[EM] Re: Election redistricting
drernie at mac.com
Thu Jan 15 10:27:18 PST 2004
On Jan 15, 2004, at 2:37 AM, Anthony Duff wrote:
> I'm wondering why he would want to use judges. I think it is clearly
> a task for long term bureaucrats.
Alas, here in California 'bureaucrats' is almost as negative a word as
Relatively few people are aware of how much gerrymandering skews
politics, though most people know what the word means. Most of those
who are aware tend to be beneficiaries of the system, which means
attempts to fix it will be bitterly contested. Saying we'll have
bureaucrats decide districts would be instantly derided in the press by
those who oppose reform, and the public would tend to accept such
Judges are considered more wise and impartial, and thus less likely to
invite derision. They of course could use whatever experts they want
to do the actual work, but they'd set the parameters and guidelines, as
well as own the results. However, we just went through an ugly series
of court decisions over the recall in our Appellate courts, which
somewhat tarnished their standing.
The twin issues of 'efficacy' and 'acceptability' are deeply
intertwined (at least here) which is why I think the criteria of
political feasibility is actually the most important, provide there is
no simple way for incumbents to skew the results in their favor.
-- Ernie P.
More information about the Election-Methods