Obama/Holder group NDRC pumps $250K into Michigan redistricting campaign

[RandySF]

A national Democratic redistricting reform group headed by former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is pumping $250,000 into a Michigan ballot campaign to create a citizen commission for redrawing political district boundaries.

The National Redistricting Action Fund, a non-profit affiliate of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, announced the contribution Wednesday.

Michigan is among the majority of states that allow politicians to draw legislative and congressional maps every decade, a process that has been controlled by Republicans during the past two cycles.

The system allows “partisan gerrymandering” that “leads to dysfunction, polarization, and the legitimate belief held by average Americans that, for them, our political system just does not work,” said Holder, who worked for Democratic President Barack Obama.

“Regardless of party affiliation, that’s not good for our democracy,” he said in a statement. “Maps that are drawn by a truly independent commission will help put men and women into government who are more responsive to the people they are supposed to represent."


The national funding could be a significant boost for the Michigan group, which used a grassroots volunteer network to collect petition signatures but has since added paid campaign infrastructure. Voters Not Politicians had $616,169 in cash reserves as of July 20, according to its latest campaign finance report.


https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/09/12/national-dem-250-000-voters-politcians/1277511002/


NDRC





https://democraticredistricting.com


VOTERS NOT POLITICIANS





https://www.votersnotpoliticians.com

[Garrett78]

1. It'd be really interesting to see where the 435 district boundaries would be if...

...they were all determined by an impartial group, or by a computer. Densely populated metro areas cause somewhat of a dilemma, I would think, in terms of establishing fair districts. Densely populated metro areas are ripe for gerrymandering.

Some have made much of how oddly shaped districts tend to be, but that's unavoidable.

[murielm99]

2. The Civil Rights Act has to be taken into account

when districts are drawn. Districts cannot be drawn by a computer or by a group who would work to make sure minorities are so diluted in a district that they have no representation. It might be easy in places like Iowa, or Montana, or Vermont. I believe that other places, with significant minority populations and population concentrations in general, need human input.

[Garrett78]

3. To be precise, it's the Voting Rights Act that mandates race be taken into account in some states.

And I absolutely agree with that mandate, which is why I say oddly shaped districts are unavoidable.

A computer could be programmed to take numerous factors, including race, into account. But whether done by a computer or committee, both packing (concentrating) and cracking (diluting) must be avoided in order to be fair/just. This means there will be district lines that cut right through neighborhoods.

It's not just dilution but also concentration that we want to avoid. Where's the line between the two extremes? That's not so straightforward.

Since every district is supposed to have approximately the same number of people (around 750,000 according to the current US population), and since we want every district to be as diverse or representative as can be, drawing fair district boundaries is not a simple task.

Of course, I would argue that we need more districts since 750,000 is too many for a single Representative, but that's a whole other discussion.