The Opinion Exchange piece "Minnesota saved its seat, but 'safe seats' are dangerous" (April 30) raised some good points but overlooked a larger point: The country has become geographically much more polarized. That will make it much harder even for the most committed drawers of districts to make most of them competitive. The Tufts University mathematician Moon Duchin, an expert on redistricting and gerrymandering, investigated potential districts in Massachusetts with sophisticated computer programs and detailed voter information. She concluded that it was virtually impossible to redistrict that state to make even one Republican competitive. Some other states are just as strongly weighted toward Republicans.
While Minnesota is more evenly divided, the geographical split is still quite strong. If the writer wanted to have eight competitive districts here, the districts might look like pieces of pie, with the Twin Cities, a majority of the population, at the center of the pie so as to split that heavily Democratic area and similarly divide the heavily Republican outstate population. That would run counter to one goal of districts: representing a coherent group of people. Having each district include chunks of urban, suburban and rural voters would make it hard for any representative to represent any of those voices. Collin Peterson, a Democrat, was a very effective voice for farmers in the heavily agricultural (and Republican) Seventh District for a long time. Would there be any voice for farmers in Minnesota with eight competitive districts? Similarly, urban and suburban Minnesotan constituents deserve voices in Congress.
I agree that we need to avoid protecting incumbency. But the answer is not naively to try to make every district competitive. A number of mathematicians have been studying this problem and have more nuanced approaches. I encourage readers to check out the website of the Metric Geometry and Gerrymandering Group (mggg.org). We need to find a way to redistrict Minnesota that can fairly represent all Minnesotans.
Thomas Q. Sibley, St. Joseph, Minn.
• • •
I enjoyed reading the opinion piece about congressional "safe seats." All too often we allow incumbents to insulate themselves from electoral competition. Gerrymandered districts and harsh ballot access laws are probably the two most obvious examples.
Another possible solution to gerrymandering districts, which was not discussed, would be to have adopted some form of proportional representation. In theory, Minnesota could become one large, multi-member district, with seats awarded to a party based on the percentage of votes cast.
Yes, Congress would have to approve proportional representation in multi-member congressional elections — I believe that Congress banned the practice in the 1960s — but it would certainly make for more competitive elections.
Edward T.J. Brown, Parkers Prairie, Minn.
• • •
David Lebedoff points out the problem with "safe" districts; in brief, they promote extremism that leads to legislative gridlock. He says, "The cure for this is obvious: make most districts competitive." That may, indeed, be a cure, but it is not the cure. I won't spend time poking holes in Lebedoff's cure (e.g., that demographics change, that primary voters cannot be counted on to vote for the most electable party member in the race, that one can't know if district lines are drawn to make the district competitive ...) because his proposal is not without merit. But I will note that one state (Alaska) has a superior cure for discouraging fringe candidates. In that state, primaries are not by party. Their primaries look more like general elections; everybody is on one ballot. The top four vote-getters move on to the general where ranked-choice voting picks the winner. To be successful in that system candidates must have a broader appeal than just the party base. They won't win a primary by positioning themselves as the champions of the fringes of their parties.
This method is even more effective in finding representative candidates if, as Lebedoff suggests, districts are drawn fairly.