Comments on: Redistricting

By: quixote

quixote — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 22:30:04 +0000

Yeah, it’s maddening to watch politicians make a big, self-serving deal out of the redistricting “problem,” while there’s software out there that could probably run on a high-end PDA that could solve the whole thing.

As you point out, they don’t want it solved.

This, motor voter initiatives, and an Oregon-style mail-in election system, are probably the most important initiatives we could be working on. If we could spring the democratic process loose from the Rove’s of the country, I bet all the supposedly bigger problems would suddenly become much easier to act on.

By: Don Carow

Don Carow — Mon, 22 Jan 2007 06:19:19 +0000

The way to avoid gerrymandering is to have a computer do the job of redistricting. The computer input data can be limited to the Census data, and the software shows exactly how and why the lines were drawn. Funny how the commissioners aren’t required to know geometry, much less calculus, when supposedly their job is to configure areas of equal population. Any commissioner knows that Orange County is more conservative than San Francisco County. How can a voter know that a commissioner didn’t take advantage of that fact and many other facts to gerrymander? A computer is a machine that follows a series of instructions. The series of instructions is called software. The sofware acts only on the data it reads as input. Unlike the thinking of a commissioner, the software and its input can be published for voters to see. Other computers can verify the exactness of results.
Politicians have strained to ignore that a computer can do the job. Ironically, the precision of gerrymandering today is made possible by gerrymandering software. Redistricting software is limited to curious academic research, even though gerrymandering sofware is more difficult to write since it must also include voter registration data. The difference is that gerrymandering software is profitable, since there is a strong demand for it from politicians. No bill in the legislature will end gerrymandering, only an initiative could do that.

By: Democracy Lover

Democracy Lover — Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:45:00 +0000

I’ve been saying something like this for a long time. Redistricting is a computer problem and “mousy bureaucrats in the US Geological Survey” are exactly the right types to do this.

While we’re at it, why are elections being “supervised” by partisan politicians – state Secretaries of State who are Bush campaign managers? Elections should be managed and run by apolitical bureaucrats.

By: quixote

quixote — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:44:00 +0000

SeanH: Good question. In my case, the comment was supposed to be a dig at that mindset, since it’s generally the very same people who say they want nothing but “original intent” who object to every move toward greater fairness. My theory is that all the talk about original intent is just a way to paper over a nasty agenda. People seem to feel that old paper, whether it’s old religious paper like bibles or other holy books, or old political paper like the Constitution, works best for that purpose.

By: SeanH

SeanH — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 06:45:00 +0000

gah, above should read “outsider”. It’s early.

By: SeanH

SeanH — Sat, 19 Nov 2005 06:44:00 +0000

As a curious outside, what is with the American devotion to the “original intent of the framers of the Constitution”? Why does what they wanted matter?