North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by seanmcdirmid on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @11:18AM (#16116116)

Independent non-partisan redistricting commissions solve this problem easily. But only a few states (Washington, California among the bigger ones) are brave enough to go through with it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by Amezarak on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @11:29AM (#16116276)

There are very few independent, non-partisan human beings. Simply changing who does the redistricting and the means bu which they are chosen to do so doesn't solve the problem, because the people who are interested in and chosen to do the task are always going to have political views.

Even having bipartisan commisions doesn't solve the problem. Parties will work together to secure incumbents.

It basically comes down to a who watches the watchers issue.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by seanmcdirmid on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @11:35AM (#16116340)

No, it actually works. When California went through with it, the “other side” actually gained seats. It takes the drama out of redistricting, and districts are of a much regular shape. Of course, isn’t perfect, but a sucks way less solution is much better than a sucks way more one.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by dragonwriter on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @02:49PM (#16118318)

> It takes the drama out of redistricting,

The California process may produce better results on average by some measure (and is emphatically more transparent) compared to legislative redistricting, but it emphatically vastly increased the drama associated with redistricting.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by seanmcdirmid on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @03:44PM (#16118895)

How so? Californians seem really happy with it, all things considered.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by dragonwriter on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @03:52PM (#16118978)

Largely, the transparency, which meant public hearings with lots of involvement from interest groups, with accusations (which turned out to be true) that both major political parties were actively working behind the scenes to coordinate those groups to bend the process to their partisan advantage, and all kinds of related drama that didn't happen with legislative districting.

But, yes, I think people are mostly satisfied with the results, which is a separate issue from drama in the process.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by dragonwriter on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @02:45PM (#16118281)

California has a multipartisan redistricting commission consisting of equal numbers of Democrats, Republicans, and members of neither major party; it does not have a nonpartisan redistricting commission.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by seanmcdirmid on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @03:44PM (#16118890)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistricting_commission

California is listed as "Non-partisan; super-majority (majority of each group) needed", you can argue that Wiki is wrong about this, but thats the source I'm using.

Wiki further clarifies its use of "non partisan":

Non-partisan means that either, a) the partisan makeup of the commission is not specified beforehand, or b) a substantial portion (i.e. more than one) of the membership of the commission is reserved for political independents or members of so-called Third Parties.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:North Carolina Is Ordered to Redraw Its Congressional Map by dragonwriter on Wednesday January 10, 2018 @04:00PM (#16119030)

That's a kind of odd use of “non-partisan”—both (a) and (b), actually, since (a) would allow a commission entirely of political appointees of the sitting governor, without in-law specification of partisan makeup, to be a “nonpartisan” commission, and (b) allows a commission where appointment is specifically slots by party and most seats assigned to the two major parties to be non-partisan.

But, yes, by that odd definition, the California system is non-partisan under (b).

[ Parent | on HN ]