Quote Originally Posted by SamSpade View Post
I don't know that would continue to be the case if the rules were changed across the country.
The primary consequence of gerrymandering is the creation of non-competitive districts.
So one of the problems in Congress is that candidates rarely need to put much effort into campaigning or for that matter, consider their constituent's desires, because they're all homogenous - they can simply follow *party* and represent them.

What would be the consequence of balanced districts - especially in non-Presidential years, which typically favor the right?

What's the likelihood also that once fairly drawn - they STILL favor on party greatly over the other?
For instance, the entire state of Massachusetts tilts extremely heavily to the left - any redistricting would likely yield the same results.
Most states redistrict every 10 years at the time of the newest census. Whoever does well in those election (2000, 2010 2020, 2030) usually is in a better position to gerrymander. The 2010 elections favored the Republicans, hence why they were in a better position to gerrymander.

I am not sure what a fair principle is. I think obviously Charles, St. Mary's, and Calvert County should be in one district but only makes up about half the population needed for a congressional district (around 800,000 people are in each congressional district). It would be interesting to hear ideas one what should be the basis of district drawing.