Congress Plays Redistricting Game

Gerrymandering has been slowly brought back and more and more restricted since it's original inception. I don't see it being too far fetched to see the practice abolished. It is VERY VERY unethical, and removes the people from the process, which is the exact opposite of what democracy is supposed to bring. Unfortunately, with all the renamings, and changes of gerrymandering laws, the general public is so ill informed about it that they don't even know it's happening. Hopefully something like this will spark a "revolution" so to speak.

The most terrible thing, in my opinion, about Gerrymandering is not only is it the political parties selecting THEIR voters instead of the other way around but it really makes it difficult for the third party candidates to even have a chance.

Gerrymandering=legalized vote stealing.

Vladimir
LOL

I dunno, anyone that is Independant like maybe Ralph Nader or anyone from the green party, libertarian party ot the constitutionalist(yuck) party among others. There are plenty of other parties out there though.

There are other choices besides Democrat and Republican. Sometimes you have to write their name in but in the long run its worth it because yea your selection didn't win but your numbers show the winner that people care about the issues that this person was supporting enough to vote for them even though they didn't have a chance.

The reason I don't care for constitutionalist is just on their stance that they want to incorporate religion into law in certain ways and I disagree with that. I like some of their other ideas though. But my home is with the Libertarians and the Green Party(depends on which candidate is a better choice). And I'm pretty sure the Libertarian party supports the game industry 100%. Green Party it sometimes depends but my guess is that even if they didn't like certain video games they wouldn't want the government censoring them and they have much,much more important issues to press such as the screwed up election process that we use.

Yea the system is built to support a two party system and I personally don't think that its working to well at this point so it should be changed to level the playing feild and at least give the guys with less money and good ideas a fighting chance. The people in the Green and Libertarian parties are 100 times more genuine than anyone you would find in the Democratic or Republican party.

So if your a non-voter. Vote, just don't vote for Democrats or Republicans if you dont like either one. There is no reason to vote for a candidate that you dont like just so the other guy wont win, thats silly. Vote for the person you truely like because even if they don't win the Democratic and Republican party will start to change their veiws to gain more of your votes. Thats just what they do, they whore themselves out for more votes. Ralph Nader understands this and thats pretty much why he runs, to get heard. He knows he is going to lose he just simply wants to be heard and the votes he gets just make his message that much louder.

"I don’t see it being too far fetched to see the practice abolished."

I do.

The relationship between our crooked politicians and power is like inertia. Those who are in control tend to stay in control. It's the same reason they don't have more aggressive term limits, why they don't condemn special interest groups, and why gerrymandering is fair game.

When you think about it, our "power" to vote is incredibly minor in the grand scheme of things - and they don't even want us to have that.

I'm considering voting third party. I'm so sick of the Republicans and Democrats. They tend to be opposite of each other to be opposite of each other. Even if it doesn't make a lick of sense. They fight more than they compromise. They're corrupt. Pure and simple. Maybe next time I'll write in "anyone else".

My general thoughts on elections are that the people who deserve to have the power are the last ones who will run. People who would work to better the nation and do not crave power will find others ways to do it. The ones who run for political office crave power and nothing else and thus do not deserve it.

@ jonwanker & Terrible Tom

Yes, there are third parties out there. Do a search and you'll run across them. They aren't just the Green and Libertarian, though. You can find Socialist, Communist, Socialist-Democratic (think England), and a hundred others that are so fringe as to be comedic.

@ Terrible Tom

Okay the inevitable question comes to mind. What happens if 51% of the people vote "none of the above"? Do we go four years without a President (or whatever the election was for), does the incumbent maintain his office until we vote for a replacement, do we just place some random person in the position? These questions would need to be answered before you even began to play with such an idea.

I skimmed over the article you provided. One thing that bothered be was allowing criminals to vote. There's a number of problems with that.

One, where you're incarcerated maybe different from where you lived. Where would your vote go? Where you are? Where you lived? Your closest relatives county?
Two, after committing a crime, you should be punished. Allowing them all the rights of law-abiding citizens seems like a slap in the face.
Three, how would you organize it? I have a friend that works in a prison. From talking to him, I can assure you placing that many convicts in one place, with minimal security, is a huge risk.
Four, Would they give that right to all criminals regardless of crimes? So people like Ted Bundy and Charles Manson would be allowed to vote. People convicted of horrendous felonies would be allowed to vote. Note: That New York law is going to be struck down as unconstitutional, so let's ignore it.

Sorry, man, but the Green party brief isn't impressing me. They expressed some pretty lofty theories, but didn't expand on them.

Terrible Tom
Again look at whos backing the "sides" its mostly the same old people in power who are in league with whoever, without a system that nurtures a 3rd party we have 2 and 1/2 party system the 1/2 being what ever "appears" not to be part of the main 2.

Sadly voting 3rd party is "wasting" a vote the same for voting the "lesser of evils" frankly, when it comes down to it don't vote or vote for the "popular" 3rd wheel candidate at least some change can happen when the coin lands on its side.

Sorry this game is crap. Let's see, every politician in the game is a stereotype. And It's pushing a law that sounds good but the game is so biased that no one will listen. An independent party who can't see demographics who will make up a party sheet, can only do as much bad as good. It's just a crap shoot to see who comes out on top. If anything that's the worse thing possible because no one thinks about what's important to the people who are in those districts.

@Gameboy & Terrible Tom:

Allowing those in prison a vote opens up another can of worms also, not one "free" people aren't already guilty of mind you. The possibility of votes being traded and wielded for the profit of someone on the outside pulling strings is not out of the realm of possibility. If the Aryan Brotherhood's power inside bars and their reach outside bars are any indication of the type of misuse to be had with voting, I don't know what is. (Yes, I watch a lot of documentaries on the penal system, and had visited both Soledad and San Quentin as a child.) I personally believe convicts deserve a vote so long as they meet certain guidelines within bars. Take an honest look at the male African American and other minority populations behind bars today and decide for yourself if becoming further ousted from participation in America is fair in all cases.

Party fellows vote for their candidate no matter what he/she says sometimes, and it's easier with a simple box check on local and state elections to give away your vote to blind party loyalty. I believe we need to begin to see cross-party members on a president's staff again, regardless of political agendas getting in the way of competent people doing a job before we will see a success in 3rd party politics. It works in other countries since they actually have better voter turnout and/or more dire economic situations that demand they pick something new to try and fix things. Here, voting for someone outside the norm only minimally raises awareness for other political parties and innovative ideas. Goddess forbid someone will actually end up in office who might change something for the better. *gasp*

I'm personally waiting for a game where you can filibuster like mad while starving homeless children die on the streets, gas prices soar to $12 a gallon, and soldiers sit in bases around the world playing cards and trying to get on myspace as a means to wind down after getting shot. Nice to show the realism of the world and so forth.

[...] Technology, Social Media, Web 2.0: A blog analysis « CPRS National Conference 2007 Learn the Art of Gerrymandering by Playing the District Game June 19th, 2007 Gerrymandering is a form of redistricting in which electoral district orconstituency boundaries are manipulated for an electoral advantage. You can read the rest of the Wikipedia article here. Or you can play the Redistricting Game by the University of Southern California’s Game Innovation Lab – another perfect example of how the simulational nature of digital games enables them to explain complex political processes like no other medium. And this is finally comes to politicians’ attention: The Redistricting Game, playable online, was recently shown to members of Congress by Rep. John Tanner (D-TN). Tanner realizes that his colleagues are unlikely to be swayed from the practice, which is less politely known as gerrymandering. The Tennessee Democrat told NPR’s Andrea Seabrook:You’re asking people - and I realize this - to give up an awful lot of power.Seabrook added:Maybe if voters play The Redistricting Game and have fun gaming the system themselves, they’ll see how the system is gaming them and then maybe they’ll demand change [...]