Skip to Navigation
Skip to Main Content
Skip to Related Content
The Supreme Court's Gerrymandering Case Is A Debate About Threats To American Democracy
October 4, 2017
Read Full Article
Sign in to post a message.
There is no need to require election maps to be drawn so as to make elections more competitive. What we do need however is a system that ensures ALL election maps are drawn in such a way as to prevent INTENTIONALLY disenfranchising people. If you just happen to live in a district that votes 90% Democrat, then your vote will never count for anything, but so long as the the district map has been defined substantially by long established boundaries - city limits, county boundaries, rivers etc, then I see no problem. It does also form a sense of community within the district. We also need the maps to remain essentially unchanging over time UNLESS there are substantial population number changes.
Ultimately we need a non-partisan body drawing the maps following guidelines that BOTH parties accept and respect, even if they don't universally like them.
I am a democrat in Indiana and I haven't been represented in congress in decades.
Gerrymandering = election rigging. Plain and simple.
It sad that we even have to debate this, everyone knows gerrymandering is wrong and shouldn't be allowed. It just shows how eroded US ethics and principles have become.
They also need to take the money out of the elections. But that would take money out of their pockets as well.
In Wisconsin reps took 60% of seats while getting 47% of the vote. How is that democracy?
Democracy and USA have nothing in common any longer......................we are a corporate run society and headed backwards economically into the 19th century again. I must admit though, the poorer Republican voters kinda deserve what they get from Republicans.
The shame is the theft of elections by a minority of voters as the GOP have twisted all the election laws and even the appointment of Supreme Court Justices.
DEE CHI TOWN
GIVE THE PEOPLE BACK OUR VOICE!!! CROOKS
In conclusion, the way things are today the Dems have to win between 106% and 110% of the vote just to break even overall. In red states it is much worse.
The Conservative court has already given away the country with their allowing unlimited and anonymous gifts to PACs.
The country votes as paid ads push them to vote. If you are not immensely rich or have a war-chest of 10's of millions behind you, there is no chance the public will even know you're running for office.
As one pundit said, Freedom of Speech is only for those who own a printing press.
So now the only and final step for the rich is to minimize the impact of the minority vote with their creative boundries and anti-voter-fraud shenanigans.
They already own the country -- it's just that having their winner lose the popular vote by multiple-millions is embarassing and may serve as a rallying point for popular uprising. Gotta keep voters ignorant and in the dark -- like the rightwing keeps their wimmen.
Roberts is a staunch conservative Republican with all the ideology attached. He is simply trying to legalize what the Republicans have. He, Alito, Thomas and especially Gorsuch will twist themselves into a veritable legal pretzel justifying whatever they think benefits republicans.
Wisconsin was once a tourist's paradise with its slogan being "Escape to Wisconsin." Since the gerrymandering has allowed a Koch fueled Republican takeover, tourists stay away and residents are leaving in droves.