Any ideas?
How is it done now, as in by population, area, or just as Dover-insiders see fit?
How do we make it fair?
Trackback URL for this post:
http://www.de.lp.org/trackback/148
How to decide on new voting districts.
Submitted by Brendan Fitzgerald on May 20, 2009 - 10:21pm
![[Best viewed with Any Browser]](/images/a-logo.gif){kind=logo}
![[This page was created with drupal]](/images/powered-blue-88x31.png){kind=small}
![[Powered by FreeBSD]](/images/freebsd.gif)
![[Powered by Apache]](/images/apache_pb2_ani.gif){kind=small}
![[Delaware Libertarian Party]](/images/shim.png){kind=small}
I think it is based on census
I think it is based on census data and then the gerrymandering begins. Having looked at Sussex' districts, a few look ridiculously gerrymandered, and I wouldn't expect anything different the next time redistricting comes around. Any long term GOP districts that have fallen to the Democrats will most definitely be the districts to watch.
Mostly, though, alot of the County/Rep/Senate lines in Sussex fall on the same streets, especially through the Georgetown/Millsboro/Rt 20 area. Lewes is gerrymandered all to heck, at one point there is a panhandle along Rt 9 through Five Points that is less than a mile wide, might be a single property or two wide.
The only thing I can think of to make it fair would be to require a radius limit. Centerpoint of district cannot be within X percentage of the distance from the border compared to the longest distance. This would eliminate panhandles and such. Say the longest distance was 4.5 miles, but the shortest distance from the centerpoint would be 2 miles, then you have a funky shaped district. Round it out a little by cutting back the length and widening the width, and it makes things more fair.
two possibilities
1) since there is approximately no chance that they will adopt a plan that doesn't involve gerrymandering and partisan squabbling, i propose the following: let each major party submit a plan for drawing the district boundaries. sum the lengths of the boundary lines of the Election Districts, Representative Districts and Senate Districts in each plan. the one with the smallest number wins.
2) or an unbiased way: an independent commission composed of (not that it really matters) three members appointed by each major political party, and if that is an even number, one member appointed by the largest minor political party shall be created. this commission will partition the state into 861 Election Districts by aggregating adjacent census tracts w/o regard to the party affiliation of the residents, such that the standard deviation of the district populations and the sum of the lengths of the district boundaries are minimized, and if there are multiple solutions, the one with the minimum standard deviation in district land areas shall be chosen. Representative districts shall be formed by combining 21 adjacent Election districts w/o regard to the party affiliation of the residents, such that the sum of the lengths of the Representative district boundaries is a minimum, and if there are multiple solutions, the one in which the greatest length of district boundaries coincide with geographic boundaries such as state or county borders, rivers or major highways shall be chosen. Senate districts shall be chosen in the same fashion, using 41 Election districts each.
So I see that the fairest
So I see that the fairest thing to do would be to set districts up by geographical area as opposed to anything else. I though number one was an interesting idea. The least divisive map wins. Does the Libertarian Party of Delaware have any platform for this issue yet?
Platform
We are in the process of revising our platform. The next few meetings's focus will be an overall discussion about the platform and new additions.
From this discussion, I have put redistricting on my list of topics to discuss regarding the platform.
my redistricting plans
I just made those up to get people thinking, I have no idea whether anyone in the LPD would agree with either.
#1 lets the politicians play their gerrymandering games, but brings an element of fairness by rewarding the faction who does it in the least obvious manner.
#2 probably might not be consistent with state constitutional requirements which allocate a certain number of districts to each county, and the population distribution may not allow that to work. I chose the number 861, about twice the current number of EDs because it is the smallest number that allows the Rep & Senate districts to be composed of equal numbers of equal population EDs. (41 & 21 are relatively prime.) it would tend to produce bumpy roundish EDs, and RDs & SDs that cluster around areas of denser population. it would probably be the most fair method, especially if the Commission was also prohibited from considering any data from the census other than the population and borders of each block tract. it would also be virtually guaranteed to produce some disruption and unseat a few incumbents when it was first adopted, but would also be the easiest to maintain over time as births, deaths, and migration into out of and around the state shifted the population distribution.
The LPD's platform, such as it is, can be found in the descriptions of these 5 forums. In other words, no.