[EL] More on How Gerrymandering Did Not Cause the Shutdown

Fri Oct 11 08:06:29 PDT 2013

In addition to Rob's critique, it's also useful to remember that for 
complex systems like governance, phenomena rarely have a single cause.  
And while there may certainly be value in aiming at the single largest 
causal factor, there may also be value in aiming at contributory causes 
that offer substantial leverage toward improving, even if not 
perfecting, outcomes.  (Whether any given policy improves outcomes, or 
is worth the cost to get there, is a separate question.)

For many Americans, it's probably safe to say that lack of exercise will 
not be the "real" cause of death.  That doesn't mean that those 
interested in health should ignore exercise entirely.

-- 
Justin Levitt
Associate Professor of Law
Loyola Law School | Los Angeles
919 Albany St.
Los Angeles, CA  90015
213-736-7417
justin.levitt at lls.edu
ssrn.com/author=698321

On 10/11/2013 7:48 AM, Rob Richie wrote:
> I find it remarkable that the debate over this issue (such as the 
> items linked by Rick below) narrow our choices seemingly to three:
>
> * Many non-academic editorial writer sorts will suggest gerrymandering 
> is the key reason for safe congressional seats and partisan bias.The 
> 2011 redistricting was an appalling example. So let's push for 
> commissions - -we'll worry about how those commissions can juggle 
> competing criteria  later.
>
> * A lot of academics (if not all) answer that gerrymandering isn't the 
> real reason for safe seats nor partisan bias. Safe seats and partisan 
> bias indeed are a core problem in our current politics, but they are 
> more related to growing polarization and the "big sort." There's no 
> real reform solution, so just wait it out over the next couple decades.
>
> * Gerrymandering and open primaries aren't the problem, so blame goes 
> to James Madison and the Constitution. It's time to leapfrog the 
> structure of government we have in every state and a majority of our 
> big cities, accept the reality of our parliamentary-type parties, and 
> enact a parliamentary system (ideally with a list system of 
> proportional representation).
>
> But.... there's another possibility that FairVote believes will get 
> more and more attention. Our argument basically is this.
>
> * Electoral rules ARE the core reason for the shutdown politics and 
> the clashing mandate of an electorate that in 2012 elected Barack 
> Obama by nearly five million votes and also elected a House  majority 
> from congressional districts that mostly went to anti-Obamacare Mitt 
> Romney. See my prophetic "clashing mandate" analysis from Nov. 20, 2012:
> http://www.fairvote.org/clashing-mandates-and-the-role-of-voting-structures 
> <http://www.fairvote.org/clashing-mandates-and-the-role-of-voting-structures#.UlgOhNJ1ySo>
>
> * But the electoral rule to blame is the statute mandating use of 
> single-member districts for the House. We had multi-seat House 
> districts as recently as the 1960s, and in the early decades of the 
> nation, more than a quarter of House  Members were elected in 
> multi-member districts. Many states still use multi-member districts, 
> and a few decades ago, more than half of state legislators represented 
> multi-member districts. There's nothing magic about single-member 
> districts. See a U-Richmond law review article my colleague and I 
> wrote this year addressing this history:
> http://www.fairvote.org/fairvote-s-2014-congressional-analysis 
> <http://www.fairvote.org/fairvote-s-2014-congressional-analysis#.UlgLqtJ1ySo>
>
> * We have some 100 localities already using non-winner-take-all system 
> systems based on voting for candidates (not parties) in multi-seat 
> districts We have an important model of a non-winner-take-all system 
> in state legislative elections in Illinois' experience with cumulative 
> voting that most wise-heads in the state strongly wish was back in 
> place for sensible reasons. See this summary of the case that was the 
> product of a 2001 commission co-chaired by former Republican governor 
> Jim Edgar and former Democratic House Member and federal judge Abner 
> Mikva:
> http://www.fairvote.org/assets/2012-Redistricting/IllinoisCumulativeVoting.pdf
>
> * With such a system done nationally in larger districts of no more 
> than five seats (with our choice being ranked choice voting, or the 
> "single transferable vote"), we would have shared representation by 
> both major parties in every single district in every state with at 
> least three seats. With the system used in the primary as well, 
> nominees would be more broadly represented, helping to ensure 
> regularly representation of the left, center and right of the 
> spectrum. See hard numbers and maps here 
> (http://www.fairvote.org/fair-voting-solution 
> <http://www.fairvote.org/fair-voting-solution#.UlgMH9J1ySo>),
>
> * We have a confluence of interests who would directly  benefit from 
> such a change in congressional elections, which could be done by law. 
> That list includes those who want more racial minorities to have a 
> secure way to elect preferred candidates, want more women to run and 
> win, and want all voters to have more choice and better 
> representation. Democrats have an obvious self-interest, but so do 
> Republicans who think their party would be stronger in statewide races 
> if able to compete in all districts.
>
> This last will be the test of whether are nation can debate meaningful 
> change and actually act on it We expect to see a bill in Congress 
> soon, and stay tuned for our update of the fair representation 
> flashmap and associated analyses this month and check out our new 
> video at http://www.Reform2020.com.
>
> But whenever someone says /redistricting /isn't the reason for 
>  problem, keep in mind that we can make a rather airtight case that 
> the problem is /districting/ - -and that tested reforms of such 
> districts are a heckuva lot easier and more consistent with our 
> nation's history than a parliamentary system and a whole lot more 
> satisfying than doing nothing.
>
> Rob.
>
>
> ############
>
>
>     More on How Gerrymandering Did Not Cause the Shutdown
>     <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55898>
>
> Posted on October 10, 2013 9:05 pm 
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55898> by Rick Hasen 
> <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Seth Masket 
> <http://mischiefsoffaction.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-complicated-relationship-between.html>
>
> McCarthy, Poole, and Rosenthal 
> <http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-09/gerrymandering-didn-t-cause-the-shutdown.html>
>
> -- 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "Respect for Every Vote and Every Voice"
>
> Rob Richie
> Executive Director, FairVote
> 6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 610
> Takoma Park, MD 20912
> rr at fairvote.org <mailto:rr at fairvote.org> (301) 270-4616 
> <tel:%28301%29%20270-4616>
>
> Website: http://www.fairvote.org
> Advocacy: http://www.fairvoteaction.org
> Campaigns: http://www.promoteourvote.com 
> http://www.representation2020.com http://www.instantrunoff.com 
> http://www.nationalpopularvote.com
>
> /*Donations appreciated*/: Consider making a tax-deductible donation 
> at http://fairvote.org/donate. (For federal employees, our Combined 
> Federal Campaign number is 10132.) Thank you!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20131011/b8608cc5/attachment.html>