tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post6996857674011881296..comments2024-03-26T05:22:08.256-04:00Comments on Frontloading HQ: What if Obama Won the Electoral College 1265-599?*Josh Putnamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06301836432446874997noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-38765289475435693812009-09-18T15:04:49.657-04:002009-09-18T15:04:49.657-04:00Jack,
You're right. That's where the race ...Jack,<br />You're right. That's where the race to the top (in terms of the number of seats) begins, I think. You start looking for and incorporating those exceptions and then suddenly you're up to 1761 House seats. The standard district in that case would be made up of a shade under 175,000 citizens (given a total US population of about 307 million people). <br /><br />To me, though, that is a lot of extra seats to get to that goal. It is funny that I was covering malapportionment in my American government classes today. I mentioned this case and then asked the classes how many seats they thought it would take to even districts out nationwide. I think my first class was still asleep. All I could get out of them was, "25." My second class came up with, "a bunch." When asked to define a bunch the answer was, "about 300." Not too far off from what would be needed to get to that 932 figure. Both classes were astounded when I brought out the 1761 number. <br /><br />Rob,<br />Other than mentioning "metrics" -- an oft revisited concept in his <a href="http://frontloading.blogspot.com/2009/04/live-blog-uga-getzen-lecture-featuring.html" rel="nofollow">Getzen Lecture</a> at UGA -- I think you covered most of the Gingrich bases.<br /><br />I'll have more on the former Speaker in a separate post shortly.Josh Putnamhttp://frontloading.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-21731933590448723042009-09-18T07:53:38.291-04:002009-09-18T07:53:38.291-04:00Matt and Jack,
An easier solution would be to jus...Matt and Jack,<br /><br />An easier solution would be to just redraw state boundaries every 10 years on the basis of the census. Today you live in South Dakota; tomorrow your are incorporated into Minnesota. To get politics out of the mix, you subcontract state lines and Congressional districts to someone like UPS or FedEX who develop meaningful territories for delivery routes. OR you could carve out virtual Congressional districts that bring together like-minded constituents from across the country so every citizen who has at least 500,000 constituents with similar beliefs will have a representative in Congress. You could subcontract these divisions to Netflix or Amazon.com. Of course, Josh, this would mean electronic voting and turning every public library into polling stations for those without direct computer access. Each library computer would need to be equipped with a card scanner so you could use your Master Card, Visa or Discover to verify citizenship. Or have I adapted too many of Newt Gingrich's ideas and slipped over the edge?Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-69520844564117463122009-09-18T06:56:54.624-04:002009-09-18T06:56:54.624-04:00But then how could you handle a state like South D...But then how could you handle a state like South Dakota, with a population of about 800,000? No way to divide that into districts anywhere close to 525,000. So the extra districts are needed if we want to equalize everything.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04365194237710177589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-33560338600867995712009-09-17T20:50:53.602-04:002009-09-17T20:50:53.602-04:00Good points, all.
The small state bias would ceas...Good points, all.<br /><br />The small state bias would cease to exist, plain and simple. It would have to to make room for all the new urban districts. If you use Wyoming's population (and thus district) as a baseline and try to fit every district, nationwide, to around that population (approx. 525,000) that would require only an additional 80 seats or so (around 510), so I don't know where all the extra seats are coming from.<br /><br />As Matt points out, most of this is because state boundaries would prevent certain divisions from being possible. Still, adding 400-1200 additional seats to rectify the issue seems superfluous.<br /><br />...but I haven't done <i>all</i> the math.<br /><br />And yeah, as Rick Hasen said in the link, this case likely has absolutely no chance of going anywhere. Fun to think about, though.Josh Putnamhttp://frontloading.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-78392322268370822752009-09-17T18:38:10.647-04:002009-09-17T18:38:10.647-04:00All we need it 1000+ more House members looking fo...All we need it 1000+ more House members looking for publicity. No thanks. Let's keep it at 435 members.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379192575044761972noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-2412250240226519472009-09-17T17:46:27.022-04:002009-09-17T17:46:27.022-04:00Josh asks: "why is it that we don't insis...Josh asks: "why is it that we don't insist upon this equality of representation across states?"<br /><br />The answer has nothing to do with any compromise. It's because House seats are only assigned at the state level, and can't cross state boundaries. The only way to make population really equivalent between CDs is to allow districts to span states - this of course will never happen, but since it won't, there is no way to guarantee equivalent populations with discrete numbers of districts. (Hey, we had delegates with 1/2 a vote, why not congressmen).<br /><br />The other big issue is that increasing the number of congressmen in no way solves the problem - it makes it better, but it doesn't solve it. On what legal grounds can a court rule that, differences of 200,000 are unconstitutional, but 100,000 are OK? Sounds like a pretty frivolous lawsuit to me, since there is no remedy which makes any sense.Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02126730290750804530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-2003886479858784652009-09-17T16:45:13.822-04:002009-09-17T16:45:13.822-04:00well, california is an intresting case hispanic nu...well, california is an intresting case hispanic numbers are rising as white numbers are droping (leaving to othe states) California will become more hispanic then white in about 20 yearsSimple thoughtshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05735246568110010553noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719252574677567989.post-60035565957096817322009-09-17T16:13:34.027-04:002009-09-17T16:13:34.027-04:00Such a move would also almost entirely eliminate t...Such a move would also almost entirely eliminate the small state bias in the electoral college.Arbitristahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14090122079098885856noreply@blogger.com