As I have hinted at before, there is no easy way to
define fair redistricting. District maps may have strange shapes, or unusual racial
demographics, but these things alone do not give clear criteria for defining a
fair system.
This is where philosophy comes in. To come up with
fairness criteria, I must answer questions like: “Should communities of
interest (e.g. African-American communities in the South) be separated among
many districts, or kept together in just a few?”, “Should counties be seen as
individual communities?”, and “Should redistricting be used as a tool to
protect the will of political minorities?”
I will develop answers to these questions (based on my
own opinion) by studying various political philosophies.
Hi Giacomo,
ReplyDeleteAs of right now, do you mind sharing where you stand on these issues? I'd be interested to see if your viewpoint remains the same, or changes at all after studying different political philosophies.
My opinion that the current redistricting system is dangerously undemocratic has not significantly changed. Reading the work of Utilitarian philosophers has merely given me a lens for observing certain aspects of the unfairness. For example, I am better equipped to define population equality between districts as a requirement for fairness if I can use Utility as a framework for that assertion.
Delete