Reflecting on Redistricting Activity & Discussion Peer Review | Instant Homework Help

Reply to Peers

*Note: You will not be able to view your peers’ posting until you initially post. Let’s try to identify which peer’s posting you are replying to by using their first name at the beginning of your reply. Replying to one or two peers will satisfy this criteria.

Here is what the aim should be for when replying to your peers:

Extending meaningful discussion by elaborating on your peers’ initial posting through adding to or expanding upon the initial thoughts or questions posted.
Advancing the discussion by posing new questions to your peers or class.
Asking for clarification (in a respectful manner) on confusions you may have about initial postings by the instructor and/or peers.

Your Peer Person: Emmanuel Nfawmor

TASK 1 of Redistricting Activity: Mission 1 (Fundamentals Basic)

Political Party; REPUBLICAN. ( Goal is to redraw district lines for the State of Jefferson to make all districts equal in size)

1) Yes, I succeeded in drawing the district lines so that the population was equal in in the state of Jefferson.

– Two bodies of government approved my plan, namely; The State Legislature and the Governor, the voting results were as follows:

For the State Legislature: 64 Yes and 36 Nays. My plan was then pass to the Governor for review.

For the Governor: The plan was signed and now off to the Courts.

For the Court: The Court disapproved my plan. After the rejection, the court asked me to return to the map and revise.

Reason for the Court’s Disapproval (Rulings) was as follows:

Plaintif : Sybil Rites (Clue). Rejection of the plan was on grounds that my plan did not meet contiguity laws. So based on such reasoning, the State Court Ruling was UPHELD.

2) After completing this section of the game, although the navigation process was easy, but the procedure for redistricting was complicated than I thought, because despite going back to the map for revision as directed by the Court, both the legislature and the governor still gave their approval signatory respectively, but for the court who stood its ground. This made me understand that redistricting is not as smooth as one will think. All three bodies must be on the same lane for 100%approval.

TASK 2 of redistricting Activity: Mission 2 (Partisan Gerrymandering Basic)

Political Party (Republican)

Mission (Goal): The State of Adams has 4 Seats distributed equally between Democrats and Republican with 2 Seats each, but we need to redistrict in favor of our party, Republican to have 3 Seats instead of 2.

1) No, I did not succeed to in gerrymandering the redistrict the lines in favor of the Republican Party.

– Non of the body of government approved my plan. However, the governor had to veto and called for a backup commission after the state failed to approve of it.

– My plan failed approval because according the State Legislature, a backup commission was required to redraw the lines to equal population after several attempts was made to no avail.

– The reasoning was simply that it was mapped as unconstitutional by the State Court. This was due to issues that intersect with redistricting policy, such as; ethnicity, race and electoral competitiveness, with respect to State Legislation for redistricting, which contradicts federal requirement standards.

2) After completing this section of the game, my impression is that it is difficult and complicated to use gerrymander in favor of one’s party. First, because of separation of powers. All sorts of self-favoritism, corruption, discrimination and dishonesty is scrutinized and counteracted by other government bodies involved in the process. Moreover, gerrymandering will be difficult in a process which requires equal state legislative representation for all citizens of all places and races, and it is unconstitutional if the largest and smallest districts are more than 10% apart.

Therefore, gerrymandering should be illegal and banned. Not only because it was considered unconstitutional by the court, but it is bad, biased, unfair, corrupt, and not a transparent approach. Also, Gerrymandering stands on the way of true democracy, and it violates the law of equal protection. Moreover, instead of voters choosing their representatives, it is the representatives who seem to chose their voters. In addition, gerrymandering obstructs winning by merit or majority because one party may get the majority votes and the other party ends up winning the election and carries more elected representatives; a very bad system. Thus, this are some of the reasons why I think gerrymandering should unapologetically be illegitimated.