General Discussion

treestar

(82,383 posts)

60. Then start a movement in each state

Reply to Recursion (Reply #6)

Mon Sep 30, 2013, 06:05 PM

Sep 2013

To have at large districts. That might work.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do we need a constitutional amendment to end gerrymandering? [View all] MoonRiver Sep 2013 OP

Yes we do shenmue Sep 2013 #1

Yeah, but good luck getting that to happen. Tidy Cat Sep 2013 #2

Right. Its inherently a state issue, elleng Sep 2013 #13

We need to end House districts. They aren't even in the Constitution. Recursion Sep 2013 #3

Well, how do we go about making that happen? MoonRiver Sep 2013 #5

And there's the problem. Districting is controlled entirely by state legislatures Recursion Sep 2013 #6

Ok, so that is what needs amending. MoonRiver Sep 2013 #12

As I said, good luck with that. Tidy Cat Sep 2013 #15

Then start a movement in each state treestar Sep 2013 #60

That is why I have been screaming for folks to get out and vote in state and local elections. kelliekat44 Sep 2013 #64

I'd be fine with just doing away with the House... Drunken Irishman Sep 2013 #36

Your understanding of our goverment is badly in error. GreenStormCloud Sep 2013 #43

There is an interesting underlying point there though mythology Sep 2013 #48

See my post # 51. N/T GreenStormCloud Sep 2013 #52

They won more seats. They didn't win more votes. Drunken Irishman Sep 2013 #50

We are not a parliamentary system. GreenStormCloud Sep 2013 #51

And? Drunken Irishman Sep 2013 #58

We have made amendment, never a rewrite. GreenStormCloud Sep 2013 #59

I never said it would happen. Doesn't mean it shouldn't, tho. Drunken Irishman Sep 2013 #70

The best solution would be proportionally appointed reps Blaukraut Sep 2013 #4

I like the "party slate" idea Recursion Sep 2013 #9

...but then people get upset about "the Party Bosses"... brooklynite Sep 2013 #17

And about 95% of the world's democracies seem fine with the idea (nt) Recursion Sep 2013 #49

Proportional is the way to go. NuclearDem Sep 2013 #26

100% needed but how? Freddie Sep 2013 #7

Districts are mentioned nowhere in the Constitution Recursion Sep 2013 #11

The apportionment of Representatives per State is, though. pinto Sep 2013 #30

OK, but how do we enforce it? Savannahmann Sep 2013 #8

There's a variety of ways jeff47 Sep 2013 #23

Representation by County PADemD Sep 2013 #37

First the Constitutional issue. Savannahmann Sep 2013 #40

Yes, yes yes. Cleita Sep 2013 #10

There already is one - it's called the 14th Amendment jberryhill Sep 2013 #14

Good idea. With computerization, gerrymandering effects are worse than ever. JEFF9K Sep 2013 #16

Somebody has to do something. MadrasT Sep 2013 #18

Lol... jberryhill Sep 2013 #28

Racking my brains to come up with something a constituent in Upper Darby MadrasT Sep 2013 #55

Yes, but you have no change of getting one. Donald Ian Rankin Sep 2013 #19

This would need to pass in the very state legislatures that ... surrealAmerican Sep 2013 #20

I don't believe it's necessary. Blanks Sep 2013 #21

"One man, one vote" was enforced by Supreme Court decision starroute Sep 2013 #22

gerrymandering is a problem but not the only one dsc Sep 2013 #24

No. We need to shoot every single Republicans who *THINKS* gerrymandering is a wonderful idea. Old Navy Sep 2013 #25

Isn't gerrymandering a positive for minority representation? dkf Sep 2013 #27

If you like being held hostage by the minority, which Cleita Sep 2013 #29

What does the CBC say? dkf Sep 2013 #31

This message was self-deleted by its author MoonRiver Sep 2013 #32

I don't know. I suspect they are fine with it. Cleita Sep 2013 #34

No, yet I feel we need an independent oversight group to handle apportionment of Representatives. pinto Sep 2013 #33

Politicians will never write a law Mr.Bill Sep 2013 #35

It wouldn't work. There is no clear cut line on what is and what isn't gerrymandering. JVS Sep 2013 #38

No. It's a political process and "gerrymandering" is very subjective RB TexLa Sep 2013 #39

opening a constitutional convention would be very dangerous. grasswire Sep 2013 #41

Maybe - but shouldn't we gerrymander it back first? Whiskeytide Sep 2013 #42

Just a reminder, Democrats have gerrymandered too. GreenStormCloud Sep 2013 #44

I don't think it is right for either party to do it. MoonRiver Sep 2013 #45

Agreed, but in your OP you blamed only the Republicans. N/T GreenStormCloud Sep 2013 #46

That's the big issue right now. MoonRiver Sep 2013 #47

K&R cprise Sep 2013 #53

I don't know davidpdx Sep 2013 #54

We'd need 50 state battles as well. n/t Egalitarian Thug Sep 2013 #56

You Beat Them At Their Own Game...On The State & Local Level... KharmaTrain Sep 2013 #57

k&r...it's a blatant manipulation of voters will. spanone Sep 2013 #61

If we could get such an amendment ratified we wouldn't need such an amendment onenote Sep 2013 #62

I would love if we could do it. gopiscrap Sep 2013 #63

How about a constitutional amendment to end Republicans? kentauros Sep 2013 #65

the entire thing desperately needs an overhaul ecstatic Sep 2013 #66

I can't imagine how such an amendment could be worded, without becoming meaningless pablum struggle4progress Sep 2013 #67

Let's have one. lonestarnot Sep 2013 #68

Set up federal control over election to federal offices. The States can kiranon Sep 2013 #69