Psephology series, part 5: How to avoid and stop gerrymandering

Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court voted 5-4 not to impose federal standards to stop redistricting of US congressional districts in such a way as to favour one party-otherwise known by the popular term gerrymandering: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/27/supreme-court-gerrymandering-dissent-elena-kagan

This dereliction of duty has unsurprisingly attracted heavy criticism, especially Elena Kagan whose dissent received international attention. Gerrymandering, usually found in countries using first past the post for elections, is an affront to democracy around the world as it undermines free and fair elections and divides nations.

The United Kingdom has a Boundary Commission, independent from Parliament, and Local Government Boundary Commissions, also independent from Parliament, which supposedly limits gerrymandering; the United States of America has neither at a federal level. However, at a local government level, it can unintentionally happen when political parties submit plans focused too much on electoral equality and not enough on community ties, especially where councils require a uniform pattern of wards. A failure by Labour to engage with the constituency boundary review for the 1983 general election was a significant factor in the creation of such constituencies as Cannock & Burntwood, Colchester South & Maldon, Clwyd South West, and North Bedfordshire, of those constituencies extant from 1983 to 1997 not forced by the new local government boundaries.

Here are tips for thwarting de facto gerrymanders in a first past the post system, a Single Transferable Vote system, or a proportional representation system involving a FPTP element:

1. Keep a regular eye on relevant Boundary Commission websites. In England this is the LGBCE website, which can be found at: www.lgbce.org.uk. If your local area is having a ward boundary review, always respond-this applies in whichever country you live in, as the Republic of Ireland has regular boundary reviews as well. Countries using Mixed Member Proportional Representation also have regular boundary reviews of their single member constituencies e.g. Germany.

2. If a poor boundary proposal appears, suggest a plausible alternative. Boundary Commissions will stick to initial proposals, even poorly thought out ones, unless an alternative is proposed and/or reasons why the initial suggestion should be scrapped are acted upon. Evidence of community ties and barriers are good reasons to suggest alternative wards and/or constituencies.

3. Alert interested people to the boundary review. Fair representation is important in a democracy, so making sure communities and areas are whenever possible not divided between different representatives is crucial.
 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The English local elections of 2023-Conservatives pay the penalty for failing to put a stop to sleaze and sewage in our rivers

The English local elections of 2023 (Northern Ireland's elections will finish next week and a separate blog post will be devoted to these) not only resulted in more than 1000 Conservative losses just as Rallings & Thrasher and Sir John Curtice predicted, they also resulted in sweeping Green and Liberal Democrat gains across the nation-sending a hard message to the Conservatives about the need to protect our environment and Labour for barely acting like an opposition at all. The Conservatives in total made a net loss of 1,061 seats, with the vast majority being in the shire districts where they once dominated-even councils such as Bracknell Forest and Surrey Heath, which they held in 1995 and 2019, fell, to Labour and the Liberal Democrats respectively in those two cases. Who they lost to varied widely by the nature of the authority-their losses to Labour came mainly in (ex) industrial "Red Wall" areas where they had made against-the-trend gains in 2019 or fared better
Read more

My analysis of the Swedish general election of 2022

The Swedish general election of 2022 generated some surprising results, despite also averting pollsters' predictions significantly. The last three years in particular proved to be a rough ride for the Social Democrat led governments of Stefan Lofven and Magdalena Andersson respectively. Although Sweden's laxer approach to the COVID-19 pandemic (compared to most countries in Europe, which imposed lockdowns during much of 2020 and 2021, an approach that arguably caused more problems than it solved) proved effective, Mr Lofven's desire to lift the austerity tax (which only affected a wealthy minority, similar in nature to the wealth tax initiative of former French President Francois Hollande) and to join NATO proved contentious, with two of the Social Democrats' former coalition partners (the Swedish Greens and Swedish Left Party, who had both pulled out of confidence and supply) unsurprisingly voting against Swedish accession to NATO membership (all other parties in the R
Read more

On the 2020 Serbian election: Why a boycott will only worsen things there

First of all, I apologise for the recent hiatus; however elections are still postponed or on hold in many countries, including the UK. Serbia, however, was able to proceed with its 2020 general election amidst this crisis. Its overall result proved reminiscent of Hungarian elections under Viktor Orban's tenure (2010-present), since the leading national-conservative coalition, the SNS (Progressive Party of Serbia) coalition led by Serbian President Aleksander Vucic (Ana Brnabic is the Serbian Prime Minister, and the first woman and openly homosexual person to hold that position), polled 61.6% of the vote, giving them as many as 191 seats out of 250 and a majority of as high as 132, almost unheard of in any country with proportional representation. Press freedom has endured significant curbs since President Vucic first came into power as Serbian PM in 2012 (he became President of Serbia in 2017), as have civil liberties of Serbs in general. Nepotism and corruption in the Serbian
Read more