END GERRYMANDERING
Catastrophic Thinking emphasizes easily administered public policies which can operate smoothly in catastrophic conditions. A policy or process which requires litigation or judicial review is not suitable for a democracy in catastrophic circumstances. A prime example of a policy which fails catastrophic analysis is the long-honored right of legislatures to manipulate voting districts in a process called gerrymandering.
Gerrymandering undermines democracy and the right to a meaningful vote. Since the 1960’s gerrymandering has been justified to create majority-minority voting districts. Then the Republicans began creating super-majority minority districts, in essence gathering up all minority voters in as few districts as possible. Inevitably, the judiciary became involved, holding such super-majority minority districts as unlawful. So now judges are reviewing voting maps to decide if the proposed map allows Democrats to win but not by too much. Needless to say, all efforts by either side is a cynical manipulation of voting maps. It also stretches out a basic governmental function indefinitely while judges dither over a proposed map’s “fairness.” In a catastrophe, such drawn out processes are a luxury we cannot afford. The ONLY answer is to pass laws prohibiting all such identity-based manipulation and use objective criteria to draw maps. Geographic dispersions of voters should be plotted and SQUARE districts should be drawn, with each district having the same number of voters to say within a five (5) percent margin of error. Perhaps by County, or some other political subdivisions drawn without regard to party, voting patterns, race, creed, ethnicity, gender, or any other criteria of identity. If the desired distribution of counties into districts cannot be drawn to within a five (5) per cent margin of error, then perhaps the objective body like the Census Bureau can draw squares called Census Tracts, or use other units of measure like townships. Then let the chips fall, or votes cast, where they may. At least such an approach would be easiest way to administer the mapping procedures in catastrophic circumstances.
In those states where square counties or other gridlines are lacking, then the criterion should be the shortest lines possible between any two points within a voting district. Look at the North Carolina map shown in the featured illustration of a book on gerrymandering. Due in part to the heritage of colonial lines for districts and due in part to legislative and judicial interference, the districts look like my breakfast spilled on the kitchen floor. There should be alternative methods for drawing voting district lines. In North Carolina, for example, the interstate highway system slices the state up into pretty compact or square segments. It would be objectively more fair to define districts by interstates which are designed to get from points A to B with a minimum of driving time. As suggested earlier, Census Tracts could also be used, as long as the Census Bureau had objective criteria for drawing up tract lines without regard for the identity or characteristics of the population. As much as possible, municipalities should be kept together. In big cities like New York, street grids are used to define voting boundaries and could continue to be used, subject to the overriding rule that the districts be made as square as possible. However, the grids would not start at the corners of the city but from the center (where city hall is in the absence of a city ordinance defining the center of the city). Bodies of water would also weigh in, as a map should not have a district partly in Manhattan and partly in Staten Island.
Finally, I would entrust the Census Bureau to draw three alternative maps with these criteria and submit them to the state legislatures. Then the state legislatures could select the “best” one, or the legislature could submit the maps to the people in a referendum, not subject to judicial review. If the Census Bureau is able to apportion the state by counties within a five (5) per cent margin of error, then the map is drawn as is, with only one alternative. Those are my thoughts anyway. You got a better idea, please put it in this blog.