The recent decision from the U.S. Supreme Court regarding redistricting was based on several reasons, the major one being there is no standard to compare redistricting plans.
This is a major conundrum. The ultimate solution is actually a complex mathematical problem.
First, the states must be divided into districts that assign the number of representatives to the House of Representatives. This is predicated upon the density distributions of citizens that is available from the last census. This is a major reason for the census and is done today.
The second constraint is that the division must be made to equally distribute voter political associations among the districts. This is predicated upon the density distributions of voters from the last election.
Finally, the last constraint, if possible, is that the division must be made to minimize obvious segregation according to ethnic voters among the districts. Again, this is predicated upon the density distribution of ethnic citizens from the last census.
The constraints placed on the distribution of members in each district probably may make the redistricting standard solution not unique. Then how to judge among the several possible solutions?
The federal government should award a "Democracy Prize," say $1 million, to anyone who solves this complicated problem. Then a non-political committee should assign the standard solution to states rather than political parties as is done today.
Marty M. Sokoloski, PhD