The dilemma, of course, is that we have the POLITICIANS “educating” the children. If the children are kept uneducated, the politicians keep the power.

Is it any wonder that our public education system is so horrible?

“I know no safe depositary of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

It’s good for me because I’m a Democrat, and the suburban/exurban voters on the fringe between metropolitan and urban interests are breaking my way right now. But I have enough rural folk in my family that I find that sort of redistricting a little bit distasteful.

We will have Census data giving populations of every existing voting district, and the boundaries of those districts. It should not be that difficult to develop a computer program to create 11 congressional districts with equal population (within a certain margin) with the minimum total perimeter. This will create compact, non-partisan districts.

We need to keep pushing our elected representatives on this. It’s just too important an issue.

AEM – take that up with your Congresscritter. Let’s not get off track – we’re talking about redistricting here.

Will wonders never cease?

The law was meant to remedy the problem of having states with a majority party elect all of their representatives at large, so that party wins all the elections. Districts do not change that problem if there is a uniform distribution. Massachusetts, for instance, has 10 Democratic congressmen and NO Republicans. Are 95% of the people in Massachusetts Democrats? In Virginia, we have only three of eleven congressmen who are Democrats. Is only 30% of the state Democratic?

The solution, as proposed by one of Clinton’s unconfirmed nominees, is to have at-large elections, and as many votes as seats in congress. Thus, the Libertarians could all cast their 11 votes for one person, and if they total more than 9% of the vote, he is a congressman.

Furthermore, her solution avoids the problem of non-representation. For instance, could a Democrat really write to his Republican congressman and expect that congressman to push a Democratic bill that voter wants? He could write to another congressman, another Democrat, but why should he listen to a voter who is not even in his district?

When all are elected at-large with proportional voting, a voter will have SEVERAL congressmen of his party to whom he could write. (Obviously, this does not change things in single-district states, but neither did districting.)

Federal laws can be changed, too.

http://www.fairvote.org/?page=1724

Self-fulfilling prophecy, anyone?

Are you high?

Voters in the suburban communites between Dale City and Bolling Green and folks in Hampton and Newport News are not even close to being “geographic communities of interest.”

When the next redistricting is done I do hope it is about “giving the voters choices” and not about building 60/40 safe seats and uncontested elections.

Yeah. No-one saw that coming, huh?

I doubt Deeds and Moran will re-introduce their bills.

The congressional districs should be eliminated, and all congressmen elected at-large.

I was not as much opposed to political gerrymandering, it s when it took all sense of geography out of the equation that did it for me.

Hampton split into 3 congressional districts. The 1st spanning from NN/Hampton to Prince William.

The 3rd CD from Norfolk to Richmond.

Throwing Mathews County into the 6th SD seems like a what the heck kind of effort.

I hope it happens and how much fun it will b to have a whole host of competitive elections instead of one oer here and one over there.

BTW…Good job on OTR