Objective Redistricting



One of Arnold's most significant (and controversial) reform proposals is the idea of putting redistricting in the hands of a non-partisan panel of retired judges. However, even some commentators who dislike gerrymandering are concerned that this reform might lead to "Arniemandering" -- that is, giving the governor too much control over the outcome (by picking judges who agree with his biases).

Personally, I think such fears are overblown, though not entirely unfounded. Fortunately, there's a better way. Rather than trying to micromanage the process, why not simply state the desired criteria that redistricting should satisfy, and choose the one that best meets those criteria? Let the legislature, governor, academics, citizens -- heck, anyone who wants to -- submit a plan; as long as we have fair, unbiased criteria for determining the winner, it doesn't matter where it came from, only that it reflects the nature of the population rather than the desires of politicians.

I've been discussing this idea of objective (re)districting with my friends on the election-methods mailing list. Its not perfect, but it should produce much better outcomes than leaving districting in the hands of politicians, which to me is well worth the price of learning a little math. Let me know what you think.

Posted: Sun - January 9, 2005 at 06:02 PM        

©