Columnist shares my view inre: Repubs retaining House

[Dot Com]

I said this a few days ago about the census, req'd by the Constitution every decade, and the influence the party in power (at that time-the repubs) can have on redistricting:

Dana Milbank: Republican gerrymandering makes the difference in the House - The Washington Post

In a very real sense, the Republican House majority is impervious to the will of the electorate. Thanks in part to deft redistricting based on the 2010 Census, House Republicans may be protected from the vicissitudes of the voters for the next decade. For Obama and the Democrats, this is an ominous development: The House Republican majority is durable, and it isn’t necessarily sensitive to political pressure and public opinion.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I said this a few days ago about the census, req'd by the Constitution every decade, and the influence the party in power (at that time-the repubs) can have on redistricting:

Dana Milbank: Republican gerrymandering makes the difference in the House - The Washington Post

In a very real sense, the Republican House majority is impervious to the will of the electorate. Thanks in part to deft redistricting based on the 2010 Census, House Republicans may be protected from the vicissitudes of the voters for the next decade. For Obama and the Democrats, this is an ominous development: The House Republican majority is durable, and it isn’t necessarily sensitive to political pressure and public opinion.

Moron, the districts are drawn by local State Governments. SO heavy democratic states draw districts that favor democrats and heavy Republican States draw districts that favor Republicans. I notice you don't whine about Democrats doing it.

Most States have specific fixed laws on how to draw districts. For example in NC one must attempt to place a district in a single County or if multiple Counties then preferable both the Counties. EXCEPT when the fed gets involved in regards supposed fairness to minorities. Look up district 13 in NC.

The main culprit in gerrymandering in most States is by fudging the numbers. There is a high and low number for how many citizens can be in a district. One gerrymandering is to place the low numbers in heavy supporter districts and force the opposition into high number districts.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

When Democrats redrew districts, it was for the good of the country...and the planet

 

[Dot Com]

I said this a few days ago about the census, req'd by the Constitution every decade, and the influence the party in power (at that time-the repubs) can have on redistricting:

Dana Milbank: Republican gerrymandering makes the difference in the House - The Washington Post

In a very real sense, the Republican House majority is impervious to the will of the electorate. Thanks in part to deft redistricting based on the 2010 Census, House Republicans may be protected from the vicissitudes of the voters for the next decade. For Obama and the Democrats, this is an ominous development: The House Republican majority is durable, and it isn’t necessarily sensitive to political pressure and public opinion.

Moron, the districts are drawn by local State Governments. SO heavy democratic states draw districts that favor democrats and heavy Republican States draw districts that favor Republicans. I notice you don't whine about Democrats doing it.

Most States have specific fixed laws on how to draw districts. For example in NC one must attempt to place a district in a single County or if multiple Counties then preferable both the Counties. EXCEPT when the fed gets involved in regards supposed fairness to minorities. Look up district 13 in NC.

The main culprit in gerrymandering in most States is by fudging the numbers. There is a high and low number for how many citizens can be in a district. One gerrymandering is to place the low numbers in heavy supporter districts and force the opposition into high number districts.

link? I can also do w/o the name calling pfc

 

[Seawytch]

Gerrymandering has made it very difficult for Democrats to gain power in the House until the next Census rolls around. Democrats won the popular vote by something like a million votes and yet it didn't matter.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

In a very real sense, the Republican House majority is impervious to the will of the electorate. Thanks in part to deft redistricting based on the 2010 Census, House Republicans may be protected from the vicissitudes of the voters for the next decade. For Obama and the Democrats, this is an ominous development: The House Republican majority is durable, and it isn’t necessarily sensitive to political pressure and public opinion.

The bolded is actually the most troubling aspect of the situation, where a political party perceives it can function with impunity, that it cannot be compelled to answer to the voters.

 

[g5000]

 

[Jroc]

Gerrymandering has made it very difficult for Democrats to gain power in the House until the next Census rolls around. Democrats won the popular vote by something like a million votes and yet it didn't matter.

Popular vote? That doesn't mean anything. Should California and New York choose representatives for the rest of the country? That’s the most useless meaningless stat that’s been posted for a while here, almost silliness. Republicans control more states which why they have the edge

 

[whitehall]

Gerrymandering has been around as far back as 1812 when Mass governor Elbridge Gerry started the concept. The Washington Post gets hysterical about it only when republicans hold the majority in congress.

 

[Jroc]

In a very real sense, the Republican House majority is impervious to the will of the electorate. Thanks in part to deft redistricting based on the 2010 Census, House Republicans may be protected from the vicissitudes of the voters for the next decade. For Obama and the Democrats, this is an ominous development: The House Republican majority is durable, and it isn’t necessarily sensitive to political pressure and public opinion.

The bolded is actually the most troubling aspect of the situation, where a political party perceives it can function with impunity, that it cannot be compelled to answer to the voters.

Troubling? Thats how it was meant to be, house races are local

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Gerrymandering is a serious threat to our democratic process because the politicians are choosing their voters rather than the other way around and when you know you don't have to worry about losing, you don't have to care as much about what the voters want. It needs to stop and that includes racial gerrymandering as well.

In North Carolina, Republicans picked up three Congressional seats because of gerrymandering. In Illinois, Democrats picked up four seats because of gerrymandering. There were also smaller gains in other states for the same reason.

I don't really know what the alternative solution is, though. Some states like California now leave the drawing up to an independent commission, but I don't think that turned out much better when you look at the election results out there.

 

[Londoner]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/why-did-the-republicans-w_b_2110673.html
Although the Republicans won 55 percent of the House seats, they received less than half of the votes for members of the House of Representatives. Indeed, more than half-a-million more Americans voted for Democratic House candidates than for Republicans House candidates. There was no split-decision. The Democrats won both the presidential election and the House election. But the Republicans won 55 percent of the seats in the House. This seems crazy. How could this be?

This answer lies in the 2010 election, in which Republicans won control of a substantial majority of state governments. They then used that power to re-draw congressional district lines in such a way as to maximize the Republican outcome in the 2012 House election.

 

[blackhawk]

Just more of the it's only bad when the other side does it B.S. somehow I doubt this would be a major concern to Dana Milbank if it favored the Democrats.

 

[Dot Com]

This topic was of interest to me because some Rep said Repub's were legislating for the Primary meaning- they were legislating as if they were afraid of a primary challenge in the next election. They aren't concerned about challenges form the other party, the Rep said, because 75% of seats are considered "safe" due to gerrymandering.

Dont Taz Me Bro is right in that this is no way to run a democratic republic

 

[Jroc]

Geoffrey R. Stone: Why Did the Republicans Win the House?
Although the Republicans won 55 percent of the House seats, they received less than half of the votes for members of the House of Representatives. Indeed, more than half-a-million more Americans voted for Democratic House candidates than for Republicans House candidates. There was no split-decision. The Democrats won both the presidential election and the House election. But the Republicans won 55 percent of the seats in the House. This seems crazy. How could this be?

This answer lies in the 2010 election, in which Republicans won control of a substantial majority of state governments. They then used that power to re-draw congressional district lines in such a way as to maximize the Republican outcome in the 2012 House election.

The answer lays in the fact that California and New York etc...Don't run the country your post is for the simple minded you qualify

 

[Jroc]

This topic was of interest to me because some Rep said Repub's were legislating for the Primary meaning- they were legislating as if they were afraid of a primary challenge in the next election. They aren't concerned about challenges form the other party, the Rep said, because 75% of seats are considered "safe" due to gerrymandering.

Dont Taz Me Bro is right in that this is no way to run a democratic republic

The Constitution is a wonderful thing. Liberals would love a direct democracy, tyrannical government

 

[Seawytch]

Gerrymandering has made it very difficult for Democrats to gain power in the House until the next Census rolls around. Democrats won the popular vote by something like a million votes and yet it didn't matter.

Popular vote? That doesn't mean anything. Should California and New York choose representatives for the rest of the country? That’s the most useless meaningless stat that’s been posted for a while here, almost silliness. Republicans control more states which why they have the edge

It's not a meaningless statistic that a million more people voted for Democrats than Republicans and it does mean something that Gerrymandering goes on with such abandon in both Democratic and Republican Districts. If not for non partisan redistricting in many states, it could have been worse than it was.

Who Gerrymanders More, Democrats or Republicans?

 

[konradv]

Gerrymandering has made it very difficult for Democrats to gain power in the House until the next Census rolls around. Democrats won the popular vote by something like a million votes and yet it didn't matter.

Popular vote? That doesn't mean anything. Should California and New York choose representatives for the rest of the country? That’s the most useless meaningless stat that’s been posted for a while here, almost silliness. Republicans control more states which why they have the edge

Did you even look at the graph? Those are INTRA-state popular votes. It's got nothing to do with NY & CA.

 

[Jroc]

Gerrymandering has made it very difficult for Democrats to gain power in the House until the next Census rolls around. Democrats won the popular vote by something like a million votes and yet it didn't matter.

Popular vote? That doesn't mean anything. Should California and New York choose representatives for the rest of the country? That’s the most useless meaningless stat that’s been posted for a while here, almost silliness. Republicans control more states which why they have the edge

Did you even look at the graph? Those are INTRA-state popular votes. It's got nothing to do with NY & CA.

Doesn't matter, representatives are local not statewide. The chart says MI voted more for Democrats? We have a republican governor, a republican legislator and a republican majority on the Supreme Court here were the judges are elected by popular vote. We also defeated soundly a union effort to put collective bargaining in the constitution...ok so Detroit votes 90% for Democratic Party so what you want conservatives in California to have no voice at all? Electoral votes should be allotted based on congressional districts in my view

 

[BillyV]

This is Debbie Wasserman Schultz's district prior to redrawing the boundaries in 2010, carefully excluding any areas that might vote against her to the point that it's obvious. It seems the left only gets up in arms when the other side "cheats" better than they do!