Gerrymandering districts explained for dummies.

[Ichingcarpenter]

[Takket]

1. yeah, i don't think people appreciate the effect gerrymandering has on the House

yet it seems to be an issue that is simply shrugged at in this country. If you've never seen what happened to Austin, an hugely progressive city where democratic representation was eliminated through gerrymandering, you can't really appreciate how bad the process is.

[spanone]

2. i agree. here in tennessee it's pretty damned obvious what's going on....

people yawn

i think it's the mentality of 'everybody does it'.

[Fred Sanders]

9. Then everybody are just screwing themselves out of proportional representation and tax reform.

And, hey, who you calling a dummy?

[spanone]

10. i'll never understand people voting against their better interests....never

[Fred Sanders]

13. Or not bothering to vote at all, as Obama said in his Telemundo TV interview...shaking head....

[alc]

32. best interest of MYSELF vs best interest of my country/state/city

Some (many) people believe that the best thing for them personally is not the best for society. So they vote against their self-interests.

I see lots of comments on DU about "how can poor whites vote for Republicans"? If you go to rural areas in my state and talk to them about "the proper role of government" you'll understand why they vote against their better interests - their best interests should be taken care of by neighbors and the city and church. The people they vote to Congress should take care of state/country concerns a leave their city alone. You can discuss/argue/debate all day but they'll insist the best thing long term is for the federal and state governments to leave them alone now. And they'll vote for the party they think is most likely to leave them alone even when they acknowledge the other party would give them needed help.

[toothless dragon]

42. the brainwashed multitude

yes you can get many people to believe government is not in their best interests... get them to believe that they are rugged individuals... of course they are not... humans are societal species that need societies to survive... as to what the federal government should be doing... i find these words explain it all: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

[MissMarple]

43. They are voting for what they think are better values.

Google Jonathan Haidt, he explains it very well. People will twist themselves into knots to justify their beliefs. Then they have to have those beliefs continuously praised. And that's why they watch so much faux news, and why they get so angry when their cherished thoughts are questioned.

[yeoman6987]

28. It can work both ways if Democratic Party would do it

Thankfully in Maryland the did. They chopped up Anne Arundle County into other districts to get rid of the red House Member. It was brilliant. Now Maryland only has one Republican House Rep instead of 3. I hope all blue states do this.

[jeff47]

3. We really need a much bigger House.

We set the limit to 435 in 1911. When there were about 91M people in the US. There's now about 320M. 350% more people, no increase in representation.

Smaller districts makes gerrymandering much harder, as your "50 district" example demonstrates. Smaller districts also make it possible for a representative to actually represent their people instead of only their donors.

So we should make the House much bigger. Would probably require other tweaks, like setting up a few "satellite" Capitol buildings around the country to make it practical.

[HereSince1628]

4. But, but the oligarchs would have to buy more politicians...think of the strain!!!

that's just cruel to the 1% who would be kings.

It would also require a new building to meet in.

I propose building said building somewhere south of St Joe Missouri. Near the geographic and demographic center of the US and far far from the existing lobbiest digs on K street

[jeff47]

5. That's one reason why I proposed several buildings.

Put them closer to the districts. And build several of them. Now they don't have only one location to lobby from.

So open a west coast Capitol building, A midwest Captiol building, a southern Capitol building, and so on.

[HereSince1628]

11. Considering modern technology, I have no problem with that... in terms of National Security and

Homeland Defense, it would make it much harder for terrorists to destroy government with a single attack.

My only concern about 'work at home' telecommuting representatives is that it creates a security issue for congressional televoting.

[LiberalElite]

12. With computers and the internet -

nobody has to be anywhere in particular. Why even have them show up in Washington? They can vote from wherever they are, use videoconferencing, whatever. Plenty of room for all that way.

[KansDem]

35. "...think of the strain!!!"

The 1% would just have to "work harder." Get a second job, if necessary!

[Freddie]

17. The 435 limit was set to curb the influence of immigrants in the cities

And to preserve the outsize power of rural areas. Particularly since the immigrants from countries like Ireland and Italy would be more likely to be opposed to the pending Prohibition legislation.

[whereisjustice]

33. +1000 Exactly, as it is power is being concentrated into a minority. I don't understand why people

don't demand better representation except for the complicit shills who insist on preserving the status quo - the media, lobbyists, and the politicians themselves.

[Stuart G]

6. Outstanding post...explains it so simple and clear...thank you ...no text

[Savannahmann]

7. Unfortunately, that does not explain the Senate

But it's a good example none the less.

[jeff47]

22. The Senate is due to turnout.

Low turnout elections favor the rural areas, which tend to vote for Republicans. The higher the turnout, the more it favors the cities, which tend to vote for Democrats. PA is famously described as Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Kentucky in-between.

We gave very little reason for "marginally attached voters" to turn out in 2010 and 2014. And so we got this Senate.

[Jim Lane]

37. The inherent malapportionment is also part of the problem.

With each state having the same representation in the Senate, more populous states are disadvantaged, to the benefit of less populous states. The less populous states, that wield outsize influence, are predominantly Republican.

If you look at the most recent election for each of the 100 Senate seats, and add up the votes, you find that Democratic candidates cumulatively outpolled Republican candidates. More turnout would have been nice, but even the turnout we got was enough to give us a majority of the votes -- just not a majority of the seats.

[progressoid]

36. The Senate has always disproportionately represented small states.

The Senate has always disproportionately represented small states, but the bias hasn't always been extreme. One good proxy for the disproportionateness of the Senate is the ratio of population between the largest state in the Union and the smallest state. I went back through every Census from 1790 and 2010 and found that ratio. In 1790, Virginia, the largest state, was 12.65 times the size of Delaware, the smallest. In 2010, however, California, the largest state, was fully 66 times the size of Wyoming, the smallest. The Senate is now about five times less proportionate than it was at the country's founding.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/18/you-cant-understand-whats-happened-to-the-senate-without-these-two-graphs/

[Fred Sanders]

8. SCOTUS and the mass media need to see that graphic, maybe they really do not get it?

[BlueCaliDem]

30. Oh, you can believe it that they're well aware of that graph. It probably inspired them to gut

Section 4 of the VRA.

We need to neuter that Bircher, pro-corporate-ONLY justices on SCOTUS. We can't afford to lose the White House in 2016 or 2020 (especially the 2020 elections where we can redraw districts since it's a census year!), and if Scalia and Kennedy don't keel over in their seats or retire, we need to continue to put a Democrat in the White House and keep the Senate.

[Fred Sanders]

34. Waiting until census years and then waiting to wing elections is a rigged game. Stop playing.

Last edited Sat Feb 28, 2015, 03:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Logic demands something be done now, policies over personalities. ELECTIONS are being stolen Now.

[Romeo.lima333]

38. tom delay proved you dont need to wait 'til the census to redistrict

[BlueCaliDem]

48. True. But Democrats seem challenge-averse, unlike Tom Delay whose off-census year redistricting

was upheld in Court.

But what would you advise to do something now to stop elections from being stolen?

[mucifer]

14. It's not always a republican thing either. It's crazy here in Chicago this is my aldermanic district

http://app.chicagoelections.com/documents/general/document_3979.pdf

[Fred Sanders]

15. WTF, I think I saw a snake in the outline...and no one takes this to a Court to judge it's fairness?

As long as neighbourhoods and lands are connected by a freeway it is OK.

It is not logical....Spock would suspect something is 99.666% likely rotten in the State of Denmark.

[former9thward]

20. The Voting Rights Act required it.

The district is a majority-minority district as required by the VRA. They needed to make it loop around to pick up enough Hispanics to make a district. ON edit I thought the poster was talking about IL-4th Congressional. That is usually the district most complain about.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d2/Illinois_US_Congressional_District_4_(since_2013).tif/lossless-page1-400px-Illinois_US_Congressional_District_4_(since_2013).tif.png

[Fred Sanders]

26. Does the VRA cover a city alderman district.....? Nope. Overall electoral fairness is being destroyed.

[former9thward]

29. Yes, Section 2 does.

Section 2 prohibits any state or local government from imposing any voting law that results in discrimination against racial or language minorities.

[HereSince1628]

16. This is a great example of how perimeter length vs area

rations create a numerical detector of irregular shape.

High values of that ratio are 'red flags' to gerrymandering.

[former9thward]

18. It is not as simple as that.

Democrats tend to live in concentrated areas like urban centers. Republicans are more spread out. People in the U.S. do not live in the patterns your graphic suggests. In addition the Voting Rights Act requires majority-minority districts where they can be formed. This usually means minorities have to be at least 70% of the district population. This means compacting Democrats together in a district which allows Republicans to be spread out since districts have to be roughly equal in population.

[Fred Sanders]

19. That is making excuses for the laws badly misinterpreted by courts to end up with the opposite result of the

intent of the original laws as written - Justice for All.

[former9thward]

21. No.

The courts have not "misinterpreted" the law. The law is very plain in what it says.

[HereSince1628]

23. Districts have to be roughly same population, not area

[former9thward]

25. That is what I meant.

[jeff47]

24. Districts don't have to have the same geographic size.

Go ahead and have a giant rural district and several small city districts. Because they have the same number of people in them.

The point of the House is to represent the people. We have the Senate to represent geography.

[former9thward]

27. I meant size of population.

I will edit to make that clear.

[pinto]

31. (aside) I used to live in what's considered the first gerrymandered district (Massachusetts)

In 1812, Governor Gerry of Massachusetts drew up a new district in the northeast of the state -



It's resemblance to a salamander is said to be the origin of the term. Gerry + salamander = gerrymander.

[JDPriestly]

39. This is a state issue.

Join the Democratic Club in your community and the Democratic Party in your state, and work on this issue where you are. Thanks. This is important.

[jimruymen]

41. thwarting the will of the people

Through gerrymandering, voter suppression and legislative tricks, the GOP has managed to hold on to power while more and more Americans reject their candidates and their ideas; the fix is in thanks to ALEC and the Koch brothers and after stealing the House, Senate and U.S. Supreme Court they are now poised to steal the White House in 2016.

[jimruymen]

40. sleeping Democrats

Karl Rove wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal and explained what the Republicans were about to do prior to the 2010 elections; controlling state legislatures gave the Republican party an opportunity to redraw Congressional districts in a census year: the Democrats were asleep at the switch and allowed this to happen including the "genius" David Axelrod.

[toothless dragon]

44. Proportional voting....

Its time to step out of the dark ages of representing geographical locations and to start representing people directly through human dynamics and proportional voting. You would have people start and select the groups they identify with... allowing the group representation in congress when a specified number of registered voters had signed in to be a member of that group. For example: I would start the "Old guys with eccentric views party"... if representation level was 100,000 members... when my group reached 100,000 people... we would hold an election with-in the group and have a member of the party in congress for a specified period... and after that period.. if we still had met the threshold we would have another vote and the process would continue.....and if we had grown to 200,000 people we would get 2 seats... those groups which don't seem to meet the standard.. like "We eat the dead" ... would not be represented until they met the standard or they were able to coalesce with another group such as "Zombies and other undead Creatures" forming the "We eat the dead and undead party"...

Public financing. ... a free set of political channels for advertisement and training in party organization starting in grade school would be the foundation of such a process...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. One man, one vote.

[malokvale77]

46. As an example...

I live in the heavily populated city of Dallas, yet somehow I have been gerrymandered into having a Congressional Representative from rural East Texas over a hundred miles away.

How are me and my neighbors fairly represented? We are not.

[davidn3600]

47. Gerrymandering is never going to end

Gerrymandering has been going on for nearly 2 centuries. It's not a new phenomenon and it's not going to ever end. It's just a reality of how our system of government works. If the federal government has say in how the districts are drawn, then potentially whichever party is in power of the federal government could fix the House elections to its own benefit. This is why it's largely the domain of the states in how these things are drawn. The courts really only care about if racial minorities are being marginalized in representation.

Second, we need to stop pretending that the Democrats make up some actual huge majority and we are being suppressed by a tiny minority of Republicans. In 2012, Obama got 51% of the vote and Romney got 47%. We are politically divided country nearly right down the middle. All it takes to flip the popular vote is for 1.5% of voters to flip. It's THAT close.