House balance may hinge on court rulings

[old Grump]

Judges weigh in on redistricting By Sean Lengell


The Washington Times
Tuesday, December 27, 2011

The 2012 congressional elections are more than 10 months away, but some key votes already have been cast — and not by the electorate.


Judges, rather, are playing major roles in reshaping the House landscape this election cycle, as the courts in many states have ruled — or soon will — on disputed redistricting maps in several battleground states.


http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...court-rulings/

I absolutely hate everything about redrawing the districts every time a new party takes power, its flat wrong no matter who does it.

[El Laton Caliente]

Except Texas has more congressmen and California and New York have fewer Congressmen. How do you not redraw districts in those cases?

[old Grump]

It's called gerrymandering The first map is under governor Ann Richards and the second is under Bush, Perry and Tom Delay. Both parties redrew to maximize their majority chances in the next election and as far as I am concerned the whole process is criminal.

[El Laton Caliente]

Gerrymandering was common under the Texas Dem's also. So when Republicans do it it is suddenly bad?

[old Grump]

Gerrymandering was common under the Texas Dem's also. So when Republicans do it it is suddenly bad?

That made no sense. I don't like it period no matter what party does it. It is just flat out wrong anyway you look at it.

[mriddick]

The question is how would you set it up, would you put the center of each district at an urban center? Would you incorporate entire counties as much as possible? Could you just draw a grid? Would you try to put political parties into distinct majorities or would you make every district competitive?

Like so many things political in nature what seems fair to one guy is unfair to another, meanwhile "we the people" complain either way it goes

[Penguin]

They do that here too, just to screw the Dems. Like you said I think it is wrong no matter who does it.

[El Laton Caliente]

That made no sense. I don't like it period no matter what party does it. It is just flat out wrong anyway you look at it.

So Texas after going Conservative Republican should leave the districts gerrymandered for Democrats?

[N/A]

I'd like to see them draw districts that cut the very large cities in half, to dilute their disproportunate power in relation to rural or small town Texas.

[El Laton Caliente]

I'd like to see them draw districts that cut the very large cities in half, to dilute their disproportionate power in relation to rural or small town Texas.

And I being rural would argue that it would dilute my vote because of the disproportionate numbers in a metropolitan area.

[N/A]

And I being rural would argue that it would dilute my vote because of the disproportionate numbers in a metropolitan area.

And being in a rural area, it takes a large district to get one rep...whereas a large city could have 6 or 7 reps.....7 votes to 1 you might say.

[mriddick]

That's the reason for gerrymandering, urban folk want the districts drawn so their power is maximized, county folk want it drawn so it's theirs that is. Do you set the districts up by sq miles or by number of people? 5 sq miles in an urban center might make a complete district, in the country it might take 200sq miles or more... Then you have those who want to make every district competitive (as close to 50/50 R/D) and those who want them set up to maximized party strength.

[N/A]

They are set up by population, after a census usually.

[mriddick]

They are set up by population, after a census usually.

About 650,000 per district now....

[El Laton Caliente]

And being in a rural area, it takes a large district to get one rep...whereas a large city could have 6 or 7 reps.....7 votes to 1 you might say.

At least I have my libritarian....

[N/A]

Not an easy task to draw a district, even if trying to be fair and ignore party lines or racial lines.

[Warthogg]

This is the COURTS and not the politicians at work.


Wart

Democrats have won early-round court battles in Texas and California regarding congressional redistricting — a process conducted every 10 years based on census data that reflect changes in population. With more cases pending or expected in those and other key states such as Florida and New York, the party is in a good position to chip away at the Republicans’ 50-seat advantage in the House.



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...court-rulings/

[old Grump]

An impartial panel with no dog in the fight is the only fair way. Retired judges, people from out of state, a panel of clergy, anything but partisan politicians.

Unless of course you prefer partisan politics and like getting screwed out of your vote every time the power switches to a different party.

[mriddick]

Then there's a fight for who gets to pick the impartial panel... There's really no way you're going to remove bias from the system, just too much is at stake.

[shorthair]

Like said earlier, the party in power after the census every ten years.