# Should election district boundaries be fixed to prevent Gerrymandering? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 30, 2015, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175 "2015-10-30T13:41:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![boffking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/858c86/32.png) [@boffking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boffking)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/1 "2015-10-30T13:41:20Z")
Politicians are always trying to move political boundaries around to their own benefit. I think the lines shouldn’t be movable at all. Once surveyed and established, they should be permanent. This would prevent gerrymandering and abuse. ---
**Author:** ![DinoR](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dinor/32/2821_2.png) [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/2 "2015-10-30T13:43:57Z")
Populations shift. Your plan would, over time, create unequal representation. ---
**Author:** ![Cheesesteak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cheesesteak/32/3694_2.png) [@Cheesesteak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheesesteak)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/3 "2015-10-30T13:55:17Z")
They can’t do that and keep them valid for population based voting purposes. I’d be OK if there was just a rule that no district can exceed some mathematical ratio of area to boundary length. Maybe there are other rules that are equally neutral, but easier to implement. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/4 "2015-10-30T14:00:14Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > They can’t do that and keep them valid for population based voting purposes. > > I’d be OK if there was just a rule that no district can exceed some mathematical ratio of area to boundary length. Maybe there are other rules that are equally neutral, but easier to implement. You’d also have to account for population density. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/5 "2015-10-30T14:40:50Z")
Only if my party gets to set the permanent boundaries. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/6 "2015-10-30T14:48:47Z")
Why does it have to be permanent? The problem isn’t the boundary, the problem is the political interference is setting the boundary. The solution seems simple if you live outside the US. Establish at the federal level an independant organization tasked with laying out minimum standards for elections and for district boundaries. However, if you live in the US, that solution comes across to a significant portion of the population as something tantamount to slavery since you’re infringing on State rights. ---
**Author:** ![boffking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/858c86/32.png) [@boffking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boffking)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/7 "2015-10-30T15:00:20Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Only if my party gets to set the permanent boundaries. > > Regards, > Shodan Voters choose politicians, not the other way around. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/8 "2015-10-30T15:19:20Z")
I was pointing out a problem, which is that it cannot be assumed that there will be no politicking in setting the permanent boundaries. But you are correct that voters pick politicians. One of the function of politicians, on both sides and any side, is setting the boundaries for voting districts. These boundaries cannot really be permanent, because people move. And politicians are going to try to jigger the boundaries to get elections to come out the way they want. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/9 "2015-10-30T17:33:48Z")
> [@Grey](#): > > The solution seems simple if you live outside the US. Establish at the federal level an independant organization tasked with laying out minimum standards for elections and for district boundaries. So all we need an independant nation-level comissions with intimnate information about every district, the full amount of time to decide, and completely honest people to staff and manage it? Yeah, I suppose that’s _simple_, in the sense that it sounds really easy as long as you don’t think out the full implications or requirements. But it’s like saying you can simply fix all environmental issues by inventing a source of clean power so we can all live in floating cities: you’re pretending to get around the vast difficulties by calling for an entirely fictitious solution. There are thousands of districts to be reapportioned, complex rules which we have to adhere to, and wrangling over what it right and just. The questions around minorities, or exactly hat constitutes an interest group, if huge. Furthermore, such a group realistically cannot be independent; it will almost certainly end up being heavily influenced by party politics. California got around this essentially by building in politics into the structyre of its board, and it’s already had some arguments over whether it was actually fair or not. (The main change there caused more internal fights per party, not more competition across party lines. And the long-term impact is unknown). There simply isn’t a mathematical formula for “fair” districts, and trying to do so can and does spark real issues for people. I’m personally for districts formed by geography even if they are ostensibly “unfair”. The nice thing about geography is that it doesn’t rapidly change, and groups within reasonably defined borders probably have some common interests. They’re also relatively neutral for political purposes. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/10 "2015-10-30T17:40:35Z")
I think we could make the districts harder to rig by using some geometry – perhaps several fixed boundary lines, and anytime a state’s largest district gets X times as large in population as the smallest, the largest’s boundaries automatically shift smaller by 1 fixed increment and the smallest’s boundaries shift bigger by 1 fixed increment, with other adjustments as necessary (and automatic), or something similar to that. Not a perfect solution, probably, but it might be more likely to avoid gerrymandering while retaining roughly balanced districts. ---
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/11 "2015-10-30T18:26:42Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > So all we need an independant nation-level comissions with intimnate information about every district, the full amount of time to decide, and completely honest people to staff and manage it? Yeah, I suppose that’s _simple_, in the sense that it sounds really easy as long as you don’t think out the full implications or requirements. But it’s like saying you can simply fix all environmental issues by inventing a source of clean power so we can all live in floating cities: you’re pretending to get around the vast difficulties by calling for an entirely fictitious solution. Or you establish something like the EPA. I keep forgetting, America is so complex no such solution is ever possible despite other countries somehow managing a more reasonable approach. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/12 "2015-10-30T18:38:07Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > So all we need an independant nation-level comissions with intimnate information about every district, the full amount of time to decide, and completely honest people to staff and manage it? Seems to work okay on the state level in those states that have implemented such a measure, such as Arizona. It’s not as though the state legislatures themselves have “intimate information” about anything except their own districts. ---
**Author:** ![Blaster\_Master](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/cab0a1/32.png) [@Blaster\_Master](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blaster_Master)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/13 "2015-10-30T19:23:24Z")
This is a simple optimization problem. What makes gerrymandered districts work is that they will be all kinds of bizarre shapes. So they can include various pockets of voters together. If it’s truly going to be representative by geography, then the districts need to be as geographically related (ie, as close together) as possible. The simplest way to do that is to just create an algorithm that includes various population density information and then it has to find the minimum length of district boundaries that satisfies that all districts have the same population within some tolerance. Some possible adjustments to this algorithm would be that it should probably have some sort of weighting on choosing certainl boundaries, notably natural boundaries (rivers/mountains) and pre-existing political boundaries (state/county lines). It should probably also try to keep the population density across a district as even as possible (to avoid splitting a city and mixing it with two rural areas rather than one district for the city and another for the rural). Regardless, even if it doesn’t do a super awesome job, the key point would be that it would definitely not include information about whether suburb A tends Democract and suburb B tends Republican. Other than some vague generalities, like rural areas tend to be Republican and urban tend to be Democrat, and whether or not a given state is more of one than the other, it shouldn’t prefer either party. Though frankly, while that would be what I think would be best for a single representative per district, I’d rather see us do something akin to Single Transferable Votes (STV) to assign representatives on much larger districts with multiple representatives, possibly even state-wide in all but the largest states. Even if you broke a large state into regions and assigned, say, 5 per region, it would still make it difficult or impossible effectively gerrymander more than a few seats for a party in general because of how that system works. Plus, as it stands now, if I vote for one party and the other party wins, my voice is effectively unheard, but with STV, if an area is closely split between both parties, chances are both parties get at least some representation. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/14 "2015-10-30T19:23:53Z")
Just get rid of districts and use a proportional representation voting system instead. No wasted votes or disenfranchised minorities. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2015, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/15 "2015-10-30T19:24:55Z")
> [@DinoR](#): > > Populations shift. Your plan would, over time, create unequal representation. Yes, both because the population within a state shifts and the number of seats a state has may change every ten years due to changes in population. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2015, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/16 "2015-10-31T00:49:46Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Seems to work okay on the state level in those states that have implemented such a measure, such as Arizona. It’s not as though the state legislatures themselves have “intimate information” about anything except their own districts. Has it actually accomplished anything one can specifically point to? I can’t find any specific accomplishments, although one could argue taking it out of the hands of legislatures is a good thing. As I mentioned before, it mostly seems to result in more intra-party fighting - but not necessarily better or more equitably represented districts. It’s also a very new system, and there’s more than a little concern one group or another will end up controlling it. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2015, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/17 "2015-10-31T00:53:37Z")
> [@Blaster\_Master](#): > > This is a simple optimization problem. What makes gerrymandered districts work is that they will be all kinds of bizarre shapes. So they can include various pockets of voters together. If it’s truly going to be representative by geography, then the districts need to be as geographically related (ie, as close together) as possible. The simplest way to do that is to just create an algorithm that includes various population density information and then it has to find the minimum length of district boundaries that satisfies that all districts have the same population within some tolerance. > > Some possible adjustments to this algorithm would be that it should probably have some sort of weighting on choosing certainl boundaries, notably natural boundaries (rivers/mountains) and pre-existing political boundaries (state/county lines). It should probably also try to keep the population density across a district as even as possible (to avoid splitting a city and mixing it with two rural areas rather than one district for the city and another for the rural). The short version of your argument is the word “compactness.” Courts do recognize the need for compactness in lawsuits about voting rights, though they also recognize that there are competing values, such as uniting “communities of interest” or satisfying the Voting Rights Act. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2015, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/18 "2015-10-31T01:11:03Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > There are thousands of districts to be reapportioned, complex rules which we have to adhere to, and wrangling over what it right and just. There are exactly 435 Congressional districts, though. Individual states may have to sort out gerrymandered state legislative districts on their own, but we could still do something about gerrymandering in the U.S. House of Representatives. > [@](#): > > The questions around minorities, or exactly hat constitutes an interest group, if huge. Furthermore, such a group realistically cannot be independent; it will almost certainly end up being heavily influenced by party politics. California got around this essentially by building in politics into the structyre of its board, and it’s already had some arguments over whether it was actually fair or not. (The main change there caused more internal fights per party, not more competition across party lines. And the long-term impact is unknown). There simply isn’t a mathematical formula for “fair” districts, and trying to do so can and does spark real issues for people. My understanding is that while gerrymandering is [literally about as old as the Republic](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering#/media/File:The_Gerry-Mander_Edit.png), it has gotten a lot worse because of the rise of sophisticated and powerful software that can draw up districts that are extremely precise in terms of having equal populations, but are also extremely precise in going in and looking at very, very detailed information about voting patters to maximally stick it to the party which isn’t in control of the re-districting process. Such software _could_ be put in the hands of a Federal Redistricting Commission to draw up districts which are extremely precise in terms of having equal populations, and are also geographically compact, and aren’t being deliberately drawn up to advance the interests of one party over another. As you say, there are certainly complications–e.g., do we deliberately seek to create “majority-minority” districts, or do we just draw “race blind” districts and let the chips fall where they may–but the current system is definitely being gamed and I think it’s a pretty serious problem for our political system, and one worth sitting down and trying to solve and not just throwing up our hands and saying “Well, it’s complicated, and anyhow we’ve always done it this way”. Based on [Article I, Section 4](http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_4_1.html), I don’t even know that a Federal Redistricting Commission would necessarily require a Constitutional Amendment: “…but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators”. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2015, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/19 "2015-10-31T02:34:07Z")
First ask: _What are the goals of districting? What does “fair” mean?_ If a state has ten districts and votes 50% Republican, it is possible to district 9-1 in favor of the Republicans … or 9-1 in favor of the Democrats. If you answer that 5-5 would obviously be best, why not just support proportional represention, or a “party list” system? The notion that a district should conform with geographic or demographic boundaries may have made sense when a 40-mile stagecoach ride was a major undertaking. It seems much less important these days, with some people commuting 60 miles to work, while their children are sex-texting to New Jersey. It is very unfortunate that America’s poltical opinions have changed from an ordinary bell-shaped curve to today’s stark and perverse bimodal curve. We get 51% of an electorate choosing someone the other 49% think is an idiot, crook or lunatic. Better districting will help that only a little. Major change is needed – perhaps multiple parties with proportional representation. Having said that: yes, egregious gerrymadering is malicious and contemptible. Politicians sometimes make pledges like “If any state does the following batshit-insane thing, then so will we.” Perhaps we need voters to take pledges “We will not vote for any party or politician who supports gerrymandering and similar mischief.” ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2015, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175/20 "2015-10-31T02:41:51Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > First ask: _What are the goals of districting? What does “fair” mean?_ > > If a state has ten districts and votes 50% Republican, it is possible to district 9-1 in favor of the Republicans … or 9-1 in favor of the Democrats. If you answer that 5-5 would obviously be best, why not just support proportional represention, or a “party list” system? One reason, to tie every Representative to a specific constituency, rather than an abstract share of his party’s supporters across the whole state. It doesn’t always work, but I have seen Reps be responsive to very local concerns in a way that seems unlikely if, in a populous state, they had no particular reason to care about this one county. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-election-district-boundaries-be-fixed-to-prevent-gerrymandering/736175.md?page=2)