Constitutional Amendement proposal. (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 06:46:07 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Constitutional Amendement proposal. (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Constitutional Amendement proposal.  (Read 1748 times)
Fmr. Gov. NickG
NickG
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,208


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -3.49

« on: May 26, 2004, 09:13:22 PM »

I oppose this amendment.  Districts should be contiguous.

What about Alaska and Hawaii?
Logged
Fmr. Gov. NickG
NickG
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,208


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -3.49

« Reply #1 on: May 26, 2004, 09:25:46 PM »
« Edited: May 26, 2004, 09:26:03 PM by Gov. NickG »

Techinicalities aside, the fact is that with the current voter distribution, it is impossible to make districts that are both totally contiguous and close in population (also a constitutional requirement).

The problem is that NY has 10 voters, and is the only state contiguous with New England.  if you put NY in the same district as NE, the district is too large.  Without NY, the district is too small.
Logged
Fmr. Gov. NickG
NickG
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,208


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -3.49

« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2004, 10:22:47 AM »

Wow, let's not get too carried away here...I think contigiousness (hm, does that really exist?) is more important. Look at how actual districts in RL looks. They're always contigious (except for when they're HEAVILY gerrymandered). And population doesn't have to be exactly equal number ov voters. As long as the differences aren't too big.

In real life, the Supreme Court has definitely held that districts being equal size is more important that geographical integrity.  This is because "one person, one vote" is a constitutional guarantee, while geography

For instance, they struck down the original Pennsylvania map in 2002 for only slight differences in population, while upholding all of the recent political gerrymanders, like Maryland and Texas, no matter how wacky the Districts looked, as long as they had equal populations.

The SC has struck down gerrymanders that were racially motivated.  But that is because not being discriminated against on the basis of race is a constitutional guarantee; pure georgraphy is awarded no such protection.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 12 queries.