Proportional Representation
* As your editorial “Case of Amnesia for the High Court” (July 2) points out, the Supreme Court ruling on redistricting fails to “address how equal opportunities will be accomplished” if some districts are not drawn to favor racial minorities.
The real problem is that each single-member district is gerrymandered to favor one group or party to the disadvantage of all others. When a legislator gets elected with 51% of the vote, then 49% of that district’s voters are represented geographically by someone they opposed politically.
America’s antiquated winner-take-all system inherently wastes votes and distorts the will of the electorate, thus discouraging voter turnout. The only way we can make everyone’s vote count is to elect our legislators by proportional representation. This allows ethnic minorities, women, professional associations, political groups and other citizens to form voluntary constituencies, replacing arbitrary districts for the purpose of electing representatives.
The Supreme Court’s decisions on redistricting and term limits have opened the door for real electoral reform. Now is the time for us to finally catch up with the rest of the world. CASEY PETERS
Los Angeles
* “There’s something vaguely un-American about proportional representation.” So says William Schneider (Opinion, July 2). Apparently Schneider is unaware of the fact that the Democratic Party--and to a lesser extent the Republicans--have used proportional representation for years to allocate delegates to their presidential nominating conventions. Several cities and school districts--including Cambridge, Mass., New York, Cincinnati, and even some in the South--have used proportional representation. Un-American?
Where Schneider should really be directing his wrath is at preordained quotas of representation. That is what the paternalistic gerrymander--creating districts where minorities are the majority--is all about. Under real proportional representation, as much as in Schneider’s preferred system, “no group is entitled to a certain proportion of electoral victories.” The group still must earn its way--a very American idea. Voters are given the choice. If a minority voter wants to vote for a white candidate of her preferred party, she can. If she wants to vote for one of her own race, she can. The minority candidate thus must work to be elected. Paternalistic gerrymander limits voter options and Balkanizes voters and it is wrong.
MATTHEW SHUGART
La Jolla