Posted on 01/10/2012 7:21:50 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
Paul Clement is a busy man. He’s also defending DOMA against the Sodomite-in-Chief.
Talk to a mathematician (like me). It can be done.
Not in this case.
Mathematics resolves unique solutions from multiple constraints.
Politics takes a resolved solution and fractures it into competing alternatives.
No way no how can the two disciplines help each other.
The supreme court justices can't even agree one which circuit courts should consider which conflicting sections of a law with an outdated purpose of protecting black voting rights being applied to hispanics, which are white and not historically repressed at the voting booth.
Nobody agrees that gerrymandering should be rejected, they merely agree that gerrymandering should only apply to further each parties conflicting goals. And there's not just two parties. There are d's, r's, black groups, hispanic groups, state govt turf, fed govt turf, etc.
While your proposal may seem ideal for a map case, the problem is that there are no constraints agreed upon to guide the selection of better or worse maps.
What they're doing here is simply waiting for the ultimate authority to carve out an arbitrary, final solution.
It will not make any sense either and the final reason your proposal fails is just that....your result might be fair, equitable and verifiable. That would disadvantage all of the power players, and so it is not a desirable political solution.
One of the reasons I supported Perry was that I saw him as the best person to understand and attempt to roll back the federal governments impingement on state and individual rights.
Admittedly, I may be wrong about that but I like the chances of someone from Texas taking on the feds rather than a Masshole.
The SCOTUS mmay prove to be some counterweight to nobama, i.e. EPA and redistricting and potentially nobamacare.
I seem to remember a snippet from history lessons that the SCOTUS had similar counter effect against FDR’s rampant socialism.
On a larger scale maybe the Constitutional system does work, just that on the smaller scale the liberals are incermentalizing us to death.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Ping to a little bit of Perry campaign info in the article.
Ping to the daily stuff Perry’s been fighting for 10 years.
Walking the walk.
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
States right? or Obama rights?
Go Perry.
I live and vote in Texas.
Texas has made it illegal to write in one’s choice for a political office.
I suggest to the Court that the anti write in law is unconstitutional, because it restricts a voters freedom of choice.
You mean that you don’t have the right to vote for Adolf Hitler, or Mickey Mouse? We get to do that in Wisconsin, and the votes get counted too!! It drives those of us who work the polls a little bit nuts on election night cause we have to copy each extra name onto a report to turn into the County. Grrrrr.
You mean that you don’t have the right to vote for Adolf Hitler, or Mickey Mouse? We get to do that in Wisconsin, and the votes get counted too!! It drives those of us who work the polls a little bit nuts on election night cause we have to copy each extra name onto a report to turn into the County. Grrrrr.
Get the ratio somewhere close to the 1:30,000 in our Constitution and all of the various rat victim groups along with regular Americans will be represented.
San Francisco will send a few freaks to Congress, and my rural area will send a good ‘ol boy. That is the sort of representation our Framers set up.
It is perfectly Constitutional. Review Article II Section 1 para 2.
Here’s a workable, but very-likely “unacceptable to established politicians” approach.
The politics in setting up congressional districts involves gerrymandering 435 districts , so looking for “workable” (see “non-workable” below) and randomized gerrymandering constraints involving roads, conjoined properties and some sort of "symmetry" involving 435 districts (covering the US citizen census count) across each of the 50 states – could be done.
“Non Workable” could be defined as a randomized plan subject to some significant -- and increasing -- percentage (5%, 10%, 20%, etc) of Americans objecting …within 30 days …. to a currently extant randomized plan.
As I said, I could do it … but ... established politicians, and their well connected, "happy", constituents; wouldn’t stand for it because every push of my Go button would come up with a totally unique solution.
But then ...
"Not everything needs to be fixed." -- Randy Pausch
” - - - Grrrrr.”
No. I choose to vote for a Conservative, who will Impeach those who violate the US Constitution, cut Baseline Federal spending and shrink the size of the US Federal Government.
Since “both” Political Parties refuse to do ANY of the above, I want to write in a Candidate who is not on their rigged ballots.
I vote to get my Country back on track, in spite of “both” political parties.
I want the right to do so restored.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
