I am defending the shortest split-line method along with Sarah and many other students. This method is based on facts and facts only. It isn't susceptible to any favoring of one party over the other. The districts are created by math equations, and cannot be persuaded by money or anyone. It is the fairest and most just way to prevent gerrymandering in my opinion. In the video, it explains this method by a set of math equations in which the shortest line splits up the districts evenly until the desired amount of ranges are made. The Congressional Redistricting packet explained many cases in which districts were skewed to favor one person or party. This method eliminates any possibility of that ever happening. But as in all things there are flaws, and this method may actually create slightly skewed results based on coincidence over where the lines were drawn. Yet, even with these skewed results, math doesn't lie and it wouldn't have been on purpose. The Redistricting Game we played for homework was actual pretty difficult, but gave us a pretty clear insight of what it is like to have to create these districts. There are certain guidelines you have to meet, and these districts can't look odd or disproportional to each other. I feel that the shortest split-line would make this job way easier. It gives you a specific formula to work with, and there is no guessing. It is a straightforward set of equations that ifs fair and equal for everyone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUS9uvYyn3A
"This method eliminates any possibility of that ever happening. But as in all things there are flaws, and this method may actually create slightly skewed results based on coincidence over where the lines were drawn." Seem to contradict yourself here...
ReplyDeleteCould there be a compromise between solutions here?