Reply #11: Agree totally with this logic... [View All]

[cascadiance]

Also key is that if you do use a computer to decide these lines, that you come up with a determining algorithm that everyone feels is simple and fair. A computer algorithm can be used that is slanted to help one party's strengths more than another too. That set of rules should be argued and negotiated for some time before coming up with a final solution. We shouldn't do a "knee jerk" quick solution here.

The real goal for redistricting is to find a way to have representatives that are less interested in being self-serving and serving others than those who vote them into office. That they are accountable to US, and not to others, or a "manipulated minority" that control a given district. I still would argue that enacting "clean elections" campaign rules would do just as much, if not more to make them more accountable to us, by taking the "bribery money" out of campaigns that has them answer to others, and also reinforces more "lifetime" politicians that continue to serve a few that have that money. I think clean elections campaign legislation would do far more to help Democratic Party objectives than redistricting would as well, as its principles are more in line with those of the Democratic Party of representing everyone equally, not just those with more money and other powerful influence.

Let's vote this "knee jerk" and "cloaked" proposition down and work really hard on "clean elections" proposition for the near future in 2008, and then after we can really craft a more substantive redistricting proposition that is really well thought out and hopefully represents people of all parties and political persuasions fairly.