Defining Communities of Interest in Redistricting Through Initiative Voting

Abstract

Abstract

Scholars of redistricting often make reference to “communities of interest,” either to describe what districts should look like, or to criticize blatant partisan gerrymanders. The term, however, suffers from a great deal of ambiguity, the lack of an objective measurement strategy, and the absence of a methodology for translating beliefs about communities of interest into districting plans. In this article, I suggest a novel approach to defining communities of interest: using the results from statewide initiative votes to allow voters to essentially define their own communities of interest at the ballot box. Such a definition would be fundamentally political—as opposed to geographic, demographic, civic, or historical—but would not be rooted solely in partisanship. This approach would also satisfy two of the concerns addressed above. First, it recommends a specific, objective, affirmative basis for constructing districts, not merely a list of recommendations, prohibitions, or standards that need to be satisfied. Second, it would likely produce a narrow, highly constrained set of possible solutions, and as such, would make it extremely difficult to gerrymander.