James Gilmour wrote:
If one of the requirements is to secure representation within a state for the
significant (racial) minorities within that state,
would it not make much more sense to start with a voting system that had such
an objective rather than engage in deliberate
distortion of district boundaries in an attempt to overcome the deficiencies of
a voting system designed for a completely different
purpose?
James Gilmour
Much more sense, yes. I suspect that James himself knows at least as
much as anyone on this list about political opposition to PR in general
-- that is, without regard to racial inequality. In addition, in the
U.S. some leaders of black and Latino organizations working on fair
representation of minority groups prefer single member districts to PR.
One reason is that plurality at-large (which is even more majoritarian
than any single-winner method) has long been used to prevent minority
candidates from winning in local elections. Since PR requires multi-seat
districts, minority group leaders have been suspicious of it even though
it uses very different voting rules and produces the opposite results.
A more pressing reason is historically low voter turnout among minority
voters. Racially gerrymandered single-member districts can compensate
for this, since a minority candidate can get elected even when turnout
is low. PR addresses this problem as well, but only in the long run as
turnout gradually increases because people learn that their votes really
count for something. Even then, PR by itself would not close the
remaining gap in turnout, just reduce it.
Wanting racially gerrymandered single-member districts instead of PR may
sound like an opportunist, even cynical, approach. It is not. It is a
realistic, practical response to generations of exclusionary white
control of election rules -- which is still not entirely in the past.
Racial disparities in voter turnout are reduced from what they used to
be, and in some places have all but disappeared. That should create
opportunities to bring together those who work for fair representation
of all political views and those who work for fair representation of
ethnic minorities. At the same time, the Supreme Court's increasingly
chaotic rulings on which racial gerrymanders are required and which are
prohibited have led it into a constitutional blind alley. PR may be the
only escape.
--Bob Richard
Brian Olson > Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 2:39 PM
As this isn't something I really want it's going to be hard to get
motivated to work it out.
That said I think the way to go about it is to make unbiased districts
by my current district, then pick one district with the highest
proportion of the desired minority to elevate and adjust all the
districts until that one has a majority of the desired minority.
Repeat one district at a time until there are enough (some states
require two or three I think).
On Jul 16, 2009, at 6:46 PM, Raph Frank wrote:
Are you considering updating the algorithm to include majority
minority districts?
This would potentially decrease the legal issues with using it for
districting.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.19/2245 - Release Date: 07/18/09 05:57:00
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
--
Bob Richard
Executive Vice President
Californians for Electoral Reform
P.O. Box 235
Kentfield, CA 94914-0235
415-256-9393
http://www.cfer.org
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
