There is a lot of discussion about ways to improve reapportionment with one of the end goals being a more competitive environment. But the proposed rules tend to be impartial design of congressional districts, geographic sanity, and cultural homogeneity.
For example, here in Colorado there is one district that is basically the City of Denver and a second that is a large chunk of the surrounding suburbs. The districts were drawn up by judges and make a lot of sense in the way most people look at how districts should be drawn.
But by definition, the Denver district is Democratic and the suburban district is Republican. I do not think the constituients of either district are well served when they have an incumbent that is basically elected for life.
It also leads to representatives that play best to the base as the primary election is the election that matters and therefore you end up with representatives that are very liberal/conservative.
I think the two main goals of redistricting should be competitiveness and geographic sanity. Take the circle that is Denver and the suburbs, split it in half, and make that the two districts. Each district would then be a very competitive race. And the constituients in each district would be served by a representative very aware that winning 50%+ of the vote in the next election will be a lot of work.
This country is founded on capitalism and the invisible hand of the free market. We should have this in our congressional races.
ps - And to eliminate the changes made in districts to make sure the incumbent remains in their district, waive the residency requirement for any incumbent who is redistricted out of their own district.
Trackbacks: Mudville Gazette, ColoradoPols
