When politicians redraw congressional district maps to favor their party, they may secure short-term victories. But those wins can come at a steep price — a loss of public faith in elections and, ultimately, in democracy itself.
When politicians redraw congressional district maps to favor their party, they may secure short-term victories. But those wins can come at a steep price — a loss of public faith in elections and, ultimately, in democracy itself.
Agree on both points, but gerrymandering doesn’t apply to the function of the EC. Even with Ranked Choice voting, they would still be susceptible to gerrymandering. Independent redistricting commissions seem like the best compromise, but then you get into a situation where not all states are playing by the same rules, and actually supporting your citizens rights is bad for the country if an equally large state can gerrymander the shit out of districts.
The article does suggest also having “proportional representation, in which parties win seats based on their share of the statewide vote, rather than in winner-take-all districts” which remove a lot of the fuss about districts maps, but would still probably still disenfranchise some voters. I also can’t imagine a ballot in a big state like CA or TX having to rank 70+ representatives for your house seat.
The unfortunate reality is the politicians currently in power would rather pull up the ladder and secure their seat than make things more fair and add more ladders.
Of course, we are fucked. It’s all over. The best outcome we can hope for at this point is a civil war
And to win that war. And to somehow ensure that, in the vacuum of power that immediately follows, whomever takes over leading the nation isn’t influenced by foreign actors.
There won’t be any winners in a civil war these days. There will be too many sides.