I Want a Voice, Part II

Redistricting

The primary reason that voters like me do not believe that they have a voice is because they way our states have been sliced and diced to provide an advantage to one or the other major political parties. Anyone paying attention is aware of the recent redistricting that the Republicans forced through in Texas in order to gain seats in the House of Representatives. While this is absolutely marvelous for the party in power, this practice guarantees that a segment of our population is denied a voice in the political process. I do not profess that I know how all of this stuff works. My solution below is probably illegal in some obscure law or statute that the two major parties have created to protect themselves. But I offer an approach that would be fair, the four-letter “f” word that is missing in our federal government.

One more thing – what I suggest here is only for the districting that is put in place for national elections, i.e., President, Vice-President, Senate, and House. You may not consider the latter two to be national since they represent your state. However, a vote by any member of Congress from any state affects everyone in the country, and therefore we should consider these national offices. The primary focus of redistricting is for the election of members of the House. I will discuss in a later entry how this solution can positively affect the other offices.

I think that the way things are supposed to be set up is that each member of the House is to represent some number of citizens. The larger-populated states have more representatives that those with smaller populations. This seems reasonable and does not need to be changed. I do not know what the exact number, formula, or whatever they use to determine the “number” of representatives from each state is, nor is it important here, as long as it is defined and followed. What is important is how and when the districts are defined.

First the when. We “count” the number of citizens in this country once every ten years. With all of the systems in place you would think that this could be determined at any time, but that is a whole other issue. Let’s assume that this ten-year process is effective and use it as our baseline. Since we get a new official “count” every ten years it would make sense to adjust the districts in every state to maintain the proper representation for every citizen, based on that “number”, and only after that “number” is determined.

Now the how. I have no idea how these Einsteins determine what the districts will be. They are irregularly shaped and follow no set pattern. There is probably some basis like school district, county, or some other distinction responsible for this, but the bottom line is that some subjective process is used for, at least in the states where I have lived, political advantage.

I suggest that some independent group, who is a whole lot smarter than me, develop a standard algorithm that will be applied equally to every state. This algorithm would divide the state in to equally populated segments that will become the voting districts. No consideration would be given for anything except developing districts objectively based on population numbers. All other factors, e.g., race, income, political party, would be ignored.

I envision this as something like starting in the northwest corner of a state and drawing a line down the western border for some number of miles, then east until the number of citizens in the box represented by this L-shaped area reaches the “number” discussed earlier. Once this number is met the line stops and is drawn north the border. This would be repeated across the state, creating somewhat consistently-shaped districts, until the eastern border is reached. At that point the line would have to start south again for the specified number of miles and then proceed west until the number is met, then north to the southern border of the adjacent district. This process would be repeated back and forth across the state until all of the districts have been defined, reaching the southeast corner of the state.

Is this perfect? No, but it is fair. To make sure that it remains as fair as possible the starting point for drawing the districts in this manner should be rotated to each of the four corners before the districts are drawn again starting in the northwest corner, forty years later.

Won’t this create some irregularly-shaped districts? Yes, but it is fair. Because of the “number” and because we do not have our population equally dispersed within each state, some districts will be larger, area wise, than others. There is no way around this.

Won’t this complicate voting procedures? No, because I have a solution that I will cover in a later entry that will eliminate having to draw districts based on polling location, school district, etc.

Isn’t it possible that my next door neighbor and I could wind up with different representatives? Absolutely, but lines have to be drawn somewhere, just like today. But instead of politicians determining where the lines are drawn, an objective process will be used, again making this fair for everyone.

Will this eliminate the issue of districts being heavily populated by one of the two major parties? No, there is no way to do this, unless there is a major overhaul in how citizens are represented. But at least the districts would be drawn without party affiliation being a determining factor, thereby, in some cases, making districts more heterogeneous.

I think that I have covered everything, so shoot holes in if you like.

Coming up next campaigns and contributions.