It wouldn't be surprising if a political science professor used Senate District 60 to teach her students
about gerrymandering.
If any teacher wanted to instruct students
about gerrymandering, a field trip to state Sen. Tony Avella's (D - Bayside) district might be a good place to start.
Claims
about gerrymandering are political in nature.
Perhaps you don't remember, but in 1980 and 1990, Republicans complained
about gerrymandering a lot.
All of the previous was just background
about gerrymandering.
I've been writing a paper
about Gerrymandering, but whilst reading about Electoral Districts, I started to wonder.
There's a lot of complaining
about gerrymandering, but what should districts look like?
Around three quarters, 76 %, believe the «lack of transparency» over the policy issues decided that night are a «serious» problem, and 68 % were concerned
about the gerrymandered new district lines.
Not exact matches
It's not the «fault» of those that live in rural areas that their influence is so exagerated; I think a large part of it was the PC's DELIBERATE
gerrymandering of constituencies (
about 20 or so years ago) to ensure that any urban opposition would be diluted by rural supporters.
Before the Dominion Elections Act (1920), voting in Canadian federal elections was largely governed by the provinces, just as voting in US federal elections is still, even today, governed by the «several States» (as they are wont to put it)-- except for the 1917 wartime election, labelled as the «largest
gerrymander in Canadian history» (I've just finished a fascinating book
about that election, fought over the issue of conscription; I highly recommend it).
Listen to Slate's show
about the census citizenship question, Trump's (lack of) legal representation, and
gerrymandering.
Other potential showstoppers include a case
about partisan
gerrymandering and another round on President Trump's executive order on immigration.
Obviously
gerrymandering is not a new concept, but it seems that all the news I hear
about it is related to Republicans trying to suppress liberal (particularly urban and low - income) voting groups.
It won't eliminate
gerrymandering, either, although it reduces its maximum effectiveness to
about a 1.71 to 1 ratio (
about 12 to 7.)
Gerrymandering is all
about drawing electoral boundaries such that the artifact of most electoral systems (that one citizen's vote doesn't translate directly into voting weight in parliament) can override the natural outcome of a vote.
It really does defeat the idea of open primaries, which are
about as close as you are going to get towards fielding candidates that the public want to represent them if you are going to
gerrymander the lists.
Like, if the Republicans continue to control the Senate thanks to a Cuomo - approved
gerrymander plus five defections that the governor was perfectly OK with, and then over the course of the next couple of years their conference blocks campaign finance reform and drug reform and a hike of the minimum wage, doesn't it become somewhat more difficult for Cuomo to explain to Democratic primary voters why he didn't just do something
about it?
Iain, regarding the accusations of planned
gerrymandering, it is all very well talking
about the impartiality of the Electoral Commission but Cameron has announced his intention to slash its funding - while at the same time enforcing a massive reorganisation of boundaries by cutting the number of seats by 10 %.
He has boasted
about his ability to work with the current Republican leadership, and has been helpful to the conference's efforts to hang onto the majority, from his approval of a majority -
gerrymandered district map to his general - election endorsement of a Republican incumbent who had voted for same - sex marriage.
Owing to natural clustering of Democratic voters and Republican
gerrymandering, Democrats probably need to win the House popular vote by
about seven points to take control.
In contrast, a real area representative doing his / her job would have been screaming
about the blatant
gerrymandering and crying foul at that time way before the decision was made.
Is there any good analysis
about how many seats were lost because of
gerrymandering that happened after 2008?
But some Labour MPs have accused the coalition of
gerrymandering while some Lib Dems are reported to be unhappy
about the prospect of losing seats in the shake - up - agreed as a package earlier this year in combination with May's referendum on the voting system.
Learn more
about redistricting and
gerrymandering
More typical is the fact that these two battles are
about a lot more than simply one district that snakes,
gerrymander - style, through the Bronx and captures a bit of Westchester County, too, and another that hugs the northeast corner of Queens.
So the argument wasn't
about the implausibility of a partisan
gerrymander - scheme, but
about upstate versus downstate, which never gets old.
There has been a fair bit of discussion
about whether it's a good idea to reduce the HoC to 600, and whether the new boundaries constitute
gerrymandering in favour of the Conservatives.
But I suppose that is a rather insignificant observation when you look at what New York Public Interest Group's Bill Mahoney has to say
about the proposed maps as a whole.He says, the Senate's maps are, «clearly the most
gerrymandered lines in recent New York History.»
We actually changed our system to MMP proportional representation because of
gerrymandering problems, and after
about 20 years the vast majority are happy with MMP according to various polls.
It happened several weeks before the Supreme Court heard arguments in Gill v. Whitford, a Wisconsin case that was the first major lawsuit
about partisan
gerrymandering to be taken up by the justices in 14 years.
There have been many similar «civic education» video games out there, like the UN video game to teach kids
about world hunger and, my personal favorite, a video game to teach kids how to
gerrymander voting districts to get political support.
As Ilya Somin and David Bernstein point out at Volokh Conspiracy, Sotomayor also
gerrymanders «race» in a way convenient to her purposes, using it to include Hispanic - Americans (who aren't a race) while breathing not one word
about Asian - Americans (a more genuine racial classification whose situation of being both historically disadvantaged * and * discriminated against in university admissions cries out for recognition).
Over the past year I've written
about the Emoluments Clause; the No Religious Tests clause; limits on presidential power as defined in the steel seizure case; the meaning of the oath of office; how the Appropriations Clause constrains lawsuit settlements involving the federal government; how and whether
gerrymandering by race and for partisan advantage affects constitutional rights; judicial independence; the decline and fall of the Contracts Clause; the application of Obergefell to issues of public employees and birth certificates; Article V procedure for calling a new constitutional convention; and too many First, Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendment controversies to list.
Franita Tolson published an op - ed
about how the Supreme Court deals with cases involving allegations of partisan
gerrymandering.
With an AI in charge we wouldn't have to worry
about our democracy being stolen, sold, rigged,
gerrymandered, or given away.