[EM] No geographical districts

[Allen Smith]

In message <BAY104-F37EB23BC91C64156A090F68F5E0 at phx.gbl> (on 3 September
2008 22:01:24 +0000), stephane.rouillon at sympatico.ca
(=?iso-8859-1?B?U3TpcGhhbmUgUm91aWxsb24=?=) wrote:
>Hello electorama fans,
>
>regarding that last comment, I invite those interested in non-geographical 
>district to consider astrological district.

How about self-chosen districts? One element of current geographical
districts is that people at least theoretically (and in some actual cases -
see Libertarians moving to New Hampshire, Alaska, etc for instance) can
choose to move to be more around people they agree more with; that even this
(frequently impractical) method would be impossible with such a system would
be one objection to it.

>...
>>However, even something like "they should be compact" favours some
>>people.  If you are part of a group that is spread evenly, then you do
>>worse if the districts are compact.  The problem is that philosophy
>>that districts should be geographically based.

Yes.

	-Allen

-- 
Allen Smith, Ph.D.			 http://cesario.rutgers.edu/easmith/
There is only one sound argument for democracy, and that is the argument
that it is a crime for any man to hold himself out as better than other men,
and, above all, a most heinous offense for him to prove it. - H. L. Mencken