Proportional Gerrymandering

I have to admit those who agree with the Shortest-Split Line, such as Sarah, Zach, and many others have a good point. It is the only way to keep personal and partisan bias out of the redistricting because it involves math, statistics and no feelings or opinions of humans. However, this time I am in full agreement with Gilbert. Just as he pointed out proportional gerrymandering is a weird solution, but as Grey said, it avoids disproportional districts. Leaving our democracy in the hands of technology is not the most comforting idea. That is why, leaving it in the hands of someone being paid to make sure democracy remains fair and free is the best idea. It, is true as some have pointed out, that the person hired by the people to create the districts could be biased, but as Gil said once again, (he and I thought very alike tonight) this person will be payed to be in charge of the redistricting. The money will, whether we think so or not, most definately secure the person into doing whatever the person who pays the highest price would like. In this case it will be taxpayers of this fine nation. The game showed us all that redistricting, especially reapportionment, could be difficult, but even I was able to eventually conquer mission 4, so someone can do it and be paid to do it. To expand on this point, when someone commmits the crime of gerrymandering in favor of a party they do it for the money. So, there is no harm in paying them more so that they complete the gerrymandering in a way that benefits the nation. Also, once again stealing from the brilliant words of Gilbert because i couldn't say it better, with the bipartisan committee incumbents are reelected in their safe districts every year. With the proportional gerrymandering the competitiveness of elections will grow again just as it should in democracy. Therefore, proportional gerrymandering is the most suitable way to take care of the problem of gerrrymandering and protect redistricting.