Thursday, January 06, 2005

Redistricting in California

I was excited about Schwarzenegger's plan to end gerrymandering in California until I read Kevin Drum's post on why he can't support the plan. Gerrymandering is awful and the plan is pretty good, but it would only increase Republican dominance of Congress, and DeLay would laugh his head off that he managed to get away with his naked power grab while the idealist liberals in California surrendered some of their own power in the name of democracy.

It's like the Prisoner's Dilemma. If all 50 states end gerrymandering together, everyone wins (less extreme partisanship because legislative candidates actually would cater to the center; less bias in favor of incumbents; a more truly democratic system of representation). But if blue states end gerrymandering first, Democrats lose but Republicans win; if red states end gerrymandering first, Republicans lose but Democrats win; and if no one ends gerrymandering, we all lose. Unfortunately, rational actors will always choose to screw the other guy, so it looks like gerrymandering is here to stay. (Or, perhaps the solution is for a swing state to lead the way and end gerrymandering?)

It also reminds me of Robert Dahl's Polyarchy, in which he argued that democracy would have the best chances of emerging/surviving if the costs of losing were relatively low (i.e., you wouldn't be executed, have your whole estate confiscated). Could it be that the stakes are just too high these days for democratic reform? (Obviously gerrymandering is not like political executions, but I'm speaking relatively here...)

Well, maybe Schwarzenegger will win the day and California will be as a city upon the hill in better representative democracy. It could be good in the long run, I guess...

By the way, I am also a bit bothered by the somewhat Bonapartist strain in the way Schwarzenegger keeps threatening to "go to the people" with a popular referendum if the legislature won't go along with his demands. Something troubling about superceding normal checks and balances with easily manipulated mass democracy centered around a personality cult...

Update, 11 Jan: Jesse Zink expresses similar thoughts re: referenda at Doubly Sure, a thoughtful and well-written blog that I just discovered (amazing - the "Next Blog" link on the Blogger bar actually turned up something good!)


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Viagra side effects - Amongst sildenafil's rare but serious adverse effects are: priapism, severe hypotension, myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmias, stroke and increased intraocular pressure. Common side effects include sneezing, headache, flushing, dyspepsia, palpitations and photophobia.

Most detailed generic and brand Viagra price comparison tables in the net.

Generic Viagra (Sildenafil Citrate) belongs to a group of medicines that delay the enzymes called phosphodiesterases from working too quickly. The penis is one of the areas where these enzymes work. Viagra is used to treat men who have erectile dysfunction (also called sexual impotence). Sildenafil Citrate is an oral drug for male impotence, also known as erectile dysfunction (ED). It works by dilating blood vessels in the penis, allowing the inflow of blood needed for an erection.

Sildenafil citrate (viagra) is a drug used to treat male erectile dysfunction (impotence) and ulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Viagra is developed by the pharmaceutical company Pfizer. Viagra's primary competitors on the market are tadalafil (Cialis), and vardenafil (Levitra).

If you are constantly squeezing your budget to buy the you need than you might want to consider purchasing online. Compare prices before you buy. Original Pfizer Viagra. Ends all your Problems from top-rated Health & Beauty Supplies stores. Low price Viagra, Cialis, Levitra online non prescription.

Discount generic viagra, generic viagra, discount viagra, generic viagra discount, discounted viagra, discounted generic viagra, cheap viagra, cheap generic viagra, order viagra, order generic viagra, viagra alternative, viagra sale and even 4 free viagra pills online.

3/30/2008 07:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The latter, Web 2.0, is not defined as a static architecture. Web 2.0 can be generally characterized as a common set of architecture and design patterns, which can be implemented in multiple contexts. bu sitede en saglam pornolar izlenir.The list of common patterns includes the Mashup, Collaboration-Participation, Software as a Service (SaaS), Semantic Tagging (folksonomy), and Rich User Experience (also known as Rich Internet Application) patterns among others. These are augmented with themes for software architects such as trusting your users and harnessing collective intelligence. Most Web 2.0 architecture patterns rely on Service Oriented Architecture in order to function

11/03/2010 01:51:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home