Letter to the Editor
May 5, 2004
Fred Hiatt is quite right to finger redistricting as a
major problem with our democracy -- it's simply wrong to
allow elected officials to help their friends and hurt their
enemies ["Time to Draw the Line," op-ed, May 3].
But with nonpartisan redistricting, the number of
competitive districts around the nation would probably
increase from one in 10 seats to perhaps one in six -- doing
little to address the polarized nature of policymaking on
Capitol Hill and under-representation of women and
minorities.
It's time to modify winner-take-all elections, as nearly
all other enduring democracies have. One American example
comes from Illinois, where from 1870 to 1980 candidates for
the state House of Representatives ran in three-seat
districts, as is done in most of Maryland. A
full-representation voting method was used that lowered the
victory threshold for candidates from 50 to 25 percent.
The Illinois system didn't threaten the two-party system,
but it broadened representation within the parties and
promoted more bipartisan policy. It also gave most voters
better choices and fairer representation, and it boosted
representation of women and African Americans.
It would take only a statute to enact the Illinois system
of multi-seat districts for electing the U.S. House members
and most state legislators. Without it most voters are
doomed to electoral irrelevance no matter how we draw
district lines.
Rob Richie