5 ms·
Gerrymandering gets attention because it is malicious misrepresentation, but unintentional misrepresentation is just as bad. Voting is a flawed system that will
by JDDunn9 11y ago
Gerrymandering gets attention because it is malicious misrepresentation, but unintentional misrepresentation is just as bad. Voting is a flawed system that will always give some voters more voice than others.
- The people who voted for the loser will not be represented (one of the reasons minorities are underrepresented).
- The need of local representation is illusory. Make a list of all the political issues you care about. How many of them are local?
- The effect of a bi-cameral legislature means that in the Senate, voters in Wyoming have over 60x the voting power of voters in California.
- Voting itself is irrational under a cost/benefit analysis. So by definition, the least rational citizens are picking candidates.
- Name recognition is huge for elections, meaning money will always effect elections.
- Candidates suffer self-selection bias (as well as others). To run, you need to be good at public speaking (fear of public speaking is one of the most common fear in America), look a certain way (no tattoos or piercings allowed), and have a lust for power.
Representation is a math problem. The only solution is random sampling. Replace Congress with 1 house made up of 1,000 randomly sampled citizens and we will have true representation.
- mannykannot 11y ago> Gerrymandering gets attention because it is malicious misrepresentation, but unintentional misrepresentation is just as bad. From an ethics point of view, the intent makes gerrymandering worse than unintentional misrepresentation. If you are not moved by ethical considerations, there is still the purely practical matter that the intent makes it much harder to fix.
- randcraw 11y agoGerrymandering applies as much to local school, county, and state districts as it does federal districts. At the school and county and state level, all issues are local. In fact, most legislation that has a large tangible effect on your kids, your home, and your job occurs locally, not federally.
- JDDunn9 11y agoThe Federal government makes decisions for the entire nation. State-specific issues should not make their way into Congress. State issues are likewise at the state level. There is no reason to make sure two counties are represented, since they won't get separate laws/taxes. All that matters is that the people being affected by the laws are equally represented. That cannot happen with districting.
- panglott 11y agoYou'd get a good sample, but a poor representative. If a group of people is attempting to choose a person to advocate their interests, they'll choose the person best at advocacy, who is likely atypical in a variety of ways. Because typically people are bad at public speaking, rhetoric, bargaining, and other means of advocating their interests.
- JDDunn9 11y agoNot everyone has to address Congress. As long as each valid viewpoint has at least one advocate, I trust people could figure out the best option. Less bargaining means fewer riders and pork, which is a good thing. I'm fine if only the best ~10% of Congress wrote/debated laws and the rest simply voted. Also, remember we are comparing against the current Congress, which only represents the wealthiest among us. Pretty low bar.