Earlier this month, after years of litigation, a federal judge in Alabama ordered a new state senate map. In a surprising decision, the map she chose wasn’t one drafted by a court-appointed special master and his expert cartographer, but rather one that had been submitted by an anonymous member of the public, known only by their initials, “DD”.
The decision stunned “DD” – an 18-year-old freshman at the University of Alabama named Daniel DiDonato – who learned his map had been selected as he was preparing to leave for his 9.30am introduction to political science class.
“I was absolutely surprised,” he said in an interview. “Now, nearly 300,000 Alabamians will be voting under new district lines that I drew up at two in the morning in a dorm, a cramped dorm study room.”
I think it would be a good thing to provide people with access to mapping software that can plan redistricting in a fair way, or expose the way someone is doing it unfairly with evidence.
Since the teenager did the work of assembling the info, I think the headline is fine. Do I have to give credit to a calculator because I suck at math?
I mean, fairness is heavily predicated on your end goals. Even then, while I find the software fascinating and I’m glad it exists, I don’t see a huge strategic benefit in people wishcasting districts their states won’t let them have.
The other big lead-bury on this headline is the degree to which the courts have been wrangling over district maps for decades. This map is just the latest selected to rebalance Alabama and there’s little reason to believe it will stick
Well, there shouldn’t be districts anyway. It should just all be popular vote. But that’s a whole other topic.
Hard truths