Skip to main content

View Diary: Fantasy Redistricting: State of Appalachia, Part 1 - the States (56 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  States have their place IMHO (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Mainly due to the disadvantages of a legislature with ultra-large districts. I like my gal in Washington, but she's got to represent about 700,000 constituents, which really isolates her from ordinary citizens. With only 50,000 constituents, my Assemblyman can be far more responsive to the people he represents.

      Furthermore, much as I disapprove of my current state government, there are some issues that Wisconsinites need to handle for themselves. For one, I wouldn't want the federal government to set the punishment for murder here, because they'd probably insist on capital punishment in some cases (Wisconsin abolished the death penalty in 1853). Yes, it's a bother, but I feel a lot better about having some powers kept here in Madison rather than a thousand miles away.

    Male, 21, -4.75/-6.92, born and raised TN-05, now WI-02, unapologetic supporter of Obama and Occupy. Tammy Baldwin for Senate and Recall Walker!

    by fearlessfred14 on Wed Feb 08, 2012 at 10:31:07 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The size of electoral districts (0+ / 0-)

      or really, of any administrative district, has nothing to do with having states. Don't you think that countries without sovereign sub-states divvy themselves up into convenient sizes for various administrative or electoral purposes? Of course they do.

      In fact, getting rid of states with invariant boundaries would help, not hinder, administrative districting. For example, if there were some reason to do so, Appalachia could exist as some regional district based on its geography and culture.

      In a representative democracy as large as the US, there is a tremendous need for finding ways to connect voters to legislators more fairly, directly, and justly. For example, if a couple of dozen regional districts were apportioned, then each one could in turn have a couple of hundred or so local districts. There could be action taken either completely within the several thousand local districts (based on the leaders of communities within the local district); within the 25 or so mid-level regional districts (in that case, in bodies containing 200 or so representatives of its local districts); or at the national level (in that case, in bodies containing representatives from each of the regions). This would all be apportioned based on population density, geography, and other considerations, but it would be done at the national level. The result would be much better representativeness in Washington as well as in the district assemblies. But with our existing unequal and sovereign states, that kind of thing can only be dreamt of.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site