From The Hill
It is widely believed that the partisan gerrymandering of election districts is unfair, but revising district boundaries to alleviate the problem is easier said than done.
Proposed methods for doing so involve such abstruse concepts as “efficiency gaps.” Perhaps his characterization was too harsh, but Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts probably spoke for many when he derided such approaches as “sociological gobbledygook.”
To prevent gerrymandering by politicians, the citizens of Colorado, Michigan and Missouri have just voted to have their election districts determined by experts. But this approach has not been conspicuously successful in California, which pioneered it.
There, the vote tallies for each political party diverge from their seat shares in both Congress and the state assembly as lopsidedly as in other states.
Yet, one can imagine a way to dispel the pernicious effects of gerrymandering without the need to modify any election districts. It can be described using data about the 2012 Wisconsin election for the state assembly, which was at the heart of a gerrymandering case that the Supreme Court considered this past term.