Weaken the influence of special interests.Increase voter participation – when an election appears to be very close, more people vote because their vote might determine who wins.Reduce the number of representatives who are permanent fixtures in Washington.This approach would address several issues simultaneously: “Why not use gerrymandering to achieve a different objective - to create as many competitive districts as possible?” Frey proposed. “It can be a serious violation of the one-person, one-vote principal.” Frey proposed applying the same computer programs and analysis currently used to create “safe” partisan districts and program them to do the exact opposite: create districts with nearly equal number of voters from each party. “Redistricting appears to have as much influence as what happens at the ballot box,” said Peter Frey, a professor emeritus from Northwestern University. The concern is for “safe districts,” where the incumbent party has an unfavorable advantage. Allows minorities to be better represented in Washington.Leads to the creation of “safe” districts for incumbents.Allows a state to group together voters who have common interests.But gerrymandering also has other significant facets that can impact a district: In general, redistricting is important in that it reflects changes that happen over time in any given state’s population. The Constitution expressly assigns power to each state to prescribe its own redistricting rules, and proponents would argue that gerrymandering simply reflects the basic human instinct for people to join groups that reflect their own interests and identity. Gerrymandering is a time-honored tradition in American politics. “And if so, do we have the political will to do it?” “The question is, do we have the ability to create neutral districts with the use of technology?” Maddux asked. The seminar provides an opportunity for Aspen community members to engage in non-partisan discussion and debate regarding the future implications of technology and innovation. Maddux moderated the final session in a new four-week Aspen Community Program Series called Our Society Reimagined: Exploring New Ideas. “The courts have been very reluctant to get involved in trying to resolve the issue, with the exception of the anti-discrimination provisions put in place by the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which prohibited the act of ‘racial gerrymandering.’” “Redistricting becomes an issue when popular votes are not reflected in Congress,” said retired attorney Parker Maddux during a recent Aspen Community Program discussion on the topic. With the geography of our voting landscape being drawn along party lines, where does the “one person, one vote” basis for democracy fit in? According to Merriam-Webster, to gerrymander is “to divide (a state, school district, etc.) into political units that give one group an unfair advantage.” How do our votes count when states have the ability to fine-tune district lines to favor one party over the other? The results of the most recent Census brought about extensive redistricting, with states under Republican control redistricted to favor Republican candidates, and those under Democratic control favoring Democrats. The challenges voters face as a result of gerrymandering are inherent in the very definition of the word.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |