This bill would have allowed a greater range of options for individual states to configure their Congressional districts, giving them the ability to create districts that more fairly reflect the population of the state as a whole. Specifically, the States' Choice of Voting Act lifts the Congressionally-imposed 1967 requirement for single-member districts. Allowing states the choice to adopt multi-member districts, or a combination of multi-member and single-member districts, will give a greater chance for minority representation while at the same time, ending the incentive for politicians to create sprawling, oddly-shaped gerrymandered districts.
Rob Richie's discussion with Mel Watt about the Act.
Testimony is now on line from the September 23rd hearing on the States' Choice of Voting Systems Act (HR 1173)
Addressing Common Concerns about Multi-Seat House Districts for U.S. House Elections (HR 1173, 1999-2000 Session) A Center for Voting and Democracy Factsheet
Read the text of the legislation.
Read a "Dear Colleague" letter sent from North Carolina Representatives Mel Watt and Eva Clayton to the other 433 Members of Congress, asking for support of the States' Choice of Voting Act.
Proportional Representation: Next Step for Democracy Rep. Cynthia McKinney; Roll Call, February 14, 2000
Check the bill's current status, co-sponsors, and other legislative information through Thomas, the Library of Congress' system to track federal legislation.
Bigger districts don't mean more expensive campaigns. Analysis of campaign costs in single and multi-seats districts of North Carolina and Vermont
Maps of twisted districts are one feature of our online material about redistricting.
Super districts Examples of semi-proportional voting districts for Congress: Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina, Texas, Virginia.