United States US Constitutional Amendment Proposals and Discussion Thread

[Abhorsen]

Hmm, what about an alternative with non-contiguous districts? Break the entire state into perfectly square sections (start with 1 square mile as an opening proposal). Sum the total number of representative districts. Assign individual square-mile blocks to districts in a directly linear fashion, 1st district, then 2nd, and so forth, from top left, repeating after each district has a block. If a district has all the votes it should have as a district due to grabbing a particularly populous block or two, it's dropped from receiving more and things continue with the remaining districts. Repeat until all blocks have been assigned a district.

There would be a small margin of error along the edges since only a few states have perfectly square corners and shapes, but it would ultimately result in a fairly brownian vote pattern.

Funnily, this is actually optimally gerrymandered. if each section has an equal selection of the states makeup, then in a 55-45 Republican advantage state becomes a 55-45 republican advantage in each district.

 

[strunkenwhite]

Hmm, what about an alternative with non-contiguous districts? Break the entire state into perfectly square sections (start with 1 square mile as an opening proposal). Sum the total number of representative districts. Assign individual square-mile blocks to districts in a directly linear fashion, 1st district, then 2nd, and so forth, from top left, repeating after each district has a block. If a district has all the votes it should have as a district due to grabbing a particularly populous block or two, it's dropped from receiving more and things continue with the remaining districts. Repeat until all blocks have been assigned a district.

There would be a small margin of error along the edges since only a few states have perfectly square corners and shapes, but it would ultimately result in a fairly brownian vote pattern.

Honest question, what is actually the point of having single-district geographical areas where the area in question is calculated to not represent any coherent interest? Seems like the worst of both worlds to me.

I personally prefer single-representative districts over, say, multi-member proportional representative districts, but it seems to me to defeat the point if the single-representative districts are randomized patchworks.

@Bacle - of course, human nature being what it is, I'd suggest redrawn country etc. boundries to have a cool down period, e.g. ten or twenty years before they apply and cause district rearrangments.. Which should kill most redrawing attempts ...

Already solved, since the districts are redrawn decennially already. If someone messes with county lines, it doesn't affect the district boundaries until the next redistricting.

 

[strunkenwhite]

Hey, back on the OP topic: eliminate no-knock warrants. Are there circumstances where they might be reasonable? Yes. Have the judges and cops ruined it for everybody? Also yes. As a wise man once said, this is why we can't have nice things. If "no quartering of troops" merits a constitutional mention, I reckon this does.

 

[Abhorsen]

Already solved, since the districts are redrawn decennially already. If someone messes with county lines, it doesn't affect the district boundaries until the next redistricting.

At this point, the country lines and gerrymandering will just be done together.

Honestly, the best option without a constitutional amendment is for two states, one from each party with the same-ish number of districts, to create a district map for both states that has to meet joint approval. It still fucks third parties, and likely people in-state, but at least the fuckery balances out.

A balanced budget amendment sounds nice, until you realize it means jacked taxes, not cut spending. Instead, limit spending to a percentage of last years GDP (though this will lead to fucked calculations of GDP).

The key ones for me are enshrining 9 justices so the supreme court is less fuckwithable, and enshrining the fillibuster so that congress can't do shit.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

The key ones for me are enshrining 9 justices so the supreme court is less fuckwithable, and enshrining the fillibuster so that congress can't do shit.

I'm actually for that, with the caveat that filibusters should absolutely require the Congressperson to actually stand there and speak without any break. The Senate's "courtesy" filibusters where you just declare that you're filibustering without having to so much as lift an actual finger are BS.

 

[strunkenwhite]

At this point, the country lines and gerrymandering will just be done together.

I'm not convinced of this. Unless gerrymandering gets a lot more subtle than it has been to date, the necessary fuckery would be extremely noticeable from ground level where people do their daily lives. I think there would be popular revolt. This assumes that state governments don't create a clone of the "county" level and use the clone for administrative purposes, leaving the original counties as nothing but meaningless shells acting as empty vessels for gerrymandering. But that seems like the sort of thing that courts would object to.

 

[Abhorsen]

I'm actually for that, with the caveat that filibusters should absolutely require the Congressperson to actually stand there and speak without any break. The Senate's "courtesy" filibusters where you just declare that you're filibustering without having to so much as lift an actual finger are BS.

I love the courtesy fillibusters. I'm generally for anything that stalls the government from doing stuff.

I'm not convinced of this. Unless gerrymandering gets a lot more subtle than it has been to date, the necessary fuckery would be extremely noticeable from ground level where people do their daily lives. I think there would be popular revolt. This assumes that state governments don't create a clone of the "county" level and use the clone for administrative purposes, leaving the original counties as nothing but meaningless shells acting as empty vessels for gerrymandering. But that seems like the sort of thing that courts would object to.

I expect that they can find a clever way to get around it. It also wouldn't matter at all in Massachusetts (and I suspect other NE towns, as up there we barely paid attention to county, what matters is town.

 

[WolfBear]

Funnily, this is actually optimally gerrymandered. if each section has an equal selection of the states makeup, then in a 55-45 Republican advantage state becomes a 55-45 republican advantage in each district.

So, do proportional representation to solve this problem?