• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Racial gerrymandering shot down by SCOTUS

i dont lnow why this concept is so hard..

A. Using racial bias in drawing lines to prevent a race of people from getting representation is illegal

B. Using racial bias in drawing lines to give a race of people an advantage in getting representation is also illegal

C. Using racial bias in drawing lines is illegal... period.


They really should just go to computer modeling of regions for gerrymandering... take the politics out of this altogether
 
madinsomniac said:
i dont lnow why this concept is so hard..

A. Using racial bias in drawing lines to prevent a race of people from getting representation is illegal

B. Using racial bias in drawing lines to give a race of people an advantage in getting representation is also illegal

C. Using racial bias in drawing lines is illegal... period.


They really should just go to computer modeling of regions for gerrymandering... take the politics out of this altogether
Click to expand...
It should be on county lines.
 
madinsomniac said:
Id be ok with that, but numbers wise it would need to be more evened up... county populations vary too greatly as is
Click to expand...
Well, there are too many counties in the US for it to be one county per representative, so there will be some sparcely represented counties that team up with others for the 435 we need. The problem here is that some small, red leaning counties will be stuck onto blue leaning cities, voiding their representation. There are 3,143 counties in this nation. I'm not bothering with the state count.

There is no easy answer, which shows why we have a bicameral system. The best of the messed up ideas.
 
Djfan said:
It should be on county lines.
Click to expand...
I have a radical idea. Probably terrible but hear me out. No districts for voting. Statewide on Party and lets say they get 10 reps, and the vote is 60 40 then 6 for the winners and 4 for the losers. Discuss.
 
SteelerInLebanon said:
I have a radical idea. Probably terrible but hear me out. No districts for voting. Statewide on Party and lets say they get 10 reps, and the vote is 60 40 then 6 for the winners and 4 for the losers. Discuss.
Click to expand...
I prefer this. So would the near 40% of the republicans in New England who have zero representation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top