Feds finally get serious about Gerrymandering in Maryland

[JamesHackerMP]

Finally, the feds have shot down the rorschach tests---sorry Congressional districts--in Maryland for being gerrymandered.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-maryland-house-district-gerrymandering-20181107-story.html?fbclid=IwAR3XQRgaG8ZUB2Hg97qzirsVezTe_-Eug1WaaLGCskhOgpwbLiA8PRI0zEk

[Wilber]

Wonder if this will set a precedent for many states.

[Argus]

On 11/11/2018 at 7:03 PM, Wilber said:

Wonder if this will set a precedent for many states.

The court allowed North Carolina to continue with its gerrymandered borders. The result was 10 Republican seats and 3 Democratic seats it a state which voted more than 50% Democrat.

[Wilber]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

The court allowed North Carolina to continue with its gerrymandered borders. The result was 10 Republican seats and 3 Democratic seats it a state which voted more than 50% Democrat.

Guess not. Trump's court appointments are paying off for the GOP. To bad it is American voters who are being screwed.

[Boges]

You'd hope the swing in Governorships and State Houses in this "Blue Wave" may change it. 

It's one of the things I can point to Canada for getting it right. Elections Canada isn't perfect but they don't draw boundaries with partisanship in mind. 

[h102]

Gerrymandering is used by both parties, heavily in the south and midwest by the Republicans, heavily in Maryland by Dems.

Gerrymandering will be ineffective in the south as all the poor-middle class liberal people are being booted out of california, new york, and chicago and moving to Texas, Arizona, Nevada and Georgia and Florida.

[WestCanMan]

On 11/13/2018 at 6:26 PM, Argus said:

The result was 10 Republican seats and 3 Democratic seats it a state which voted more than 50% Democrat.

That doesn't mean anything without an accompanying map.

If you look at the map of how districts voted in the US federal election in 2016 it's almost entirely red. The blue dots are a small fraction of the overall map, but they're in the areas with heavy population concentrations. 

So in a place like Carolina, if you get a close vote in 10 large geographical areas and then a solid Dem win in 3 areas it tilts the vote.

Can you really turn a small area like Metrotown in Burnaby into 6 ridings? Not ideally. Should they get to determine the fate of the entire city of Burnaby? Not ideally.

[Wilber]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

That doesn't mean anything without an accompanying map.

If you look at the map of how districts voted in the US federal election in 2016 it's almost entirely red. The blue dots are a small fraction of the overall map, but they're in the areas with heavy population concentrations. 

So in a place like Carolina, if you get a close vote in 10 large geographical areas and then a solid Dem win in 3 areas it tilts the vote.

Can you really turn a small area like Metrotown in Burnaby into 6 ridings? Not ideally. Should they get to determine the fate of the entire city of Burnaby? Not ideally.

That's the way it does work. BC does not use a ward system in civic politics so councillors are elected on their percentage of the total vote. More people in your neighbourhood means the more influence it will have in an election. Provincially and federally, areas with greater populations do get more seats, with the Maritimes being an exception.

[Argus]

3 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

That doesn't mean anything without an accompanying map.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/10/27/1579905/-These-three-maps-show-just-how-effectively-gerrymandering-can-swing-election-outcomes

[taxme]

On 11/13/2018 at 7:40 PM, Wilber said:

Guess not. Trump's court appointments are paying off for the GOP. To bad it is American voters who are being screwed.

Hey, it has been the republicans that have been screwed many times when the democrats were in power. Maybe the American conservative voters are finally getting a better deal today thanks to Trump and the republican party. And Trump will be making many more conservatives as judges who will abide by the constitution. The leftist liberal democrats have had their time at appointing liberal judges for decades now. Now it is the conservatives turn for a change. The only ones that are getting screwed here are the liberal/democrats and that is working out great for conservative Americans. Sorry, all you liberal snowflakes out there. Boo-hoo for you.   

[WestCanMan]

7 hours ago, Wilber said:

That's the way it does work. BC does not use a ward system in civic politics so councillors are elected on their percentage of the total vote. More people in your neighbourhood means the more influence it will have in an election. Provincially and federally, areas with greater populations do get more seats, with the Maritimes being an exception.

Yes that’s now it works in BC, but that isn’t the point re: Carolina. 

I was using Metrotown as an example because people know that area better than they know Carolina. 

[WestCanMan]

5 hours ago, Argus said:

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/10/27/1579905/-These-three-maps-show-just-how-effectively-gerrymandering-can-swing-election-outcomes

That’s a crazy swing right there. Pretty brutal for the Dems I gotta admit. 

[JamesHackerMP]

May I ask, does the Canadian constitution specifically ban gerrymandering? I'm wondering how Canada hasn't fallen into the same trap. Not everything is written into a constitution that is good or bad. Sometimes it's a matter of what the politicians choose to do, so I'm wondering if this has been a choice by Canadian politicians not to gerrymander or whether it's something in your constitution.

Edited December 4, 2018 by JamesHackerMP

[Iznogoud]

On 12/4/2018 at 4:36 PM, JamesHackerMP said:

May I ask, does the Canadian constitution specifically ban gerrymandering? I'm wondering how Canada hasn't fallen into the same trap. Not everything is written into a constitution that is good or bad. Sometimes it's a matter of what the politicians choose to do, so I'm wondering if this has been a choice by Canadian politicians not to gerrymander or whether it's something in your constitution.

This may help answer your question.

How Canada ended gerrymandering

https://www.vox.com/2014/4/15/5604284/us-elections-are-rigged-but-canada-knows-how-to-fix-them

 

[JamesHackerMP]

On 12/6/2018 at 4:24 AM, Iznogoud said:

This may help answer your question.

How Canada ended gerrymandering

https://www.vox.com/2014/4/15/5604284/us-elections-are-rigged-but-canada-knows-how-to-fix-them

 

There can't be a federal commission in the U.S. the same as you guys did, however. It might end up backfiring and handing power to Congress, and that's the last thing you want. It seems the solution to this problem is going to be anything but easy. I think only the courts can save us now, and the results from court rulings have been mixed. Some victories against it (Maryland) but sometimes gerrymandering was upheld (Texas). It sounds to me like some Canadian politicians managed to force other Canadian politicians to do what was right. Or, maybe it somehow benefits Canadian elected leaders?

Part of the reason for the statistical disparity however, is first past the post elections. Part of it is gerrymandering.

Good article but it doesn't tell the whole story. Nor does it reference California's infamous "jungle primaries" which are just as bad as gerrymandering for nudging out the minority party.

Edited December 7, 2018 by JamesHackerMP

[Wilber]

On 11/16/2018 at 12:38 PM, Argus said:

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/10/27/1579905/-These-three-maps-show-just-how-effectively-gerrymandering-can-swing-election-outcomes

That's just brutal.

[Wilber]

On 11/16/2018 at 6:03 PM, WestCanMan said:

That’s a crazy swing right there. Pretty brutal for the Dems I gotta admit. 

Just the Dems? How about democracy?

[Iznogoud]

I find it amazing that the nation that sees itself as the world's leading democracy has such a convoluted system for establish electoral boundaries and decided who can and cannot vote.  Canada has a single system for national elections and the Supreme Court recently decided that even convicted felons had the right to vote even if they were in prison.  The US seems to have gone out of its way to reduce democracy at both the state and national level.  It should not require multiple court challenges to reestablish what should be a fundamental right. 

[bush_cheney2004]

The U.S. is not a pure democracy...it is a constitutional republic with democratic elements, with the primary objective of preventing tyranny by the majority.

[Wilber]

12 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

The U.S. is not a pure democracy...it is a constitutional republic with democratic elements, with the primary objective of preventing tyranny by the majority.

Gerrymandering enables the tyranny of the minority.

[WestCanMan]

On 12/8/2018 at 7:35 AM, Wilber said:

Gerrymandering enables the tyranny of the minority.

Tyranny lol. 

It really would be tyranny, or at least folly, if the entire country was run by the electorate of NYC, LA, Boston, Chicago and a couple other cities. The electoral college format is extremely important. It’s subject to flaws and human trickery but what isn’t? Do you see a bigger problem with the Canadian PM giving away over $1B to CBC and other media outlets?

[Wilber]

52 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Tyranny lol. 

It really would be tyranny, or at least folly, if the entire country was run by the electorate of NYC, LA, Boston, Chicago and a couple other cities. The electoral college format is extremely important. It’s subject to flaws and human trickery but what isn’t? Do you see a bigger problem with the Canadian PM giving away over $1B to CBC and other media outlets?

Do you know what gerrymandering even is?

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Wilber said:

Do you know what gerrymandering even is?

Yeah it’s re-configuring electoral boundaries so that you can eek out a win in a bunch of areas and only lose 1 or 2 by a large margin.

Elections will never be perfect, but the electoral college type of system is still better than one where the downtown core of a city gets to control an entire state, or where 4 or 5 cities control an entire country as vast as the USA.

 

 

[Wilber]

2 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Yeah it’s re-configuring electoral boundaries so that you can eek out a win in a bunch of areas and only lose 1 or 2 by a large margin.

Elections will never be perfect, but the electoral college type of system is still better than one where the downtown core of a city gets to control an entire state, or where 4 or 5 cities control an entire country as vast as the USA.

 

 

It is how local boundaries are engineered by parties to give them an advantage,  it has nothing to do with the most populous parts of the country or an electoral college.

[WestCanMan]

21 hours ago, Wilber said:

It is how local boundaries are engineered by parties to give them an advantage,  it has nothing to do with the most populous parts of the country or an electoral college.

That's what I said it was.

It has to do with the electoral college system because high density areas are always full of people in need of social assistance, ie Dem voters.

If you split up the electoral boundaries in a way that has just the right amount of high-density areas in each electoral riding then you can win for the Dems.

If you split up the electoral boundaries in a way that keeps the high-density, low-income areas in some ridings and suburban/rural areas together in other ridings the Republicans win.