SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the the-simple-answer-is-that-there-isn't-a-simple-solution dept.
The problems of gerrymandering are manifold, often debated and lamented. Now, a group of computational geometers from Tufts, MIT and others are working the problem from different fronts. From https://sites.tufts.edu/gerrymandr/
The Metric Geometry and Gerrymandering Group (MGGG) is a small Boston-based team of mathematicians launched by Moon Duchin of Tufts University. Our mission is to study applications of geometry and computing to U.S. redistricting. We believe that gerrymandering of all kinds is a fundamental threat to our democracy.
Our goals are:
- to pursue cutting-edge research in the practically relevant applications of geometry, topology, and computing to the redistricting problem;
- to foster collaboration with researchers in statistics, supercomputing, law, political science, and other fields;
- to facilitate direct civic engagement by training scholars from a variety of quantitative backgrounds to serve as expert witnesses and consultants in redistricting cases;
- to educate the public, both through direct outreach and by helping college and high school teachers incorporate units on voting, gerrymandering, and civil rights into the mathematics curriculum;
- to build a diverse community of mathematically inclined people around the country and give them the knowledge and the tools to hold map-drawers accountable when 2020 comes around.
And from https://sites.tufts.edu/gerrymandr/get-involved/
We are assembling a team of mathematicians, lawyers, statisticians, and active citizens of all stripes to work on practical metrics and solutions for gerrymandering in advance of the 2020 U.S. Census. If you're interested in joining our community, please fill out our Skills and Interest Inventory form.
For anyone that wants to get up to speed on this complex and important topic, https://sites.tufts.edu/gerrymandr/resources/ is a page of links to a variety of related papers and articles.
SN discussed the math of the gerrymander back in 2014,
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=14/12/27/1148245
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Thexalon on Thursday July 05 2018, @03:31PM (4 children)
A counter-proposal which some people are actually seriously exploring: We'd pick one citizen at random from each district to form our House. The advantages of this include:
1. There are no more professional politicians.
2. The random selection is at least as likely to actually represent the population than an election does.
3. The people serving as representatives know they're out next term no matter what. Their incentive to make good decisions is that they'll have to live with the consequences as ordinary citizens in a couple of years.
4. There's less incentive to spin partisan BS on the TV. Heck, parties themselves might become a bit obsolete, because most people are liberal on some things and conservative on other things and somewhere not even on that political compass on still other things.
And that would also reduce the incentive to gerrymander, since the only way you're going to ensure that someone you like will be the next office-holder would be to make an entire district of people who think just like you, which is impossible.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday July 05 2018, @05:18PM
Note that I'm not disagreeing with you, just stating that a traditional argument against that, that I've heard since at least the 80s, is its essentially a transfer of power from legislative to long term employees in the executive branch. Unclear if thats even good or bad. Also that turns the congressional office chief of staff from president of the coffee fetchers into something like a viceroy. Of course there are solutions to that, too, or maybe its a good thing.
I'm just saying you have a nice list of positives but you gotta prep for the inevitable list above of negatives, which the entire entrenched deep state swamp will be screaming at the top of their lungs on CNN and all the other propaganda outlets.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday July 05 2018, @06:37PM (2 children)
Their incentive is the same as if they won the State Lottery. Take all the money you can carry, and run. Plan on moving.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday July 05 2018, @07:01PM (1 child)
How is that different from what our current politicians do? About the only thing I can think of is that they don't have to stop after 2 years if they're in a "safe" district (which the vast majority of Congresscritters are).
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday July 05 2018, @09:47PM
Because they have to be able to be re-elected.
There are starting to be a LOT of safe seats that turned out not to be so safe.
Not been reading the new lately:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/26/politics/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-joe-crowley-new-york-14-primary/index.html [cnn.com]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.