←back to thread

491 points anigbrowl | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.615s | source
Show context
parpfish ◴[] No.43981035[source]
Tangent:

I’ve often thought that it would be great to let people design their own political districts to reduce gerrymandering

At the polling place you’d get a map with your census tract and then be asked “which two or three adjacent tracts are most similar to your community”. Eventually you’d end up with some sort of gram matrix for tract-to-tract affinity, and then you could apply some algorithmic segmentation.

Two problems:

- this is far too complex for most voters to understand, much less trust, what’s happening

- the fact it’s “algorithmic” would give a sheen of pseudo objectivity, but the selection of the actual algorithm would still allow political infouence over boundaries

replies(7): >>43981047 #>>43981067 #>>43981210 #>>43981302 #>>43981389 #>>43982345 #>>43994001 #
abdullahkhalids ◴[] No.43981067[source]
Gerrymandering is much more favorable in a FPTP system of elections than other types of elections. Winner takes all really incentives doing whatever it takes to keep winning.

Instead of your quite complex idea of segmentation, entities should simply move to a slightly more complex election system than FPTP, but which has reduced incentive for gerrymandering. For example, systems that give parties some seats based on the percentage of votes they get in the whole country/province etc.

replies(1): >>43984671 #
1. parpfish ◴[] No.43984671[source]
I agree that ftpt sucks, but there’s still a need to determine boundaries for various administrative district to handle geographically dependent issues.
replies(1): >>43987239 #
2. abdullahkhalids ◴[] No.43987239[source]
My country has a psuedo algorithm in law that guides how to draw these boundaries. It basically forces each constituency to be convex. There is still some freedom in the process, and there is still some gerrymandering, but harder than in some other countries.