Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

delaney.house.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 180 posts

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#11

Post by thephyber »

While it doesn't sound like a bad proposal and could probably get a strong majority of votes in some alternate dimension, the party in power will never allow this to make it to the floor of the House for a vote.[1]

The more cynical I become, the more I think the party in power doesn't actually want to solve any problems, they only want to focus on wedge issues to ensure they can use {rage, fear, some other emotion} to keep their party constituents engaged enough to vote but not enough to hold their feet to the fire on getting things done. Incumbents in Congress still have 95%+ re-election rates and in 2010 when those rates dipped, Congress was remarkably less productive than usual.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hastert_Rule

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#12

Post by baron816 »

zeckalpha wrote: post #3

I feel like most of these changes would require a constitutional amendment.

We don't just need a Constitutional amendment, we need a new Constitution.

People act like the Constitution we have came down from the heavens in a beam of light. But it was written by a bunch of guys who had never lived in a real democracy before. In fact it was written at a time when there pretty much hadn't been ANY democracies in the whole world for two thousand years. We've had two hundred years of experience and hundreds of iterations of the concept since then, so we have a much better idea of what will work and what won't.

It bothers me so much the passion for the Constitution people have. Yet, there is almost universal distain for Congress and the entire political establishment. Washington is entirely a function of the rules that are set by the Constitution. Electing different people isn't going to change anything. Ending Gerrymandering (if possible while using districts) would help, but it doesn't go far enough. You would still have a two party system. You would still be forced to choose between the lesser of two evils every time you go to the polls. And a large chunk of the country would always feel that they don't have someone in government representing them.

If we want people engaged in government, and to have a government engaged in them, then we need proportional representation in one form or another. Anything else is just a bandaid.

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#13

Post by nerdponx »

CalChris wrote: post #10

We have gerrymandering at every level, but first with the States. Why does Wyoming have two Senators and California have two Senators? We have 12% of the population of the US. Wyoming has 0.18%, smaller than DC. Of course, this continues with the House and the Electoral College. Et cetera. However, there is no incentive for Wyoming and ND and Alaska and ... to fix this. No Taxation Without Representation? Sure, but t…

This is by design. The whole point of the House is proportional representation. Recall that senators originally weren't even directly elected.

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#14

Post by jghn »

CalChris wrote: post #10

We have gerrymandering at every level, but first with the States. Why does Wyoming have two Senators and California have two Senators? We have 12% of the population of the US. Wyoming has 0.18%, smaller than DC. Of course, this continues with the House and the Electoral College. Et cetera. However, there is no incentive for Wyoming and ND and Alaska and ... to fix this. No Taxation Without Representation? Sure, but t…

That's exactly the point of the Senate.

The House is supposed to be the proportional one.

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#16

Post by ouid »

jghn wrote: post #14
CalChris wrote: post #10

We have gerrymandering at every level, but first with the States. Why does Wyoming have two Senators and California have two Senators? We have 12% of the population of the US. Wyoming has 0.18%, smaller than DC. Of course, this continues with the House and the Electoral College. Et cetera. However, there is no incentive for Wyoming and ND and Alaska and ... to fix this. No Taxation Without Representation? Sure, but t…

That's exactly the point of the Senate. The House is supposed to be the proportional one.

You're misunderstanding, I think. It's not that it isn't by design. It's that the design principle is stupid.

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#17

Post by jschwartzi »

CalChris wrote: post #10

We have gerrymandering at every level, but first with the States. Why does Wyoming have two Senators and California have two Senators? We have 12% of the population of the US. Wyoming has 0.18%, smaller than DC. Of course, this continues with the House and the Electoral College. Et cetera. However, there is no incentive for Wyoming and ND and Alaska and ... to fix this. No Taxation Without Representation? Sure, but t…

The Senate was originally meant to ensure that smaller states such as Wyoming had an equal part of the vote, so that a simple majority wasn't enough for a bill to pass and become law.

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#18

Post by CalChris »

jghn wrote: post #14
CalChris wrote: post #10

We have gerrymandering at every level, but first with the States. Why does Wyoming have two Senators and California have two Senators? We have 12% of the population of the US. Wyoming has 0.18%, smaller than DC. Of course, this continues with the House and the Electoral College. Et cetera. However, there is no incentive for Wyoming and ND and Alaska and ... to fix this. No Taxation Without Representation? Sure, but t…

That's exactly the point of the Senate. The House is supposed to be the proportional one.

No, the House isn't proportional. There is a minimum of one House member per State: each State shall have at Least one Representative.

At 321.4 million / 435 = 738850. Wyoming wouldn't even get a House member. Vermont wouldn't either.

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#19

Post by zeckalpha »

baron816 wrote: post #12
zeckalpha wrote: post #3

I feel like most of these changes would require a constitutional amendment.

We don't just need a Constitutional amendment, we need a new Constitution. People act like the Constitution we have came down from the heavens in a beam of light. But it was written by a bunch of guys who had never lived in a real democracy before. In fact it was written at a time when there pretty much hadn't been ANY democracies in the whole world for two thousand years. We've had two hundred years of experience an…

The entire constitution could be rewritten through amendment.

Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections

#20

Post by mobilefriendly »

This is hilarious because Delaney was first elected in a gerrymandered district created specifically for him, the state legislature literally looped in his house by two blocks.

http://www.carrollcountytimes.com/cct-arc-acca0c6c-9aa4-5159...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Delaney_(Maryland_politic...

Post reply on HN