Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give a concrete example where being an hypocrite would be the right thing to do?
Well, let's say I'm a doctor, I'm well convinced that smoking is quite harmful, but I find myself too addicted to manage to quit. Certainly, my nonetheless quitting is the best outcome. But telling people to quit despite not doing so myself is preferable to telling people not to quit, isn't it?
Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
161–170 of 180 posts
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#162While 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} t…
It's a difficult thing to manage. As a result of a Supreme Court ruling in regards to civil rights the states are not allowed to spread minority votes across district lines since it was determined that that doesn't give them a strong enough voice and doesn't allow them a united voice as well as the advancement of minority politicians in Congress.
States largely complied. But, as time has gone on people often believe that giving minorities their own districts actually hurts their political power because states put them all in their district, they get one politician and then the rest of the districts aren't a melting pot. So now there is a push to try to prevent states from districting based on racial lines, but the Supreme Court has already required them to do this. So it's a very fine balancing act the states have to go through, and in many cases they exploit the Supreme Court requirements/ruling to their political advantage.
And if you removed the racial districting you might actually lose minority representation in Congress in terms of number of minority Congressmen, which people don't want. So gerrymandering is this strange mix of affirmative action for Congress and political gamesmanship to protect a party's numbers in Congress.
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give a concrete example where being an hypocrite would be the right thing to do?
Suppose I want to fight climate change, and I decide to make a documentary to raise awareness. The logistics of making a documentary is certainly going to result in some amount of additional carbon emissions being produced. I might be called a hypocrite for creating all these CO2 emissions to make a movie that tells people to emit less CO2. But does that mean it was wrong of me to create this documentary? Not necessa…
This is absurd in any practical sense, but it's being used to dismiss all kinds of people's arguments simply because they have to actually live in the real world, rather than some ideological fantasy land.
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gerrymandering is always by design.
But that's not gerrymandering. It's a different thing. Gerrymandering is specifically the process of drawing otherwise unthinkable district boundaries to achieve some particular electoral result.
So with Wyoming's 0.1% population of the US then and its 0.17% now, is that a thinkable process or is it gerrymandering?
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
But that's not gerrymandering. It's a different thing. Gerrymandering is specifically the process of drawing otherwise unthinkable district boundaries to achieve some particular electoral result.
Wyoming became a state on July 10, 1890. It then had a population of 62,555 and now has 563,626 [1]. The population of the US in 1890 was 62,979,766 and is now 321.4 million. So with Wyoming's 0.1% population of the US then and its 0.17% now, is that a thinkable process or is it gerrymandering? [1] http://eadiv.state.wy.us/demog_data/cntycity_hist.htm
Is this really debatable? Are we actually arguing about something that can be settled by referencing a dictionary?
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wyoming became a state on July 10, 1890. It then had a population of 62,555 and now has 563,626 [1]. The population of the US in 1890 was 62,979,766 and is now 321.4 million. So with Wyoming's 0.1% population of the US then and its 0.17% now, is that a thinkable process or is it gerrymandering? [1] http://eadiv.state.wy.us/demog_data/cntycity_hist.htm
I think maybe you're operating at a higher level of abstraction than I am. Electoral distortions like the allocation of two Senate seats per state regardless of population share, or failure to keep representation inline with original intentions are definitely things to carp about. They might even have a similar effect as gerrymandering in some cases. But unless you're redrawing borders for purely electoral reasons yo…
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#167This is my election district: http://imgur.com/a/C1UmB . It's in the dictionary next to "illegal gerrymandering." The southwest lobe near D.C. is predominantly African American, while the northeast lobe near Annapolis is predominantly Caucasian. Though I can't figure out who is being disenfranchised.
Apparently Republicans. http://www.fairdistrictspa.com/updates/efficiency-gap-votes-...
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#168While 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} t…
> the party in power will never allow this to make it to the floor of the House for a vote The implication here is that the Democrats don't gerrymander. This is patently false. The Democrats are just pissed that the Republicans did a massively better job at it in the past decade. In many ways, it was an arms race, and the Democrats chose not to focus on small and local districts and elections (instead, worrying about…
Unless I'm missing something very important, Ossoff was competing for a district that hadn't gone to a Republican by less than 20 points in the entire history of the district (it was redistricted sometime around ~2000).
Ossoff --- who is not a great candidate! --- took one of the most solidly Republican suburban districts in the country and turned it into a real horse race. What am I supposed to learn from that about Democratic strategic weakness?
Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#169Re: Delaney Introduces Bill to End Gerrymandering, Reform Elections
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm pretty sure that the states get to decide this particular matter for themselves Please participate in the discussion by checking on the relevant sources you're citing. From the US Constitution: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but /the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations/,…
I did check the sources. The line you quote is the wrong line. The topic of "how apportionment is performed" is a different line. Further, "how districting is performed" is pretty vague in the original Constitution which I believe means it is left to the states to decide. The 14th Amendment implies that the states must use districts -- before then they could have used a statewide system.
I'm very sure it is not. Article 1, Section 4.
> The topic of "how apportionment is performed" is a different line.
That's not how the law is read (X "topic" is governed by Y statute solely). One section does not provide the guidelines for apportionment, alone. Preceding sections generally override following sections when in doubt, unless explicitly overridden in following sections.
Reapportionment has nothing to do with elections, but the result of the elections as it pertains to the composition of Congress in relation to population. There is nothing in regard to this to require a change to the constitution, as an amendment.