117th Congress: DEMS IN DISARRAY!!!111!!

[ScoobyDoo]

I would take this map in a heart beat. No way the legislature passes it, though. We'll be seeing the 2nd nonpartisan attempt in October or November. https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/publ...color_2021.pdf

Looks a lot better than most of the maps you see nowadays.

[unofan]

Looks a lot better than most of the maps you see nowadays.

It would go from 1 solid R - 2 tossup - 1 lean D to 1 extra solid R - 1 tossup - 1 lean D - 1 solid D. And it puts 2 current R incumbents in the same district.

Like I said, no way it passes.

[ScoobyDoo]

It would go from 1 solid R - 2 tossup - 1 lean D to 1 extra solid R - 1 tossup - 1 lean D - 1 solid D. And it puts 2 current R incumbents in the same district.

Like I said, no way it passes.

Whiny little girly men can't just compete on the merits? This whole idea that districts are locked into a party before voting and campaigning even begins is so ****ing Anti-American it's sick. **** Republicans and Democrats who do this ****.

[dxmnkd316]

TMBASQ: Does the constitution prohibit proportional voting for the house? Obviously if it isn't prohibited, it would be by state. And of course there is no chance the GOP states pass it. The blue states are dumb enough.

[RaceBoarder]

Stupid question on the basis of gerrymandering: Can you make any multi-county (or parish) district abide by county lines? or is that just too much of a hassle when you get into big cities?

You would have generally clear, established lines that are symmetrical or use natural barriers/borders (rivers for example).

[unofan]

Whiny little girly men can't just compete on the merits? This whole idea that districts are locked into a party before voting and campaigning even begins is so ****ing Anti-American it's sick. **** Republicans and Democrats who do this ****.

The non partisan staffers get 3 chances under Iowa law. In the last 50 years, the 1st maps have been approved twice, the 2nd maps twice, and the 3rd map once.

You can't expect a GOP-dominated legislature to approve maps that would shift power to the Dems when they get two more shots for free. I wouldn't expect Dems to, either.

if they go nuclear and go full gerrymander after rejecting the 3rd map, then it's time to get ****ed.

[dxmnkd316]

The non partisan staffers get 3 chances under Iowa law. In the last 50 years, the 1st maps have been approved twice, the 2nd maps twice, and the 3rd map once.

You can't expect a GOP-dominated legislature to approve maps that would shift power to the Dems when they get two more shots for free. I wouldn't expect Dems to, either.

if they go nuclear and go full gerrymander after rejecting the 3rd map, then it's time to get ****ed.

So wait, the non-partisans get three chances to satisfy the partisans? Why even have a non-partisan step?

[unofan]

So wait, the non-partisans get three chances to satisfy the partisans? Why even have a non-partisan step?

The partisans only get a straight up or down vote, and if they vote down they have to explain why (based on the criteria set forth in law, which explicitly excludes partisan factors) so the non partisan staffers can correct it in the next round.

If the 3rd map is not approved as drafted, the partisans can take over and amend it as desired but it's then subject to immediate review by the state Supreme Court (which, unfortunately has gone the same way as the Feds in the last 10 years).

To put this in gaming terms, the rules allow 2 rerolls. The first roll (from the GOP perspective) was a 4. Why wouldn't they reroll hoping for at least a 10, if not a 20?

Now the caveat in all this is that traditionally they vote more based on state legislative lines than the federal ones, so who knows what they think about those.

[unofan]

TMBASQ: Does the constitution prohibit proportional voting for the house? Obviously if it isn't prohibited, it would be by state. And of course there is no chance the GOP states pass it. The blue states are dumb enough.

Not directly, but it requires states to have Republican forms of government and gives Congress the power to regulate state laws with respect to congressional elections. So if congress says no, then it's a no.

[unofan]

Stupid question on the basis of gerrymandering: Can you make any multi-county (or parish) district abide by county lines? or is that just too much of a hassle when you get into big cities?

You would have generally clear, established lines that are symmetrical or use natural barriers/borders (rivers for example).

Could you (where feasible and the population allows)? Yes.
are you required to? No.

[Kepler]

As always, dead on.

[Handyman]

Chris Coons' name always makes me giggle...that was as far as I made it in the story.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

As always, dead on.

I suspect that they actually like having Manchin to fall on the centrist sword for them and soak up all the hate from progs.

[Spartanforlife4]

I suspect that they actually like having Manchin to fall on the centrist sword for them and soak up all the hate from progs.

It's like the three in the House who voted against the bill that would allow for negotiation of prescription drugs. I believe at least two, if not all three, were previous proponents of such a bill, but they had the ability to vote for it and not have it go through in the past.

[MinnesotaNorthStar]

I think she really believes this too...I almost retweeted this to the Preposterous Statement Tournament (Twin Cities sports radio bit).

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/s...55827042017290