Proposed Ballot Iniative re: Redistricting & Gerrymandering

[MikeyinBrooklyn]

There is a report in the Freep http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...ing/485228001/ about a ballot initiative to change the way that the state draws Congressional & legislative districts. While I think the intent sounds noble, in the end I think it is a terrible idea at worst, and at best not more honest or fair than the current politician-drawn lines.

There are a few reasons I am predisposed to disliking it. 1) Although the commission would be nominally independent, in reality every informed citizen has policies and parties and outcomes they favor. Just because someone is not a member of a party does not mean that they are impartial or have preconceived notions of what is fair or just. 2) The persons or groups appointing said commission members will choose people respecting their interests. 3) Smaller parties and politically unaffiliated voters have the same representation that they currently do: none. 4) Under current practice, politicians choose the districts, and they are one step removed from voters. Appointees to this commission are at least 2, and maybe more, steps removed from the people.

Don't get me wrong. Politician-driven reapportionment is problematic and often driven by self or party interest. But this proposal doesn't fix that in any way. And further, there can arguably be legitimate reasons to attempt to affect outcomes by designing district borders. Among them: 1) to represent existing political boundaries [[i.e. if there are 225,000 people in each Senate district, it makes sense for Detroit to have 3 state Senators represent the city directly, as opposed to small parts of 13 districts, electing mostly Republicans). 2) Seats can be created to make it more likely that a minority is represented whereas they may not otherwise be.

In a perfect world, the only information that would be used to create a legislative seat would be total population numbers. Race, sex, age, income, voting tendencies and political affiliation would play no role. But all that information is public and known, so it is naive to the point of being false to think that such factors wouldn't be considered by the "independent" commission.

The current system offers at least some measure of self-correction: by creating "safe" seats for a race, party, or particular incumbent, they are rendering other seats more vulnerable to opposition takeover. Pack a district with Democrats to help Sander Levin or Gary Peters or Republicans to help Dave Trott or Justin Amash and you jeopardize surrounding seats. I favor reestablishing the electoral college to have the EC votes apportioned by Congressional district. That way, packing a party's voters into "safe districts" makes that party less competitive for the up-for-grabs EC districts. Making all incumbents less safe is the best recipe for making elections more competitive, if you ask me. This proposal would shake up the status quo only to create a new one that is no more fair, and a step further removed from voter nullification.