Panel Survey from Jamie Raskin

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Marty Wulfe

unread,
Jul 16, 2019, 3:15:14 PM7/16/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com, angad.gm...@blogger.com

I was just sent a survey from Rep. Raskin asking me about my attitudes about all the right issues: public campaign financing, a constitutional amendment including campaign finance reform and corporate personhood, and gerrymandering.

 

But then there was this one that I was totally unprepared for, related to Government Reform:

 

The idea of this proposal is one that is allowed by the Constitution. This proposal would make larger US House districts that would be represented by more than one Member of Congress. This would increase the likelihood Members of Congress would more accurately mirror the partisan mix of the population. Here is how it would work:

 

  • In a state with five or fewer Congressional districts, the state would still have the same number of House Members, but they would be elected by all of the state’s voters and represent the whole state.

 

For example, for a state with five Congressional districts, on the ballot there would be at least five Republicans and five Democrats, as well as possible independent and third-party candidates. Five U.S. House Members would be elected by all voters in the state.

Research has been done on what the likely effect would be: election results would more closely mirror the partisan balance of the state. For example, Connecticut is a state in which all five House seats are currently held by Democrats and Oklahoma is one in which all five House seats are currently held by Republicans. The proposed system would likely result in 1-2 Republicans being elected in Connecticut and 1-2 Democrats in Oklahoma.

 

  • For states with more than five districts, the state would keep the same number of House Members, but the districts would be redesigned to be larger and have 3-5 Members each. The 3-5 House Members would be elected by all of the voters in these larger districts.

 

Have any of you heard of this before?  Any responses? This is completely new to me.

 

Marty

 

K Stevens

unread,
Jul 16, 2019, 4:44:11 PM7/16/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com, angad.gm...@blogger.com
Jamie Raskin included something like this notion as part of a bill that he introduced as a State Senator in 2016:


I consider this a horrible idea and don't see how it would better represent the residents of any state.  Unless proportional representation is somehow allowed, each multi-member district would very likely elect all Republicans or all Democrats.  It seems obvious to me that single-member congressional districts are more likely to be representative of state's residents by political party than multi-member ones.  Of course, gerrymandering by whatever party has the power is going to exist, but it would be pretty difficult for Maryland Democrats to totally eliminate Republican representation in the Congress if the single-member district system is retained.  If there are multi-member districts, it could be done.  But where Republicans have the power (and they do in most states), they could wipe out a lot of Democrats.

Ken



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GMOM-volunteers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to GMOM-voluntee...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/GMOM-volunteers/0a4201d53c0a%24cbbdc9d0%2463395d70%24%40yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Charlie Cooper

unread,
Jul 16, 2019, 5:16:18 PM7/16/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com, angad.gm...@blogger.com
Add Jamie explained it to me years, it does incorporate RCV. 

Charlie 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/GMOM-volunteers/966563254.2221437.1563309848311%40mail.yahoo.com.

K Stevens

unread,
Jul 16, 2019, 5:58:44 PM7/16/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com
I don't understand the abbreviation RCV, Charlie.

Ken



Doug Miller

unread,
Jul 16, 2019, 6:05:31 PM7/16/19
to 'K Stevens' via GMOM-volunteers
Ranked-choice voting

Sent from my Verizon Motorola Smartphone

K Stevens

unread,
Jul 16, 2019, 6:27:51 PM7/16/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com
Thanks, Doug.  I favor ranked-choice voting.  I don't favor multi-member congressional districts and don't see the advantage of them over single-member districts.

Ken



Charlie Cooper

unread,
Jul 17, 2019, 2:42:18 PM7/17/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com
Sorry for the confusion. I should have said proportional representation. Under this system , according to Jamie, various political parties would receive a fair number of representatives in Congress according to their voting strength in the newly drawn three to five member districts.

Charlie 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/GMOM-volunteers/1484214255.2327434.1563316065427%40mail.yahoo.com.

K Stevens

unread,
Jul 17, 2019, 3:22:06 PM7/17/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com
It looks like a matter of whether people or parties should be represented in the House of Representatives.  If the former, single-member districts are best.  If the latter, House members would have to be elected statewide to give Greens any representation at all.  Also, after each census, the total number of House members in some states would change and they'd have to go through the problems of deciding where the new three, four, or five member districts would be located.  It would add to the complexity of the redistricting problem.  If we are going to do proportional representation (and that's okay with me), I'd prefer to do it statewide, rather than via this gimmicky process.
Anyway, I can't imagine Raskin's plan being accepted.

Ken



Marty Wulfe

unread,
Jul 17, 2019, 3:33:23 PM7/17/19
to GMOM-vo...@googlegroups.com

I think it is a risky proposition. It may sound good in theory, but not sure how it would work in practice and could be open to abuse. Its worst problem is its newness, its difference from the way we do things now, and it would draw a lot of suspicion from all sides. I would like to see RCV first. I remember Anne Kaiser’s reaction to it when I mentioned RCV to her. She said she didn’t like it because it isn’t understood and would draw a lot of suspicion, even though I think the likes the idea herself.

 

Marty

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages