If Texas turns blue in 2020 should the Democrats gerrymander?

[Cow Poke]

Well I don't know off hand, I would assume that a special bipartisan or non political commision of a sort would need be created who would need adhere to the original purpose (whatever that is) of redistricting.

Yeah, in this political climate, I'm just not seeing it.

[Sam]

One proposal I heard of for redistricting which I like the sound of is the following

1) Party A draws up proposed districts
2) Party B chooses one of the districts to make permanent
3) Party B redraws the remaining districts
4) Party A chooses one of the districts to make permanent
5) Party A redraws the remaining districts
etc.

It would have to be war gamed out a few times and see how it measures up compared to other approaches but intuitively it seems hard to 'cheat' at since you are never the one picking the districts which you drew. I think you could come up with pretty simple ways to extend it to more than two parties as well if that ever became a realistic issue in this country. Of course, I'm easy to please since we have close the worst possible system at the moment.

There's no need to reinvent the wheel: numerous states have implemented different ways to create non-partisan redistricting. What matters is that the outcomes of those methods pass the mathematical models created (by people like Sam Wang at the Princeton Gerrymandering Project) to measure the extremity of partisan gerrymandering. It's possible to model "natural" gerrymandering against partisan gerrymandering and test whether a map is fairly districted.

SCOTUS had the opportunity to establish a standard with the WI/CT/MD case last year but, predictably, declined to even come close. But any state can establish such guidelines, using one or more mathematical models, and use any method it wants to get there.

--Sam

[Sam]

In Michigan in 2018, for example, a ballot initiative passed to grant redistricting power to an independent board comprised of 13 MI citizens randomly chosen: four affiliated with Democrats, four affiliated with Republicans, and five unaffiliated. I do not believe the ballot initiative established a standard to measure the extremity of gerrymandering in whatever map is chosen but such tools will be available to the commission.

--Sam

[Cow Poke]

There's no need to reinvent the wheel: numerous states have implemented different ways to create non-partisan redistricting. What matters is that the outcomes of those methods pass the mathematical models created (by people like Sam Wang at the Princeton Gerrymandering Project) to measure the extremity of partisan gerrymandering. It's possible to model "natural" gerrymandering against partisan gerrymandering and test whether a map is fairly districted.

SCOTUS had the opportunity to establish a standard with the WI/CT/MD case last year but, predictably, declined to even come close. But any state can establish such guidelines, using one or more mathematical models, and use any method it wants to get there.

--Sam

And it's probably largely influenced by the function of the Electoral College - Why would a blue state or a red state allow "fair" or "natural" gerrymandering if it meant losing the influence of either party?

Yeah, I know, I'm a cynic -- I think both sides are simply too territorial.

[JimL]

Yeah, in this political climate, I'm just not seeing it.

Well, whether we see it or not it's something that needs be done. Perhaps when republicans lose their power in state legislatures, they'll come around as well.

[Cow Poke]

Well, whether we see it or not it's something that needs be done. Perhaps when republicans lose their power in state legislatures, they'll come around as well.

Jim, you really need to come to the reality that it's not only Republicans who are power hungry and want their own party to keep or gain control. It's just totally ignorant to hold that position.

[JimL]

Jim, you really need to come to the reality that it's not only Republicans who are power hungry and want their own party to keep or gain control. It's just totally ignorant to hold that position.

I understand that, it was a democrat that came up with the whole idea of gerrymandering in the first place, but right now it is democrats who are arguing for neutral redistricting commisions and republicans who have gone bonkers with gerrymandering, as well as other voter suppression tactics. It's natural that the party in power will take advantage of the loops they find in the system, but the party in power is going to have to agree with achieving a remedy.

[Cow Poke]

I understand that, it was a democrat that came up with the whole idea of gerrymandering in the first place,

To keep or gain power, yes...

but right now it is democrats who are arguing for neutral redistricting commisions and republicans who have gone bonkers with gerrymandering,

So, think about that ---- one opens pandora's box, then gets really upset when the other takes advantage....

as well as other voter suppression tactics. It's natural that the party in power will take advantage of the loops they find in the system, but the party in power is going to have to agree with achieving a remedy.

Both sides, Jim. Both sides.

[Terraceth]

I understand that, it was a democrat that came up with the whole idea of gerrymandering in the first place,

Elbridge Gerry, who I assume is the one you are referring to, wasn't a Democrat; he died 14 years before the party was even founded.

Fun fact: While "gerrymandering" (named after him) is pronounced with a soft G, Gerry's name was pronounced with a hard G.

[DivineOb]

So, think about that ---- one opens pandora's box, then gets really upset when the other takes advantage....

As you're not doubt aware the precision and effectiveness with which gerrymandering can be implemented today bears no resemblance to the gerrymandering of even the recent past. In parallel to your argument I could call the Second Amendment "Pandora's Box" and thereby justify the raising of irregular military units.

Stated differently, should we not learn from our mistakes? Is not getting "a taste of your own medicine" a very effective teacher?

[Sam]

Jim, you really need to come to the reality that it's not only Republicans who are power hungry and want their own party to keep or gain control. It's just totally ignorant to hold that position.

While both parties engage in voter suppression, both sides do not do so equally. Republican executives and legislatures have relied on and exacerbated voter suppression tactics to a much greater degree in the past decades. Gerrymandering, for example, largely benefits GOP candidates:

Source: Analysis indicates partisan gerrymandering has benefited GOP. DAVID A. LIEB. AP. 2017.06.25

The AP scrutinized the outcomes of all 435 U.S. House races and about 4,700 state House and Assembly seats up for election last year using a new statistical method of calculating partisan advantage. It’s designed to detect cases in which one party may have won, widened or retained its grip on power through political gerrymandering.

The analysis found four times as many states with Republican-skewed state House or Assembly districts than Democratic ones. Among the two dozen most populated states that determine the vast majority of Congress, there were nearly three times as many with Republican-tilted U.S. House districts.


Traditional battlegrounds such as Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida and Virginia were among those with significant Republican advantages in their U.S. or state House races. All had districts drawn by Republicans after the last Census in 2010.


The AP analysis also found that Republicans won as many as 22 additional U.S. House seats over what would have been expected based on the average vote share in congressional districts across the country. That helped provide the GOP with a comfortable majority over Democrats instead of a narrow one.

© Copyright Original Source

[Cow Poke]

As you're not doubt aware the precision and effectiveness with which gerrymandering can be implemented today bears no resemblance to the gerrymandering of even the recent past.

Kinda goes to the "what one generation does in moderation the next does to excess" thing.

I could call the Second Amendment "Pandora's Box" and thereby justify the raising of irregular military units.

OK.

Stated differently, should we not learn from our mistakes?

Absolutely! In this incredibly divisive atmosphere, WILL WE? I sincerely doubt it.

Is not getting "a taste of your own medicine" a very effective teacher?

I don't believe it is, in this case. It's more like pouring gasoline on the fire.

[Cow Poke]

While both parties engage in voter suppression, both sides do not do so equally.

I made no such claim.

[Leonhard]

Cow Poke, it's just going to be really hard for Democrats to listen to Republicans asking them 'please don't do what we've done for the past couple of years'. It could be done, but it would involve a bit of coming to the cross for the other side. And I just don't see that happening.

[Cow Poke]

Cow Poke, it's just going to be really hard for Democrats to listen to Republicans asking them 'please don't do what we've done for the past couple of years'.

Sure. Kinda like the Republicans listening to the Democrats say "put on a fair and honest Senate trial", when the Democrats have made a total partisan sham of the process.

It could be done, but it would involve a bit of coming to the cross for the other side. And I just don't see that happening.

Sadly, I don't see either side bending or bowing or showing grace, Leon.