I'm a HUGE fan of independent redistricting commissions, like the one implemented in Iowa. I'm a big fan of common-sense districts where objective mathematical rules are used to draw those districts, such as minimizing the borders of districts so that we don't get monstrosities like my own Illinois 9th District[1].
THAT SAID, if Red States choose to redraw their districts mid-Census cycle, Blue States are chumps if they take your advice and sit on their thumbs. The goal in doing so isn't an obsession with Donald Trump, it's all game theory tit-for-tat and extracting a price from the Red States that defected from the status quo first and eliminate any advantage there may be for a defector. They are not serving their citizens if they sit idly by and allow other states to press their advantages. (Red States already enjoy a SIGNIFICANT advantage with the over-representation of rural voters in both the Senate and the House.)
Mathematics could certainly be done. Google has pretty much given us a head start toward entering every address and its geographic coordinates into a data base.
Arnold should use his energy to push for a national proportional representation reform: get rid of gerrymandering nationally.
Just to note about Massachusetts: it's pretty much impossible to draw a GOP-lean or GOP-favored district because the GOP voters there are too dispersed. Illinois or Maryland are likely better examples to use.
It would be great if a party gained an edge by outperforming the other. I suspect we would need several more parties to determine a plurality opinion of what "outperforming" means.
Nate Silver had a lengthy article back when he ran 538 on different districting models, some of which were politically neutral math models that created geometrically logical election districts. That article is longer accessible, but would be an interesting article for him to revisit on Substack.
I'm a HUGE fan of independent redistricting commissions, like the one implemented in Iowa. I'm a big fan of common-sense districts where objective mathematical rules are used to draw those districts, such as minimizing the borders of districts so that we don't get monstrosities like my own Illinois 9th District[1].
THAT SAID, if Red States choose to redraw their districts mid-Census cycle, Blue States are chumps if they take your advice and sit on their thumbs. The goal in doing so isn't an obsession with Donald Trump, it's all game theory tit-for-tat and extracting a price from the Red States that defected from the status quo first and eliminate any advantage there may be for a defector. They are not serving their citizens if they sit idly by and allow other states to press their advantages. (Red States already enjoy a SIGNIFICANT advantage with the over-representation of rural voters in both the Senate and the House.)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois%27s_9th_congressional_district
Mathematics could certainly be done. Google has pretty much given us a head start toward entering every address and its geographic coordinates into a data base.
Arnold should use his energy to push for a national proportional representation reform: get rid of gerrymandering nationally.
Just to note about Massachusetts: it's pretty much impossible to draw a GOP-lean or GOP-favored district because the GOP voters there are too dispersed. Illinois or Maryland are likely better examples to use.
Illinois is a MESS districting-wise[1].
I was unsure how much worse it could get until I saw a proposal floating around that could reduce Illinois' GOP representation to ONE House member.[2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois%27s_congressional_districts
[2] https://bsky.app/profile/mclean.bsky.social/post/3m3tkoh4m6k2s
And if the VRA is actually killed-off by SCOTUS, it's pretty much "all bets are off".
Though Illinois Dems seem to be set against redistricting at this time...
It would be great if a party gained an edge by outperforming the other. I suspect we would need several more parties to determine a plurality opinion of what "outperforming" means.
Great article, Steve.
Nate Silver had a lengthy article back when he ran 538 on different districting models, some of which were politically neutral math models that created geometrically logical election districts. That article is longer accessible, but would be an interesting article for him to revisit on Substack.
Was it this one? https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/we-drew-2568-congressional-districts-by-hand-heres-how/
Small typo: Kamala Harris, not Pamela Harris.
I blame autocorrect. I know what I typed. Kamala