New York lawmakers draw redistricting map that boosts Democrats

Let's look at the map:


Partisan control of congressional redistricting after the 2020 elections, with the number of U.S. House seats each state will receive.
blue Democratic control
red Republican control
yellow Split or bipartisan control
green Independent redistricting commission
grey No redistricting necessary

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering_in_the_United_States

Now, it looks like the Dems have already waved the white flag. Why? because they have scruples and generally prefer independent or bipartisan districting. That's going to cost them the House, because obviously most GOP controlled states will do everything in their power to disenfranchise Dem voters. Here is how it works:



It's easy to see how drawing the "correct" districts can result in the minority getting the majority of seats. It's really the politicians picking their voters, not how it should be, voters picking politicians.

Of course, the Trumpers will defend it to their death, because they like themselves their minority rule. And then they'll brag when they get 30 more House seats in the 2024 election, while being represented by only 48% of voters. In their minds, it means the silent majority had spoken. In reality, the GOP just cheats to stay in power -- on all fronts.

But, let's whine about NY, the ONE large population state where Dems can actually make some gains, and where they gave the GOP a chance in a bipartisan commission, but the GOP blew it, because they didn't get their will.

Guess this thread didn't turn out like the OP intended, did it?

 

=

This statement is false, and you know it is false.

We see, each and every day, how the Democrats do anything and everything they can to gain and maintain as much power as they can - from campaigning to bring DC in as a state, to trying to eliminate the filibuster - after their own filibuster rules change came back to bite them - to trying to pack the USSC with a leftist majority, to the National Popular Vote Compact -- their efforts to that effect in NY only serve as further proof.

Democrats? Scruples? Bi-partisan?
Never. Not once.

Guess your response didn't turn out like you intended intended, did it?

 

With computers, gerrymandering is such a simple issue to address. If both sides agree it is a problem why not design a computer algorithm to draw the lines using a set of rules agreed on by both sides for all states. Everyone can have a say in the creating of rules for the algorithm and once it is decided let the program run.

 

A non-voter bitching about gerrymandering? That's pretty far down the ladder, I grant you...

 

I thought we had freedom of choice in America, but I see that for the left it's very subjectively applied.

 

I agree with you in concept, but in practice any proposed algorithm will be analyzed by both sides to see which party it would benefit. The disadvantaged party will not agree to implement the algorithm and will propose their own to counter it. So you end up with two feuding parties arguing over algorithms instead of district maps like we have now.

In our system nothing is challenge-proof. You'll have court cases claiming the algorithm is biased, and as soon as the opposing party gets a majority they will pass a bill to change the algorithm so it benefits them instead. Putting the algorithm in an amendment to the state constitutions would make it more difficult to change on a whim, but that also requires some bipartisan cooperation which we are tragically short of these days.

 

There is an easy check for any algorithm: The number of seats for each party actually matches the total number of votes for each party. Right now, the GOP can get more seats with less votes. Of course, they'll oppose any changes that will make them loose their advantage.

 

Interesting idea.

Let me see if I understand this correctly. Following an election, there would be a check to see if the party voted for by the majority ended up with the majority of seats. And in the event that the answer is no, what happens? Are the election results invalidated? Does the algorithm get changed for next time?

 

The algorithm should get changed for the next time. By a bipartisan or independent commission.

The House should be based on proportional representation of the population, based on the constitution.

https://history.house.gov/Institution/Origins-Development/Proportional-Representation/

Currently, it is not, because the GOP is over-represented. It can be argued, therefore, that gerrymandering is unconstitutional.

 

The reasoning gerrymandering exist is because it is essentially a legal way to cheat. If we are going to fix the problem someone will be disadvantaged. Probably the party that uses gerrymandering more will be negatively impacted the most.

The whole point of a computer algorithm is that it should be impartial. It should NOT take into account current voting patterns. What I would suggest is both parties form a committee to oversee the development of the program. They would each give input and rank what is important in their mind for how districts should be drawn country wide. For example obvious things to consider would be:

1. Equal population. How the population distributes from the center. No more weird crawling lines. The district should be center on an area and have the population radiate out considering the other rules to come.
2. Contiguity. The entire districts should be connected.
3. Political Boundaries. Recognize boundaries like cities, town and counties.
4. Minority Representation. When possible try to have the same percentage of minority population representation as the state level. Of course this will not be possible if the are gathered in cities or towns but then those political boundaries should try to represent it when possible.
5. The code for this should be open source. People anywhere should be able to read the code.

I think that is a good start and the committee can argue what else needs to be considered. Once they are in agreement draw the lines and agree to re-evaluate every X years. Not everyone will be happy but that is what happens when we currently have a broken system.

 

Yeah. It's not Ok.
See. A true blue democrat says that that is not OK. In fact several people on this thread have said so.
It's not that hard to call out political malfeasance. I hav railed against gerrymandering on both sides of the aisle ever since i have been on PF? This should be a completely bipartisan thing
Funny, just a couple of weeks ago, I posted here that the NY dems could really screw heavily republican Staten Island by attaching it to more liberal parts of brooklyn, as there were very valid arguments for doing that. Looks like that is what they did.
Anyways, gerrymandering is wrong on both sides of the aisle. Looking forward to you calling out republican gerrymandering.

 

You say that as if they ever did, but they haven't. They've gerrymandered just as bad as their opponents when the opportunity presented itself. They've got no moral high ground on the issue, despite what your post attempts to portray.

 

Here's what the Constitution actually says on the matter:

 

The "Radical Left"?

Yeah, right...

I guess one's definition of "Red Wave" is in the eye of the beholder.
However, I would think that at a bare minimum (barring anything unforeseen) that the GOP will easily take control of The House.
The only real question is if The Dems can avoid a 2010 repeat of a (- 63) Bloodbath?

 

Have you noticed anyone saying this was “ok”?
I am glad to see Democrats say they disagree with their party opposed to Republicans ignoring or cheering it when it is theirs.

 

Let's apply your idea to the 2020 election:

2020 house election, CA, 53 seats
42 Dem, 11 GOP
Votes: 66.27% Dem, 33.73% GOP - works out to 35 Dem / 18 GOP seats

2020 house election, NY, 27 seats
19 Dem, 8 GOP
Votes: 61.96% Dem, 36.29% GOP vote - works out to 17 Dem / 10 GOp seats

2020 house election, IL, 18 seats
13 Dem 5 GOP
Votes: 57.10% Dem 41.13 GOP - works out to 10 Dem / 8 GOP seats

2020 house election, NJ, 12 seats
10 Dem 32 GOP
Votes: 57.28% Dems 41.58 GOP - works out to 7 Dem / 5 GOP seats

Why do you think the Democrats would agree to a system that costs them so many house seats?
If the Democrats have scruples and generally prefer independent or bipartisan districting, why are these states so heavily gerrymandered to the Dems benefit?.