard to think of say a deterministic algorithm that would do a great job at setting up districts. and there's a lot of different ways to setup districts that have merit, which means there's a lot of potential choice, and where there's potential choice there's usually a way to take political advantage of it.
there's also some issue that the most obvious methods of setting up districts may have a natural effect similar to gerrymandering. Have a 3 man/woman team for each side that draws the maps. Compromise on how it's done. Either that or you redraw them every year from someone who isn't affiliated with any political party (difficult) and they handle that. It honestly all comes down to ethics and moral. Is it required for a state to even have districts, my understanding is it isn't? States could move to something like a ranked voting mechanism if they wanted (which comes with its own pros and cons).
Then cities get all the representatives and the countryside gets nothing. That's the main point of having districts.
|
In most places its just drawed according to actual, well, city districts and villages that form some kind of community/logical area.
|
On July 19 2017 01:22 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2017 01:12 zlefin wrote:On July 19 2017 01:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 19 2017 01:03 zlefin wrote:
So, on gerrymandering, what are the main solutions? I know there's making non-partisan redistricting commissions (thoug hI'm not quite sure how you make them non-partisan)
I'm not really sure how districts should be setup; it's hard to think of say a deterministic algorithm that would do a great job at setting up districts. and there's a lot of different ways to setup districts that have merit, which means there's a lot of potential choice, and where there's potential choice there's usually a way to take political advantage of it.
there's also some issue that the most obvious methods of setting up districts may have a natural effect similar to gerrymandering. Have a 3 man/woman team for each side that draws the maps. Compromise on how it's done. Either that or you redraw them every year from someone who isn't affiliated with any political party (difficult) and they handle that. It honestly all comes down to ethics and moral. what if they can't agree on a compromise? if we had a way to reliably select people for high ethics/morals we wouldn't have these issues in the first place, so that doesn't seem like an answer. how do you classify people not affiliated with a party? they still may well have leanings/opinions and such. as with many things, the devil is in the details, and it's really quite hard to do once you get down to it, especially considering the degree to which some will leverage any small advantage to their favor. You're right. It isn't easy and it probably isn't the best way to go about it. That's just how I see it happening if it wants to be done on a bi-partisan effort. There's really no one way to fix this. The easiest way would be to be to grid the entire state and leave it at that, increase/decrease the size of the grid depending on the variables so that more populous areas get their representation and the less populated areas get theirs.
A basic first start would be to take a look at how countries that do not have this problem handle it. The US has an aversion to doing this for some inexplicable reason.
|
On July 19 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2017 01:22 Logo wrote:On July 19 2017 01:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 19 2017 01:03 zlefin wrote:
So, on gerrymandering, what are the main solutions? I know there's making non-partisan redistricting commissions (thoug hI'm not quite sure how you make them non-partisan)
I'm not really sure how districts should be setup; it's hard to think of say a deterministic algorithm that would do a great job at setting up districts. and there's a lot of different ways to setup districts that have merit, which means there's a lot of potential choice, and where there's potential choice there's usually a way to take political advantage of it.
there's also some issue that the most obvious methods of setting up districts may have a natural effect similar to gerrymandering. Have a 3 man/woman team for each side that draws the maps. Compromise on how it's done. Either that or you redraw them every year from someone who isn't affiliated with any political party (difficult) and they handle that. It honestly all comes down to ethics and moral. Is it required for a state to even have districts, my understanding is it isn't? States could move to something like a ranked voting mechanism if they wanted (which comes with its own pros and cons). Then cities get all the representatives and the countryside gets nothing. That's the main point of having districts.
But congressional districts are supposed to based on roughly equal population within a state from my understanding. So the representation with say a proportional ballot vs a district based one shouldn't be very different in representing city vs rural.
|
United States43275 Posts
On July 19 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2017 01:22 Logo wrote:On July 19 2017 01:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 19 2017 01:03 zlefin wrote:
So, on gerrymandering, what are the main solutions? I know there's making non-partisan redistricting commissions (thoug hI'm not quite sure how you make them non-partisan)
I'm not really sure how districts should be setup; it's hard to think of say a deterministic algorithm that would do a great job at setting up districts. and there's a lot of different ways to setup districts that have merit, which means there's a lot of potential choice, and where there's potential choice there's usually a way to take political advantage of it.
there's also some issue that the most obvious methods of setting up districts may have a natural effect similar to gerrymandering. Have a 3 man/woman team for each side that draws the maps. Compromise on how it's done. Either that or you redraw them every year from someone who isn't affiliated with any political party (difficult) and they handle that. It honestly all comes down to ethics and moral. Is it required for a state to even have districts, my understanding is it isn't? States could move to something like a ranked voting mechanism if they wanted (which comes with its own pros and cons). Then cities get all the representatives and the countryside gets nothing. That's the main point of having districts.
Cities do kinda have all the people. It's not weird that they're represented more heavily.
|
|
|
On July 18 2017 22:25 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Blizzard and WoW gets a shoutout in that article. Kinda crazy that WoW gamers may have affected Bannons political thinking and by extension the direction of America.
|
|
|
That's 3 against this plan.
|
|
|
Hes a POS who is refusing to try to fix it. What about the campaign promises on Drug prices? What a prick.
|
Hah, Bannon is a national treasure. Can't say that I meaningfully disagree with his assessment of Ryan.
|
On July 19 2017 01:33 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2017 01:26 Gorsameth wrote:On July 19 2017 01:22 Logo wrote:On July 19 2017 01:09 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 19 2017 01:03 zlefin wrote:
So, on gerrymandering, what are the main solutions? I know there's making non-partisan redistricting commissions (thoug hI'm not quite sure how you make them non-partisan)
I'm not really sure how districts should be setup; it's hard to think of say a deterministic algorithm that would do a great job at setting up districts. and there's a lot of different ways to setup districts that have merit, which means there's a lot of potential choice, and where there's potential choice there's usually a way to take political advantage of it.
there's also some issue that the most obvious methods of setting up districts may have a natural effect similar to gerrymandering. Have a 3 man/woman team for each side that draws the maps. Compromise on how it's done. Either that or you redraw them every year from someone who isn't affiliated with any political party (difficult) and they handle that. It honestly all comes down to ethics and moral. Is it required for a state to even have districts, my understanding is it isn't? States could move to something like a ranked voting mechanism if they wanted (which comes with its own pros and cons). Then cities get all the representatives and the countryside gets nothing. That's the main point of having districts. Cities do kinda have all the people. It's not weird that they're represented more heavily.
A ranked voting system would lead to cities getting all of the representation though. Not just represented more heavily.
|
On July 19 2017 02:07 Sadist wrote:Hes a POS who is refusing to try to fix it. What about the campaign promises on Drug prices? What a prick.
If I recall correctly, he had a meeting with them and came out of it getting nothing done but giving them tax breaks.
|
|
|
We really need term limits. We need new blood in there.
|
Come to Lansing and I'll show you why term limits are not the answer. They are, if anything, a guarantee that legislatures never have the expertise needed to approach problems with any sort of depth. The only people who end up with any sort of history at the capitol end up being lobbyists.
|
On July 19 2017 01:24 mozoku wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2017 01:03 zlefin wrote:
So, on gerrymandering, what are the main solutions? I know there's making non-partisan redistricting commissions (thoug hI'm not quite sure how you make them non-partisan)
I'm not really sure how districts should be setup; it's hard to think of say a deterministic algorithm that would do a great job at setting up districts. and there's a lot of different ways to setup districts that have merit, which means there's a lot of potential choice, and where there's potential choice there's usually a way to take political advantage of it.
there's also some issue that the most obvious methods of setting up districts may have a natural effect similar to gerrymandering. The most reasonable (and popular) solution I've heard is to draw the district lines algorithmically.
but with which algorithm? there's an awful lot of potential variables involved, and I haven't seen proposals for actual specific algorithms.
zero -> term limits really don't work that well in practice; there's been plenty of places that have tried them, and the results have been quite mixed, they don't really help that much, and create considerable problems of their own.
|
On July 19 2017 02:21 farvacola wrote:
Come to Lansing and I'll show you why term limits are not the answer. They are, if anything, a guarantee that legislatures never have the expertise needed to approach problems with any sort of depth. The only people who end up with any sort of history at the capitol end up being lobbyists.
Ya for Michigan term limits hasnt worked out so well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
