New answers tagged

8

Would "For the People Act" (aka HR1) get required bipartisan support in the US Senate if it concentrated only on the prohibition of gerrymandering? No, because what one group of people call "gerrymandering" is what another group of people call "the right of their state legislature to determine how to send representatives to Congress....


17

Impossible to say, but unlikely. Congressional Republicans have phrased the entire concept of federal regulation of voting as government overreach and a breach of the states's rights to do so. There's really no paring back of the bill which they could support without immediately undercutting that rhetoric. Not to mention that their party as a whole has the ...


4

There is a significant problem with not gerrymandering in the US system. It is a combination of two factors: (1) a de-facto two party system (2) single seat representation, with per-district winner-take-all, in legislatures at most levels of government. To illustrate, let's say you have two parties, call them X and Y. Say you are looking at a state with 10 ...


-1

You can prevent gerrymandering by having a neutral, algorithmic criterion for drawing the districts. For example, One could define the best districting plan to be the one that produces the lowest possible average output from the following procedure: "Choose a district at random. Then choose two random voters in your district. Output the crow-flies ...


0

Regardless of what you may have heard, HR 1 does not prevent gerrymandering. It merely changes who controls how the districts are drawn. But the new mechanism could be subverted, just as the old one has been. There actually is a way to prevent it. One simply has to define a neutral, algorithmic way to set up the districts. For example, "least mean ...


Top 50 recent answers are included