Why Tuesday?

Get Involved

Redistricing reform at Claim Democracy

Sunday, November 11th, 2007

Redistricting Game

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today at the Claim Democracy conference Ed Davis of Common Cause, Ben Wilcox of Common Cause Florida, Michael McDonald of Brookings & George Mason University, redistricting attorney Jeff Wice, Peter Wagner of Prison Policiy Initiative, Catherine Turcer of Ohio Citizen Action, Carling Dinkler of Congressman John Tanner’s office and Steven Ochoa of the William C. Velasquez Institute were all scheduled to speak on a panel about redistricting reform. Barnett and I attended a panel about technology and elections at the same time.

The episode about redistricting reform and car accidents continues to climb the charts since more people is getting better defense on unfair trails and getting backup with the Last Drink Defense, learn more at https://www.ladahlaw.com/las-vegas-car-accident-lawyer

4 Responses to “Redistricing reform at Claim Democracy”

  1. DNOW Says:

    The U.S.A. has been in a gerrymander death spiral since 4 July 1776.
    ALL 50 States in the U.S.A. have ANTI-DEMOCRACY gerrymander regimes [derived from the gerrymander formation of the English House of Commons in the 1200’s – a mere 700 plus years ago] —–

    1. Half the votes in half the gerrymander districts [political concentration camps] for 1 party control — about 25 percent ANTI-DEMOCRACY indirect MINORITY RULE — with much worse minority rule due to special interest gang primary math with *open* (NO incumbent) gerrymander district seats.

    2. UNEQUAL votes for each gerrymander district winner.

    3. UNEQUAL total votes in each gerrymander district.

    See ALL of the MORON gerrymander math opinions in Vieth v. Juberlier, 541 U.S. 267 (2004) [PA] and L.U.L.A.C. v. Perry, 548 U.S. 34 (2006) [TX] due to MANY, MANY, MANY lawyer MORONS — unable to detect the above 3 UNEQUAL points in their New Age ignorant MORON brains.

    Result — the nonstop brain dead gerrymander ANTI-DEMOCRACY *politics* in ALL 50 State regimes in the U.S.A. since 4 July 1776.

    ATTACK the ANTI-Democracy gerrymander systems in the media and the courts.
    U.S.A. Const. Art. IV, Sec. 4 and 14th Amdt, Sec. 1.
    The same sort of nonstop brain dead gerrymander ANTI-DEMOCRACY (or worse) *politics* has been in the U.S.A. regime since 4 March 1789 — the gerrymander U.S.A. House of Reps., the gerrymander U.S.A. Senate and the gerrymander U.S.A. Prez/VP Electoral College (with severe ROT effects on the appointed party hack U.S.A. Supremes).

    Some business- as- usual EVIL gerrymander results — genocide of the Indian tribes, slavery until 1865, undeclared wars, inflations, depressions, giant national debt increases, etc., etc., etc. — i.e. a minority rule government of the gerrymander monarchs, by the gerrymander monarchs and for the gerrymander monarchs.
    Major Reforms –

    1. Proportional Representation in all legislative body elections —

    Total Votes / Total Seats = EQUAL votes needed for each Seat Winner

    ALL voters get represented with Majority Rule (DEMOCRACY) and minority representation.

    2. Nonpartisan nominations and elections of all elected executive officers and all judges.
    Basic Democracy Election Reforms 1 July 2007

    Sec. A. All candidates for the same office in the same area shall have the same nominating petition requirements to get on the election ballots.

    Sec. B. (1) The Electors shall elect the members of each legislative body (odd number at least 5) in each year for 1 year terms.
    (2) Each legislative body district shall have between 5 and 10 times the total number of electors at the last election in all districts divided by the total members in the body.
    (3) As nearly as possible, each district shall consist of 1 or more local governments or part of 1 local government and be contiguous and square.

    Sec. C. (1) Each legislative body candidate shall get a list of all candidates for the body in all districts at least [4] weeks before the election.
    (2) Each candidate shall rank the other candidates in all districts (using 1 (highest), 2, etc.) and file such list not later than [4] P.M. [3] weeks before the election.
    (3) The lists shall be made public immediately at such deadline.
    (4) If a valid list is not filed, then the candidate’s name shall be removed from the ballots.

    [Equal Votes per winner P.R.]

    Sec. D. (1) Each Elector may vote for 1 candidate for each legislative body.
    (2) The Average shall be the Total Votes for all candidates in all districts divided by the Total Members to be elected in all districts, dropping fractions. Ave = TV/TM.
    (3) A candidate who gets the Average shall be elected.
    (4) The most excess votes above the Average shall be repeatedly moved to 1 or more unelected candidates, using the elected candidate’s rank order list.
    (5) Only the votes needed to get the Average shall be moved to any 1 unelected candidate.
    (6) If all members are not elected, then the candidate with the least votes in all districts shall lose.
    (7) The loser’s votes shall be moved to 1 or more unelected candidates, using the original losing candidate’s rank order list and subject to (5).
    (8) Steps (6) and (7) shall repeat, if necessary.
    (9) Example- 100 Votes, Elect 5, Average 20
    A 26 – 6 = 20 Elected
    B 20 Elected
    C 18 + 2 = 20 Elected
    D 16
    E 9
    F 7 + 4 = 11
    G 4
    Excess A votes moved.
    A 20 Elected
    B 20 Elected
    C 20 Elected
    D 16
    F 11 + 4 = 15
    E 9
    G 4 – 4 = 0 Loses
    A 20 Elected
    B 20 Elected
    C 20 Elected
    D 16 + 4 = 20 Elected
    F 15 + 5 = 20 Elected
    E 9 – 9 = 0 Loses

    Sec. E. (1) A legislative body candidate or member may file a written rank order list of persons to fill his/her vacancy, if any.
    (2) The qualified person who is highest on the list shall fill the vacancy.
    (3) If the preceding does not happen, then the legislative body shall fill the vacancy with a person of the same party (if any) immediately at its next meeting.

    Sec. F. (1) All elected executive officers and all judges shall be nominated for and elected at nonpartisan elections.
    (2) Each elector may vote for 1 or more candidates for each elected executive office or judge (including 1 write-in for each position).
    [This is the Approval Voting method]
    (3) The candidate(s) getting the most votes shall be elected (for the longest terms respectively in the case of 2 or more positions with different terms).

    The above has modified parts of a Model State Constitution — available on request.

    NO primaries are needed.
    NO gerrymander commissions are needed.
    NO citizens’ assemblies are needed [with *experts* controlling the amateurs].

    Democracy NOW via 100 percent Proportional Representation — before it is too late — and a Red States – Blue States gerrymander Civil WAR II happens because of the EVIL incumbent gerrymander MORONS — much, much, much worse than the gerrymander horrific Civil WAR I in 1861-1865 (that killed about 620,000 Americans and maimed multi-thousands more for life).

    See the end of the Roman Republic in 120 B.C. – 27 B.C. and its destruction by the TYRANT monarch Augustus Caesar — due to the UNREPRESENTATIVE ANTI-Democracy Roman Senate and other Roman legislative bodies.

    PAPER MAIL BALLOTS NOW — regardless of ALL of the MORONS who love having hackable E-voting systems (loved also by the domestic and foreign hacker ENEMIES of Democracy).

    Oregon Vote by Mail — NO lines on Election Day (with NO rigged UNEQUAL voters per E-voting machine — such as in Ohio 2004).


  2. » Redistricting Game Interview The Rose Report: The Rose Institute of State and Local Government Says:

    […] Jacob Soboroff, Executive Director and occasional contributor to L.A. Observed, points to a video interview with Lead Game Designer and Assistant Professor Chris Swain that “continues to climb the […]

  3. AllAboutVoting Says:

    I didn’t fully follow DNOW’s long comment and don’t find the hysteria to be useful. That said, I agree with the thesis that proportional representation (PR) can dodge much of the problems of gerrymandering by increasing the “district magnitude” past one. I don’t know how practical a reform it is for the US. I expect that the best case practical scenario would be some states allocating US House of Rep seats via PR.

    * which PR method? There are many of them with different properties.
    * for US Senate within states – not practical since there are only 2 reps per state
    * for US House – could use state as a single PR district – not helpful for states with very few reps
    * for executive branch – PR irrelevant

    Some more thoughts on PR by RangeVoting.org:

  4. AllAboutVoting Says:

    My thoughts on gerrymandering.

About Us

Why Tuesday? is a non-partisan, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization founded in 2005 to find solutions to increase voter turnout and participation in elections... More

The Answer

In 1845, before Florida, California, and Texas were states or slavery had been abolished, Congress needed to pick a time for Americans to vote... More

Recent Comments

Patrick, France is a post-Christian secular country. Relatively few of them attend church, and voting on Sunday does not interfere with their religious practices, because most of the population is not religious...

Posted by John on blog post Why Do We Vote On Tuesday?

In France they last voted on a Sunday. France is despite the Bourbon legacy a largely Catholic country, yet they vote on Sunday...

Posted by Patrick on blog post Why Do We Vote On Tuesday?

I think weekend voting would make the most sense, as people wouldn't have tu run home after work or wake up early to hit the polling stations beforehand.

Posted by Zander on blog post Why Do We Vote On Tuesday?