Bonus points. If you think of something you would add to the new constitution.

  • Steve@communick.news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    The reason they’re gerrymander immune is that they only have two reps that aren’t up for election at the same time. If you award seats proportionally Californa will have roughly a dozen seats in the Senate. What would be the schedule and process for electing them all? Why not just use that process for a single legislature?

    • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      CA can have four at-large seats for the whole state up for election every two years.

      They would have the same long-view that existing senators have, and would not be internally less responsive than the current system

        • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Having all of Congress be at-large would essentially eliminate gerrymandering by just letting any majority in a state decide everything.

          I think thats the single worst change we could make, beating out term limits. ~Because if only lobbyists and staffers can be long-term careers we’d never have principled professional politicians, just short-term figureheads~

          • Steve@communick.news
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            What does “be at-large” mean?
            We’re talking about a kind of stagered multi-member districts.

              • Steve@communick.news
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                23 hours ago

                It’s not the only way. Larger multi-member districts also work.

                And while we’re re-writing the whole constitution, we could do lots of things. Like requiring algorithmically generated districts, to remove the possibility of any arbitrary bias.

                • DomeGuy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  23 hours ago

                  Algorithmically generated districts just give a sharper target, and allowing the existing systems to include multi-member districts just makes gerrymanding easier.

                  The only way to prevent gerrymandering is with either districts that don’t change (statewide), or changing the rules of the legislature so gerrymandering doesnt matter

                  My favorite potential fix is direct proxy voting. Tie vote weight in the legislature to how many citizens voted for you, and send either the top N vote-getters or everyone who gets at least X% of the votes cast to the legislature.

                  • Steve@communick.news
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    22 hours ago

                    Don’t know what you mean by sharper target.

                    You can pick a specific algorithm based on nothing but population, without any demographics. Thus impossible to gerrymander. The Shortest Splitline is one. Another I don’t remember the name of draws circles around the densest population centers as big as they need to be to include the required number of people.