Right on.
2
Democrats are just as responsible and reprehensible as Republicans when it come to Gerrymander ..
The quintessential Democrat playbook, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."
2
Chad McEvoy for President!
5
What a breath of fresh air to finally hear someone state that they are going to take some kind of positive action for a change in our broken districting system in order to better help the people. (How come Andrew Cuomo never implements changes like districting to better serve the people?)
I am a middle aged Caucasian femme with a very very Catholic first name and used to live in Brooklyn's most ridiculous district: Orthodox Jews of the highest order, Afro Caribbean, and a sliver of lower middle class caucasians.
What did Senator Eric Adams's Office do to help me when unable to wait the 2 month delay (which is illegal) at the food stamp office?
He sent me to the local rabbi!
9
Fine example of how republicans lie cheat and steal.
11
You will never read a statement even remotely resembling this writtent by a Republican.
14
Nice that the Times gives a democrat space for a campaign piece under the guise of attacking gerrymandering.
1
I absolutely agree that gerrymandering is a HUGE problem nationwide and best of luck in your quest...
...but it's ironic that you state you couldn't begin to articulate your needs because of gerrymandering, and then you itemize them quite well.
1
Try looking at my NY 10th Congressional district, which includes Columbia University to the West Village, the Brooklyn bound lanes of the Brooklyn Bridge, the docks of Sunset Park in Brooklyn, (but not Sunset Park) all the way down Ocean parkway (both sides) to Bensonhurst and South Brooklyn. Same problem, people from one end mostly have never been to the other end, and god knows how many languages or problems never overlap. As I recall, this started out as revenge to Bella Abzug in the 70's, but however it started, it's ridiculous.
3
There should be a law against these practices. Also, get rid of the electoral college. You don't have to wonder why our country has become so dysfunctional.
7
What a noble article - and a complete scam!
What we have here is the usual Democrat bemoaning something as old as the republic itself - gerrymandering. What Mr McEvoy really wants is more central planning from Albany - aka the epitome of the 'deep', 'dark' state.
I grew up in one of the town in the 101st District (Maryland), have family still there and I now own land nearby so I'm not buying it.
Mr McEvoy talks a lot about water and wastewater issues. Yet, he does not address the overweening presence of NYSDEC - a hidebound bureaucracy that knows or cares little for local ability to deal with their unfunded regulations. No, go hat in hand to the Legislature and NYSDEC - both populated with party hacks and career civil servants that are answerable to no one.
What's the next big issue in these towns - and their biggest tax burden? Schools. And what do you have there? The NYS Education Department, aka the graveyard for UFT and NEA hacks to secure union benefits and dues across NYS while robbing our children, especially here in NYC, of a quality education.
Instead of worrying about gerrymandering, how about consider how unrepresentative the NYS Legislature is with 132,000 people for each Assembly district? Or, even worse, how corrupt it is? Or, worst of all, how backwards it is, having dialed out all decision making to the Governor and special interests?
Save us your faux righteousness and 1) get government out of the way of the locals or 2) make it more effective.
2
How about the 21 st district where our congresswoman rarely shows her face, won't debate in public, and doesn't even live in the area, which runs for St. Lauwence Co. to Warren, Washington and Saratoga Counties, with a few more in between. She lives soutth of all of them and has not visitied them all. Her opponent, Tedra Cobb is talking to people in all the counties face to face. Stefanic (our present rep. wants to debate in Albany, not even part of the district.
2
Thank you for this honest article.
It was distressing because the NYT could be as brutally honest with this president and his 'caravan' of lies.
Yet, just as in the 2016 elections there is restraint by the NYT in BRUTALLY HONESTLY exposing Trump's continued onslaught of lies about healthcare, immigrants and China etc.
One last thing. Out voting machines are being hacked, the voting tallies are being changed, polling companies are being hacked, and poll results changed.
Rather than continue the drumbeat about the continued assault on our voting system, the elite media continues focusing on the days before the Midterms, and other minutiae.
The Democrats are at the cusp of LOSING both houses again. And rather than adapt to our new political reality, by changing their reporting style, the NYT and other elite outlets, continue to report as if these are normal times.
This article reminds us all of the abnormality of this era of chaos, corruption and division.
Thank you.
3
Wow, as a former New Yorker and alum of SUNY Delhi I would like to mention that Gerry Hall is a residence dorm on campus. The building is named for the family that produced the 5th VP of the US Elbridge Gerry. When serving as the 9th Goernor of Massachutsettes Gerry established the practice of district manipulation that is now known as Gerrymandering. Today the Gerry Foundation remains active throughout this district. The story is fitting to this twist of legeslative skullduggery.
4
Wow... finally some sanity in US politics
2
Gerrymandering is so clearly anti-democratic that it baffles any reasonable person why such a practice (which, by the way, goes back into the 19th century for its start) persists but the answer, really, is evident, at least in this present day.
The GOP has become a party made up mostly white, mostly male, mostly conservative voters who are slowly being edged out numerically. Their only recourse has been to focus on state legislatures so they can draw congressional district boundaries in their favor.
Ask your local Republican congressman what he thinks of an impartial body drawing up congressional districts and hear his answer.
2
You seem intelligent, thoughtful, and well meaning. I wish you luck.
This whole country could use more people who think more of their constituents than their ambitions. Sounds like you.
4
Here's what outrages me. The complete hypocrisy of Republicans & Democrats on this issue. Both sides do it but neither will cop to it. Democrats are just as guilty as Republicans when it comes to gerrymandering. That isn't a myth. Gerrymandering by a party (say, Republicans) creates safe Democratic seats. It's in a Democrat politician's self interest to help the Republicans gerrymander, even though collectively the Democrats suffer. The Democrats don't oppose gerrymandering itself; the only oppose gerrymandering when the other guys do it. In Democrat-controlled states, Dems still gerrymander & show no signs of stopping that practice. Their only real complaint is what it's always been: The Democrats have fewer and fewer opportunities to game the system because the Republicans control more & more of the states.
Right now it's impossible to fight gerrymandering, because you are bucking established Dems who would see their districts level out. The Democratic Party has zero interest in fixing this problem because our side wants the ability to cheat if and when they gain control of state legislatures. The only way to stop this problem once & for all is to have term limits for all politicians. For more insight into this issue I urge everyone to read a brilliant NYT article on December 27th, 2012 by Nate Silver. It proves beyond a reasonable doubt how corrupt both parties are when it comes to gerrymandering.
https://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/27/as-swing-districts-
4
Post the names of the elected officials who created this district.
1
Another good argument in favor of having district lines drawn by non-partisan boards.
But your arguments are compelling, Chad, and win or lose I hope you remain passionate and involved. The state and the nation need women and men like yourself.
9
Michigan has this on it's ballot this November, and it's about time! You can bet I will be voting in favor of it.
Proposal 18-2: Voters Not Politicians
Official ballot language:
A proposed constitutional amendment to establish a commission of citizens with exclusive authority
to adopt district boundaries for the Michigan Senate, Michigan House of Representatives
and U.S. Congress, every 10 years.
This proposed constitutional amendment would:
•Create a commission of 13 registered voters randomly selected by the Secretary of State: ◦4 each who self-identify as affiliated with the 2 major political parties; and
◦5 who self-identify as unaffiliated with major political parties.
•Prohibit partisan officeholders and candidates, their employees, certain relatives, and lobbyists from serving as commissioners.
•Establish new redistricting criteria including geographically compact and contiguous districts of equal population, reflecting Michigan’s diverse population and communities of interest.
•Districts shall not provide disproportionate advantage to political parties or candidates.
•Require an appropriation of funds for commission operations and commissioner compensation
14
Nice description of what is really wrong with US democracy on a national basis. This could be repeated in most states on the level of everything except state-wide and Senatorial contests. The pigs have been allowed to control access to the trough for too long -- the temptation to entrench incumbency and seek permanent party dominance is irresistible.
2
Gerrymandering is a crime against democracy. Good luck, Chad.
7
Assembly Districts should be as contiguous with Clunty lines as possible. This mapping is a sham on the voters. Go McEvoy in AD 101st
2
I randomly looked at a couple other districts in the state just for kicks...The State Senate seat extending towards Potsdam is equally ridiculous. Why no story about that?
http://www.elections.ny.gov/district-map/district-map.html#/?address=Pot...
The point, of course, is that we need to get rid of these stinkin' rules that let Albany or Washington pick these districts. It's simply astounding that we're using this system in 2018...all so some old white guy [are they any old black, Hispanic, or (gasp), native american women who benefit from gerrymandering...hmmm?] can stay in his seat - FOREVER!
2
Chad, as a former resident of that district I wish I could vote for you!
1
Really articulate and intelligent overview of the situation for someone named ‘Chad.’
If elected, I will not run for re-election.
1
Thank you Chad for the description of how gerrymandering disenfranchises so many. I live just two towns away from you, yet sadly you will not represent my town. Hopefully you will win and that will change.
4
Mr. McEvoy:
I wish you the best of luck, and that you will not deliberately be placed in a new district where you or an equality honest-minded candidate running this year, are forced into either retirement or a bitter primary.
While you’re at it, please do something about NY’s first 3 Congressional Districts, formless amoeba in bipartisan deals.
after the 2000 census, changed from an all-Suffolk County district, which before I could vote, was shaped as a safe GOP seat for Jim Grover so the 1st would be safe for Democrat Otis Pike, “the Congressman from Grumman (aircraft corp.) in the 60s- 70s
Grover committed sepaku for his party in 1972-3, the last Pro-Nixon House Judiciary Committee member Nixon impeachment,
and in 1974 the brash, arrogant, 24-year-old Democrat Tom Downey was swept in - turning 25 the week before he was seated.
Poor Tom aged badly, and the now-lobbyist was turned out when The Man from Hollywood swept through - in part because he forgot his district boundaries, altered to make the 1st and 2nd Republican, 3rd and, I think it was the 5th safe for your party.
For a decade, the 2nd stretched from a glob between my neighborhood and GOP Rep. King, Pete’s, along a corridor the length and width of NY Highway 135 into North Shore Nassau County’s “gold coast”, the population center of the district.
Had to cut most of the history gaming the county, which,should have at least 3 swing districts
2
at the next census each district will have 750,000 inhabitants. let panel of non-partisan citizens + statisticians + judges draw the lines.
1
Well said and I wish I could vote for you. The best of luck to you, Mr McEvoy!
2
Thank you Mr. McEvoy!
1
Since at the last redistricting each chamber of the State legislature basically redistricted itself, and the Democrat party controlled and still controls the Assembly, this district was obviously created to cement the Democrat majority in the Assembly -- likely by isolating a large swath of Republican voters in their own screwy district so as not to allow them to perhaps tip the balance elsewhere. Nice ploy by Mr. McEvoy, however.
1
Good Lord! A politician who wants to get rid of gerrymandering? Vote for this man. Please!
6
Such a moral stand surprises me.
1
This guy is way too rational and smart to ever be elected. Hopefully he has a backup plan, maybe airing some TV ads calling his opponent a child-molesting communist or something. This was a great article, though.
3
Funny, we never read this kind of article about districts where Democrats always win.
1
I had not paid much attention to Mr. McEvoy as he is not running in my district. I recently was introduced to him and he represents the practical, honest, non-politician who people seem to be clamoring for these days. This article is one of the best thought out, specific arguments against the scourge of gerrymandering, which can often seem an esoteric and remote issue.
I know the odds are stacked against Mr. McEvoy in a district specifically drawn to exclude him but I urge the 101st to consider him, not as a Democrat, but as an honest representative of your district.
4
Though I will admit that I have not thought this completely through, I don’t see why we couldn’t simply have a grid of evenly sized segments across any given state.
We don’t use equal grids because Senators and Assemblyman represent people, not land. A small piece of NYC therefore gets one Senator, just like hundreds of square miles of lightly populated Upstate.
2
As the president of United University Professions – the union that represents the faculty and staff of the State University of New York, and of which Mr. McEvoy is a proud member – I want to applaud him for raising the important issue of gerrymandered state and Congressional districts in New York.
Unions have long recognized this problem in this huge state, which by sheer force of its vast expanse lends itself to some truly bizarre shapes and sizes of districts, as Mr. McEvoy so aptly notes. Because of this, we have seen a loss of truly representational government that discourages fresh faces from running, because they know the odds are so deeply stacked against them. Fortunately, that was not the case for Mr. McEvoy.
Unions stand for fair and representational elections, in which everyone can vote for the candidates of their choice, and in which those candidates also reflect a realistic picture of the voters in their district. A district that is carved with a boning knife to trim out as many people from one party as possible can never be truly representational.
10
Many of the Western states came into being as more or less similarly sized rectangles with a nod to geographical features and ignoring the number of people. It was a foolish concept because hundreds of thousands of nearly empty square miles are politically meaningless. But constitutionally we are stuck with it forever as these smaller states have undue power and will never cede it. There is an easy fix for ending gerrymandered districts, which is top down voting. Here in Washington, the top ten vote getters would get the seats in the House. The same in the state government. If the thrust of an individual's campaign tilts to local/regional issues, they should be able to garner enough voted to make the roster. Of course this system has some flaws, but that will never be overcome.
1
Where’s the picture of the district? That’d help!
I hope you win!
1
Well said, Chad.
1
If you get it done, Chad, and I hope you do, come run in our district, the 19th; its a Republican rotten borough, and despite polls, I don’t know that Delgado can beat Faso. The Dems always bring in outsiders, but you’re less outside than most—so give it a shot.
5
I forgot this was about being "represented". Chad, my friend, the is about power and pushing your will upon those you "serve" all while making sure you can't be voted out. The "politicians" talk about a "rigged" system often referring to the economy but they know who does the real rigging.
1
The only way to describe this blatant vote rigging is un-American. What would the founding fathers say about what our country has become?
4
Why doesn’t this piece name the Assembly member whom both parties wanted to punish? She is Claudia Tenney, now representing NY 22 in Congress.
1
That's the mother of all gerrymanders! The Times should run a contest to find a competitor for the title anywhere in the US.
Actually, you could do this mathematically: (1) how many other political districts does it cross? (the maps are great). Or maybe which is the most extreme ratio of length to width?
4
@James Monaco
Ever heard of “the snake on the lake?”
@James Monaco -- This is clearly gerrymandering and/yet there are many more congressional districts like this. Do a quick Google for 'most gerrymandered congressional districts' and you'll be saddened and angered by blatant gerrymandering all over the country. Our democracy is in serious trouble and in grave risk with this kind of behavior.
3
It is definitely time for common sense in governance otherwise we are self destructing for good. Good luck Chad
2
Thank you for your brilliant map model. I hope it goes viral....gets reapplied over and over again and goes to work in the state of Georgia, first.
2
(ignore the Laredo address. I spent my career in the NY State political process). Take a look at the "Earmuff" district which stretches from Buffalo through Niagara Falls to Rochester--just so a democratic would be reelected. In the past the "deal" in Albany was the Senate Republicans drew their lines and the Assembly democrats drew the lines for themselves. The fight was over the Congressional districts. Looks like the Democrats will finally take the State Senate. Upstate rural areas will be emasculated if it stays that way in the redraw in 2021. A non partisan commission might be able to fix the mess, but that will only happen if there is a constitutional convention because the legislature will never voluntarily give up redistricting.
2
The more one learns about voting in NY State the more it sounds like the deep south, that would be corrupt. And unfortunately we can't say anything good about the voters either. It's a wonder the State functions, I guess the corruption is so deep and wide that it has become very well organized.
2
Brilliant essay, sir, and timely, too, seeing as though the congressional redistricting doesn't happen for another two years.
But, could you explain to me the how it wasn't gerrymandering in western Maryland to prevent a Republican from retaining his seat, or why the town of Newton in Massachusetts has any meaningful relationship with either Fall River or New Bedford and Fall River, or the Illinois 11th is shaped like a bow tie?
I'm all for eliminating gerrymandering, but, as both our Constitution and the Supreme Court say, redistricting is a POLITICAL process far more than it is a mechanical one.
So, you tell me how things are going to be done in such a way as politics is removed from the districting process and how the inevitable odd shapes of districts can be eliminated.
Please be specific, sir, because just saying that it can be done has yet to show that any real progress has been mad.
And please don't toss out the alleged non-political arrangement for redistricting in California...The only time it will ever come close to your ideal is the first time as the parties will have yet to figure out how to work the system to advantage...And every successive time it is used, it will become more and more political to the point that gerrymandering will be as bad as you claim it to be today.
1
A supreme court that would have ruled that gerrymandering violated the constitution is a dream for decades in the future.
People will have to get involved in controlling local state legislatures to have either voter commissions, and or a state constitutional amendment to demand that districts be as compact as possible. That follow natural boundaries.
County governments that have at large seats disenfranchise minority populations as well. They can never get a seat at the table.
4
Good Luck, Mr. McEvoy.
Yes, it is past time for impartial, non-political citizen and judge panels take over redistricting in strict compliance with census figures by population only.
Not the 2020 presidential gerrymandered census The Con Don and his Robber Baron brethren are trying to push through but a true census of where people actually live.
WE THE PEOPLE must demand it unless we want the Koch brothers and other democracy-destroyers to continue to decide where and if WE get to vote.
5
There has to be a better way to define voting districts--- this makes a mockery of our political system, and it has been done by both parties. Republicans, however, have turned gerrymandering into a fine art---- and that is no compliment.
How about this for a trial balloon--- get both parties to agree on fair criteria to put into a computer program, then let the computer generate and define the districts.
7
@Bobcb A couple of years ago the New York state constitution was amended to create a less partisan redistricting process. The next time will be the first time it's used.
2
Thank you for writing this. Gerrymandering is an issue that more people need to comprehend and understand. Our democracy is dying, if not already dead. The country is going through radical changes which go against the will of the people. There are many glaring examples, but when POTUS wins with 3 million less votes, when 52% of voters in Pennsylvania vote Democrat for Congress but only 5 of 18 seats are awarded to Democrats, when Democrats win the popular vote for Senate seats by almost 6 million votes, but Republicans maintain the majority, the will of the people has been stolen.
The current government is destroying our environment, our justice system, civil liberties, alliances that are almost a century old, America's standing in the world, and overall human decency. They are doing all of this against the will of the people, and in many ways have effectively stolen the reigns of government from the people.
15
@Bull Moose 2020...
Our democracy is being killed off far faster by those who refuse to accept the results of elections than any gerrymandering that is going on.
We've had gerrymandering in our political redistricting ever since the two-party system took hold in the late 18th century. The nation has survived rather well, even prospered, under the patently political process that is redistricting.
The way to assure that redistricting doesn't hurt you political party is for your political party to win elections. It's really the only fair way to do it. And, in all such contests, elections have consequences.
It seems some what petty to wish to change the rules just because you lose. And changing the rules is exactly what you are suggesting is the solution to your failure to win elections.
That's not very "democratic", now, is it.
1
The most shocking news to a European like me is that a smaller district is not necessarily part of one larger one. I thought it was a quite obvious rule
3
@Fabio418 In Ohio, where I lived for a while, state Senate districts are indeed defined by which two or three state House districts comprise them. New Jersey created 40 state legislative districts, each of which elects two assemblymembers and one senator.
So, there's no reason this can't be (this is a result of New York having had different parties in control of the Assembly and Senate for decades), but there's no reason this has to be, either.
1
I'm a Democrat and am generally in favor of keeping rural influence at bay given the tendency there to vote for rabble like Trump. However, this badly drawn assembly district goes too far. The frustration there has obviously led to the election of their current representative. We've seen how gerrymandering to concentrate voters for racial reasons works in North Carolina, but economically these folks in NY deserve better representation than they're getting. We in NYC depend on the local produce of these areas to keep good food coming here. We should support the needs of our rural brethren, and hopefully they'll be more inclined to repress their worst instincts.
7
Hi skimish - I'm an upstate Democrat (contrary to popular belief, we exist past the Metro-North line). As this piece points out, Upstate New York has many diverse communities with unique political, economic and environmental concerns. We deserve fair representation not because we happen to supply some of NYC's farmers markets, but because we are your neighbours! Don't paint your "rural brethren" with such a broad brush - now more than ever, we need advocates and allies who take the time to listen.
3
As a native of upstate New York and a Democrat, I find your outlook bizarre. Rural voters deserve to have their votes counted, their voices heard and their economic and environmental needs tended to just as much as our urban brethren, whether you agree with them or not. It's called democracy.
Please keep in mind that upstate residents do a lot more than provide the food that fills your table. It always seems to shock Big Apples residents to learn that upstate exists, but where would you be without us? Thirsty, for one thing. The water that fills New York City faucets flows from upstate.
@Rusl
All of which is fine, but it would seem that "upstate Democrat"s are a rare breed. If not a "broad brush", perhaps a wide one is a better way to put it.
Much too reasonable. No chance to win, I assume.
10
Testify! Gerrymandering is one of the most obscene political practices in the modern era. With the use of demographic data and GIS software, politicians are quite literally choosing their own voters rather than the other way around. They are negotiating whether or not to represent you. Naturally, the results are not good for voters.
We need to think bigger than New York's 101st though. We need to think about the nation as a whole. Allowing politicians to control district lines is an inherent conflict of interest. They have a natural incentive to abuse voters. The power is fundamentally misplaced in the legislature.
This isn't a partisan issue either. Anti-gerrymandering movements aren't seeking to empower Democrats at the expense of Republicans. This will happen in some places. However, Republicans will gain in other places. Winning and losing is anathema to the concept of non-partisan districting. What we want is district lines that make sense.
Take Holladay, Utah for example. Holladay is a town of about 30,000 people. The town is split up into 4 state House seats, 2 state Senate seats and 2 congressional seats. That makes no sense. Worse than nonsensical, gerrymandering is unrepresentative and inefficient. Politicians are increasing your tax bill in order to collect a paycheck. You are paying for their corruption.
Utah state senator Todd Weiler literally said "To the victors go the spoils." I say NO. You're here to serve us. If you live in Utah, vote YES on Prop 4.
16
@Andy...
No, sir, gerrymandering is not the worst political practice.
Failing to accept the results of elections takes that title.
And you on the left are guilty beyond all reasonable doubt of not being willing to accept that your candidate in the 2016 presidential election managed to lose an election that was hers to lose.
I understand the heartache that you might have as a result of Hillary Clinton's pathetic presidential campaign.
But I, too, was most disappointed when Barack Obama was elected as president. But I neither called for his impeachment or complained about his Supreme Court nominees. I disapproved of the Obamacare bill, but accepted it as it was Congress in its wisdom that passed it.
And, instead of trying to change the rules to assure that my viewpoint held sway during the next election(s), I helped to achieve the message and solidarity that was necessary to win election.
And for the next decade, I and my fellow conservatives had the better message and won elections, including the most decisive election of every decade...the one before the decennial census.
Try working to win the votes of The People instead of trying to tear down our democracy with your decidedly anti-democratic, anarchic rhetoric and actions,
1
I live in that district and will vote for Chad McEvoy on Nov 6. It's ironic that he gets attention in the NY Times, but not so much in this snake-like district. It's very hard to find good information about candidates and the differences in media markets and interests make it impossible for us to be know the candidates.
22
So here's "the rest of the story" ... As noted in one former representative's comment, this most peculiar district was jointly decided by Dems and Reps as a meandering land of exile for an Assemblywoman neither could abide - one Claudia (the Claw) Tenney. She won unopposed in this rural Elba on the Hudson - and used this peculiar foothold two years later to wrap her arms around Trump to narrowly win the 22nd District Congressional seat which she now occupies as an Albany bashing DC loving most ardent and supplicant Trumpublican worthy of the most scarlet of red states. Thus showing the dire unintended consequences which manipulative districting can lead to.
29
@Jerry Farnsworth She wasn't unopposed when she ran for it (and indeed she actually proposed a different map), but to be fair, until this election I haven't seen a Democrat who took running in this district (I live near its southern end) as seriously as Mr. McEvoy has been able to. I also haven't seen the Republican incumbent, who's basically a creature of the Oneida County Republican Party, in our end of the district much).
Elba on the Hudson? Please ... more like Elba on the Mohawk/Leatherstocking/Catskills.
2
@Daniel Case - I stand corrected on the minor points you cite. Indeed, you remind that Tenney had an easily defeated (and forgotten), nominal "opponent" - Should have said Elba on the Mohawk - or gone with Fennimore Cooper as in "Dumbs Along the Mohawk." But the main point remains. Tenney's unfortunate elevation to Congress demonstrates the hapless unintended consequences which districting contortions and bring - to all sides.
McEvoy would have my vote if I were in the 101. He seems intelligent, informed and intent on representing his constituents. And this common sense critique of gerrymandering spells it out clearly while respecting the intelligence of the voter. This is a rare combination in politics today. But gosh, why is it so rare? We have the power to elect our own representatives, and here’s a chance to get ourselves a real one. Get out there and vote!
23
We have a proposal on our Nov 6 ballot in Michigan to address gerrymandering. I live in the 3rd district, our rep is Republican Justin Amash, who has one of the safest congressional seats in the country, due to gerrymandering. Not quite as ridiculous as the district discussed in this article, but still a doozy. Amash happens to be from Grand Rapids, home to Betsy Devos, our billionaire Sec of Education who funneled big $ into the Trump campaign. Thus, her job. But I digress.
The proposal may not be perfect, but is a start with 4 registered voters from each major party, and 5 independents.
15
What a graphic description of what gerrymandering does to the citizens of this district.
It is time for us to have a non-partisan group to look at every State in the Union and draw the districts into geographic sense.
Politics and Parties should have no say in what a District should be.
Geography is not rocket science. In fact, the more I think of it a good Geography Teacher and their class of 8th graders could do the job.
Or hire the Professor of Clark University in Worcester, Mass and their class to do the job.
They actually have a degree for Geography at Clark.
22
Chad--
If you win, please run for Congress.
If you lose, please run for Congress.
A politician pursuing an agenda beyond unenlightened self-interest is all too rare, and should be encouraged.
63
@SomeGuy
Not likely. Given the cost of running for office these days.
New York's political districts are gerrymandered to ensure specific parties and specific candidates retain their control. I remember in the 1980's when Assemblywoman Jacobs was discussing which block would be included in her district and how it would influence her chances for reelection. The NY Times continues to endorse candidates who have voted for 40 years to approve these gerrymandered districts. It is a little disingenuous for the Times to publish articles about how bad it is and then endorse the politicians who vote to approve it.
9
What is the history of Gerrymandering? Who, What started it? Is this democracy in action?
@Mishomis
There's probably a good article in Wikipedia on this. It all got started with a politician named Gerry.
@Mishomis
Gerrymandering began in 1812 when Governor Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts successfully implemented a district designed to keep his party in power. A newspaper cartoonist thought the district looked like a salamander, drew a head and legs on it, and called it a gerrymander. Incidentally, the name Gerry is pronounced with a hard G, so the correct pronunciation is gerrymander, not jerrymander.
@Mishomis It gets its name from Elbridge Gerry, a congressman from Massachusetts in the 1800s. He had his district drawn to preserve his election prospects, in such a way that it looked on the map like a salamander, and someone called it a "gerrymander". The name stuck, although today we pronounce it with a soft "g".
"When politicians pick their voters, they often no longer feel compelled to work hard in order to..." A truism whose potency is lessened when one considers that in addition to the elimination of a flawed human violating, political, creation is the need to eliminate personal unaccountability of elected and selected policymakers. Of whatever party. Of whatever political ideology. When the General Semanticists caveated US that the "map is not the territory" which it is created to graphically represent, they were, perhaps, unaware that maps can, and are, used to violate democratic principles. Lifestyles. Menschlich values and norms. This "map" graphically represents shamelessness. Not townships. Political needs. Not daily human necessities. Enabling much-needed civility between fellow beings. Sustainable mutual trust. Consideration of "the other;" those whom we know as well as the stranger. Mutual respect. Caringness that continues post-election. Mutual help, when and if needed. Gerrymandering is not simply about lines on a map. It's about bullying-barriers. when "bridges" are needed in our divided country with its diverse populations. Topographical as well as cultural ways. When the 101 disappears it will be, according to this article, a 100% victory for political accountability and constituent caring and contributions.
3
Gerrymandering may be the best argument for either party lists or multi-representative districts. We need to stop these anti-democratic policies and that has to start by getting politicians out of the process.
16
My Austin district stretches hundreds of miles away and is mostly a large glob in northeast Texas with a slender finger that reaches into Austin. The rest of Austin's districts are similar. Most of their area is far from the city. The reason is clear, prevent the comparatively liberal city from having much of a say in electing their representatives. This dilution of vote clearly violates the concept of 1 person, 1 vote. It is time to end this and require districts to be compact. Yes there will be districts with liberal representation and others with conservative representatives... but at least then the majority of the people living in the district will be fairly represented. I vote knowing that my selection for representative will be overridden by a gerrymandered district. Unfortunately, many don't vote because they think my vote doesn't matter. That means many down-ballot selections are made by a small minority of voters. This is hardly the example to the world of Democracy and the sooner it changes the better for all.
40
@CharlesM1950...
Excuse me...
Do you get to vote as to who represents you?
Then the one-person, one-vote requirement is satisfied.
Are you now claiming that it should be one-person, one-vote-that-counts that is the new standard?
I so, how do I, as a conservative in Massachusetts, be afford the same standard as the one that you are claiming?
Please be specific as my support for your thinking is in the balance.
1
What should be done to map districts, ideally, would be to start with a population distribution map, and then create districts that would afford as even a distribution of representation to approximately equal numbers of people. Yes, this may lead to more numerous but smaller districts downstate, with larger and fewer upstate, but at least the ideal of equally balanced representation would be largely realized. I doubt it could be worse than what we have now.
6
The Supreme Court long ago demanded that districts have the same population size, what they failed to do was require them to be compact or drawn without regard for the desires of incumbents of the dominant party.
8
@Patrick
We already have such a map. They're called counties. Districts should mirror counties. In some cases, several counties would be grouped together. In other cases, counties would be subdivided into several districts. The law should require districts to be geographically compact.
1
@rlschles In New York though, our least populous county (Hamilton, in the center of the Adirondacks) has a population of about 3,000, while our most populous county (New York) has a thousand times that. Not the most equitable formula for basing your district map on.
I live in the 121st New York Assembly District next to Chad's horribly gerrymandered 101st District. Chad's letter hits the nail on the head. I have known Chad for several years. He is a thoughtful and fair minded person grounded in ecological economics. He has the honesty I would like to see in our NY political landscape which is so flawed with corruption at the highest levels. We need his talents in upstate NY. I wish I could vote for him. If you are in the 101st District vote for him. He is the real thing.
53
@James...
Is this a comment on what McEvoy has to say?
Or is it a political endorsement?
Albany is not alone in being guilty of gerrymandering. It's basically the norm in most states. As a result, we are not represented, but businesses and their lobbyists are.
Even when our elected officials do a good job, it's usually because they are good at trading their vote. "I'll give you a bridge if you give me a new school tax" is not what good government is made from.
A legislative representative is supposed to look out for the interests of their district. But they are also supposed to recognize that their district is part of the state. It can never be all one or the other.
What do we do when the people responsible for this mess are the ones who control all options for change?
In many Western states their constitutions provide for referendums where voters can sign petition to get issues on the ballot, often over the opposition of their "elected representative."
We need something similar in New York.
17
Political gerrymandering has been part and parcel of politics going back as far as you want. Presumably there is a commission compromised of reps from both mainstream parties and the results are some sort of workable compromise. But it has gotten way out of hand in many parts of the country and we take yet another step towards becoming just another corrupt nation in the world. Sad! I dearly hope Bernie and others in the congress find ways to reverse this trend.
7
@WhiskeyJack
Someone wrote a book a few years ago about the history of corruption in the US. In our earliest days, it was about land. There was no aerial imaging then and to guide further development, surveyors explored the land to see what was there and to establish boundaries. The quality of all land remained undetermined and unbounded until men like Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln surveyed it. Early surveyors were the first to know what was the best land.
Knowledge and possession of the best soil would form the basis for future wealth. In general, bottomland was the best. Corrupt practices could establish property boundaries that would concentrate the best land within one set of boundaries and rocky and hilly soil within other boundaries. Landed gentry in one area and "hillbillies" in another. Described by metes and bounds.
One way to improve fairness was to limit the aspect ratio of individual the property boundaries. In other words, to make them more regular/square and less meandering.
Probably the origin of the Square Deal.
Later, surveys in the Midwest were based on rectangular Lat-Long measurements.
For awhile land was the focus of corruption. Now, the divisions are prompted by education and voters.
Aspect ratio limitations should be considered -- a new square deal.
1
@WhiskeyJack...
Bernie and his friends, and for that matter, those that oppose him in Congress have absolutely nothing to say about the matter. And, a very strong argument could be made that sitting senators have no business talking about how members of the House of Representatives are elected.
The election of people to the House of Representatives is a matter for the States to decide...that is what the Constitution requires.
Your knowledge of our system of government is appallingly inadequate, sir.
And given its inadequacy, why should anyone who has read and understands the processes by which our Constitution's provisions are implemented give your view any credence other than being an opinion that you are rightfully allow to hold?
1
I used to live in this district (in Neversink)--and I never thought anyone would notice or care about how all of us in this district were effectively disenfranchised. Thank you for bringing this to national attention.
43
I am a resident in a district next door to the 101st. and therefore will not have the privilege of casting my vote for Chad McAvoy. However, he is the one candidate who truly represents my views illustrated so perfectly in this piece. I thank him....he is deserving of the seat he's running for.
45
@Lilian Voorhees,
Agreed!
1
Surely such a district can't exist in New York, since republicans only do this terrible type of thing.
3
@vulcanalex
Next time, read.
"The 101st was drawn in 2012, so the story goes, by Republicans to punish one of their own caucus members yet remain a safe Republican seat. In other words, its design is actively antidemocratic. (Broadly speaking, anything that artificially makes a district less competitive makes it less democratic.)"
You're welcome.
30
I sense sarcasm, but I'll bite. To clarify, Republicans, through the help of the IDC, control the State Senate and were in control of drawing the district maps in 2012 after the 2010 census. That is why its important that this same segment is not in control after the 2020 census.
29
@vulcanalex
Solid tongue-in-cheek comment. However, if you look at data from across the country on a county and district basis, you will notice that both Republicans & Democrats utilize gerrymandering. SCOTUS needs to come up a crystalized and universal test that the lower courts can uniformly apply in the quest to remedy this undemocratic phenomenon.
1
I know Mr. McEvoy and I I find him to be smart, concerned and dedicated to the issues that affect his district.
If any candidate has the fortitude and grit to make sense out of chaos, its Chad McEvoy.
27
I’m a potential future constituent. I got his flyer in my door the other day, looked at the map, and thought the exact same thing. I wasn’t paying any attention to this race, but Chad has my vote now.
52
Good essay, thoughtful, articulate. Let's hope he wins and can then abolish or transform his own assembly district!
26
Yes, please. And let us recollect the House of Representatives was where our Founders conceived the legislative processes being specifically 'OF the People, BY the People and FOR the People'.
Let us also recollect that in 1911 the Apportionment Act locked the number of Representatives in the House at 435, based on the census of 1910. In 1910 the US population was 91 million and it has grown north of 321 million since. By our founders' standards then, 230 million Americans are either UNDER represented today or not represented AT ALL.
State-wide gerrymandering? How country wide? Simple math says there should be more than 435 Reps in the House of Representatives, something OVER 1530 in fact, enough that control can't be easily purchased by the Koch Bros or manipulated by the Rupert-Rush 'News' Teams.
Vote out the Cons, yes. Vote in open-minded progressives, absolutely. Consider calling a new Constitutional Convention to get Puerto Rico and Washington D.C. onboard as States, yes. But consider doing away with the Apportionment Act of 1911 as well. Our legislative process was NOT created to foster oligarchy or national feudalism, but that's the direction 'special interests' have it trending. Cast your vote for an ongoing democracy this November, not the Middle Ages.
37
@Wm Conelly This is a state district, has nothing to do with the federal government, and is in Dem New York. Those things won't be happening, some require changes in the constitution, others are just stupid like having a house with many more individuals. And PR should be a country, they have rejected being a state in the past. DC as well needs to stay as it is.
4
@vulcanalex
After their neglect by Trump during Maria, and the corruption that lead to bankruptcy, PR probably realizes it needs statehood to get any attention. And DC has twice the population of Wyoming; why do we just combine Wyoming with Utah, and make DC a state instead?
And a good way to get around the fact thatWyoming has 1 rep for 300,000 people while each California rep has 800,000 constituents would be solved by expanding the House. One person one vote is something even Karl Rove would have to pretend to agree with...
@Wm Conelly,What you propose would mean even less press coverage of specific Congresspeople. I would actually prefer cutting the number of House members in half, although that would further empower tiny states (population-wise) unless combined with a provision to have one House member represent more than one state. Don't worry, it is never going to happen.
1
Chad McEvoy is fantastic. He is smart and sees people as people not chess pieces. So glad I can vote for him.
29
Back when they were putting it all together, organizing and structuring counties, voting at the county seats demanded that nobody should be further than one day's ride away.
Now we have things like telephones, credit cards, computers on that world wide web, etc
Why is God's good name don't we just vote at large?
No more districts.
Just population count equals proportional representation.
Simple huh?
I can use my credit card and bankrupt myself in hours.
No problem. Sitting here at my desk.
Everybody is so secure spending fortunes.
But for some cynical reason,
to vote, you've got to get up, drive, wait in line,
prove you are who you say you are and etc.
Hey, that reminds me,
I gotta pay those three insurance policies,
totaling out around $1200 right now on the internet.
Then come November I gotta go do the vote thing.
14
@Bruce Because that would allow a majority to abuse their position to empose things on a minority.
1
@vulcanalex
At the rate the USA is going it might be better to let the majority have their say once in a while. Certainly it doesn't make sense for the minority to be imposing it's will on the majority. I think the original intention was that there would be checks and balances in the system of government, so that tyranny would be avoided, NOT that the tyranny of the minority (as in an oligarchy or monarchy) would prevail.
@Bruce, At large is its own big problem. Minorities do not get represented.
how many watersheds does it cross. watersheds are how we SHOULD define our geographical and political boundaries.
11
I, too, live in a gerrymandered district: the 10th Congressional District of New York, represented by Jerrold Nadler. It stretches all the way from Morningside Heights, down the West Side of Manhattan, crosses the East River, skirts the waterfront of Brooklyn, and finally ends up in the neighborhoods of South Brooklyn, including Borough Park. While this district isn't nearly as large as the one Mr. McEvoy is vying for upstate, the district lines are equally nonsensical. It is not a partisan gerrymander, in the sense that the district is overwhelmingly Democratic. I could never understand why the powers that be felt the need to create such a district in a city of over 8 million people, where there are voters aplenty and the partisan tilt is overwhelmingly in one direction.
I got my answer this summer, when I volunteered for one of the insurgent candidates for the State Senate, who were running against the members of the former IDC. I asked the candidate's press secretary this very question, and he told me that politicians like to divide up communities, in order to make it more difficult for community-based opponents to challenge them. Divide and conquer, if you will.
It's high time that redistricting be taken out of the hands of those who have an inherent conflict of interest and be entrusted to an independent process. Gerrymandering is a national problem, not just one limited to the "red" states.
84
@ProSkeptic
Divide communities, in effect, choosing their voters. Not the other way around.
We need to demand that not happen.
17
@ProSkeptic
"It is not a partisan gerrymander, in the sense that the district is overwhelmingly Democratic. "
All gerrymandering is partisan. When you put voters into one such district it affects which voters are in others.
13
@kwb
Yeah. So lumping all the Democrats into one district does not give them a voice in other districts, thus limiting the possibility of more moderate candidates.
Being from Texas, I have little interest in the 101st State Assembly District in New York; however, I was fascinated by the headline of your piece. The 101st could easily serve as the "poster child" of what is wrong with gerrymandering. Your discussion is thorough, and I applaud you for promising to abolish the district if elected. Good luck.
138
@RF Good points but I bet he does not have the power to change it and other districts would also be effected. Those that did this are not going to change it just for him. Mostly politics, not reality.
2
@vulcanalex So the answer is do nothing and just accept gerrymandering? Seriously? Of course, other areas would be affected; they would gain new citizens.
p.s. "ITS position to IMPOSE …" AFFECT not effect.
@vulcanalex In a few years all the district boundaries will be redrawn, so yes, the power to change it will be there.
People matter, and have a right to a voice in government. Acres don't. Geography shouldn't be a basis for anything.
That cuts both ways: geographic compactness isn't an ideal to be prized in itself, any more than oddly-shaped districts should be allowed to be used as a way of rigging elections. It's the election-rigging that matters, not the way things look on a map.
The legislative process should represent everyone. Hypothetically, that could be achieved by having each legislator elected by a diverse set of people, if the institutions would ensure that each legislator is responsive to all their constituents. Alternatively (again hypothetically) it could be achieved by having a diverse set of legislators, each representing a very different constituency, if the institutions could ensure that every legislator has a real voice in the legislature.
That, not anything about geography, should be the bottom line. We need to get rid of the winner-take-all plurality election system, which gives legislators an incentive to represent only the median swing voter. There are lots of ways of doing that. Redistricting -- having winner-take-all districts of different shapes -- isn't one of them.
4
@dsws Absolutely correct. In the 21st century geographic state districts are an anachronism. To end gerrymandering, assign registered voters randomly - and in equal numbers - to as many districts as the state has/needs/wants - for state senate and state rep. There'd still be town & city & village gov't for local issues. Also use ranked voting to put a damper on extremism. Also, enact in each state the National Popular Vote Count to end the travesty of minority national rule (while still adhering to the Constitution w/ resp. to the electoral college).
7
@Unconvinced I often wonder if it's time for some jurisdiction to implement that solution proposed by the professor in Robert Heinlein's "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress": Get rid of not only districts but regularly scheduled elections. Every member of a legislative body would serve if they got a certain amount of qualified citizens to sign a petition for them ... that way they would represent the interests of all their supporters, not just the majority.
They would have to leave service if enough people removed their signatures and transferred them to someone else.
I wish I could vote for you!
23
The state senate and assembly districts aren't the same, with the same borders and the same district numbers? Sheesh.
We have our own bizarro stuff here, but at least the state districts are the same for our state senators and state representatives.
10
“When politicians pick their voters”.
The simplest, most accurate description of gerrymandering.
64
Democrats control the Assembly by a more than 2-1 margin and have always had the final say over their own districting. How could Republicans have dictated this district? This district is as long and thin as it is to pack as many rural Republicans in one district is possible, thus ensuring the Democrats have a 2-1 majority in the Assembly and can pick the New York Board of Regents with no outside influence. It will be a great upset if Mr. McEvoy, a Democrat can win this district, but it was his party who blessed it.
13
@Amanda Read the article. This district was proposed by Republicans who wanted to punish then-Assemblywoman Claudia Tenney. She was chief of staff for her predecessor (some say more than that) when he retired in 2010, and rode that year's Tea Party wave to an upset victory over the local GOP's pick in the primary, and since the district as it existed at the time was just as Republican, won the general.
In the Assembly she decided to be as conservative as she had when she ran, which is to say more conservative than the party leadership, whom she often criticized. They naturally retaliated by getting the Democrats and their Republican colleagues in the Senate to redraw the boundaries in redistricting so that she shared her district with the minority leader. After she complained mightily about this, the map was redrawn so that her house in New Hartford was literally just inside the northern boundary of a district that stretches over a hundred miles down to where I live (previously the 101st was an even worse gerrymander that had no incumbent).
So, yeah, Democrats drew the map, but they threw the GOP a bone here since there was no way they could draw a more compact Democratic-leaning district in much of that territory.
@Amanda
Republicans, one hundred years ago, where the majority.
I read your article because of the provoking, if not interesting, headline and out of curiosity. Thanks for explaing this complex and apparently hopeless situation.
Another curiosity I have is if you won, sir, how would you go about to get rid of the district? I’d like to know for my own knowledge.
Best wishes on your win and the aftermath.
27
@Anna Thai Alone he can't, he could propose it.
@Anna Thai It won't be hard to get rid of it. After 2020, there will be a new census and redistricting; the 2022 elections will take place with different district lines.
Wow! A political candidate who speaks to the electorate as if their intelligent and able to understand a complex issue. Mr. McEvoy wish I was in your district but thanks for a most comprehensive overview of the problem of gerrymandering.
56
Mr. McEvoy puts forth a convincing argument. I hope he wins!
44
I believe the state government is dominated much more by Wall Street and wealthy New York City suburbs than by the city itself. If not, why would the state still be resisting paying the city what it legally should get in school aid? And if not, why would the school aid formula end up giving more money per pupil to some wealthy suburban districts than to some poor and very needy upstate districts?
24
I am so tired of hearing about procedural checks on gerrymandering (McEvoy, 10/24): if only we can establish an independent commission, everything will be corrected; if only we can professionalize the mapping process, everything will be fair. The problem with an independent commission is that it can be subverted by whomever selects the "independents"; the only problem with professional automated procedures is that the procedures need to be transparent and well-vetted, and the evaluation needs to be open and above board.
I would like some simple geometry and mathematics introduced as a matter of law. If a district has more than 12 edges, it is gerrymandered. If the square of the district's perimeter is greater than 25 times the area, the district is gerrymandered. If the percentage of statewide actual voters for each party significantly differs in ANY election from the percentage of legislators produced for each party by a legislative map, then the legislative map is gerrymandered. Of course, the provisions of the Voting Rights Act should continue to be enforced, as if we we all lived in areas with a history of segregation (because we all do, Justice Roberts: pre-clearance is wrong because it is not applied everywhere it is needed; not because it is only applied by geographic assertions of color-blindness).
110
@Ben Please see https://news.brown.edu/articles/2017/11/redistricting about a sophisticated mathematical approach to combating gerrymandering. The article specifically shows how a redrawn New York State map would look.
16
@Larry I'm pretty sure that map is for New York's (US) congressional districts, which aren't nearly as bad as the state ones. (Your point about Brown's k-means clustering or other algorithms to address the problem still stands though! )
6
@Ben The problem with "edges" is tougher than you think. It is similar to the coastline measurement problem.
New York should follow the lead of Oregon. In the Beaver State, every two adjacent state house districts are combined to form one state senate district. It makes much more sense than the monstrosity of the New York State Assembly.
39
@Metaphor The Democrats have run the Assembly since 1974; the Republicans have controlled the Senate since 1966. Until that changes (which I hope it does in a couple of weeks) that's not going to happen.
Another problem with doing that is that New York has a fixed number of Assembly seats: 150. The state constitution says that in black and white. But the Senate is merely supposed to have a minimum of 60 seats, and for the last several censuses the Republicans have preserved their majority by adding a seat each time, so we now have 63. How do you then create combined districts with those ratios? It might look worse than the present approach.
@Metaphor Nah, too simple. It'd never fly in Albany, where they like to make things as complicated as possible. I suppose the next thing you're going to tell me is that Oregonians vote by mail. Oh wait, you do! But thanks for the suggestion!
Aptly encapsulates the biggest problem with gerrymandered districts. So long as it is safe, the incumbent lacks any incentive to advocate for the needs of constituents. Rather than benefit, they are ignored.
82
I live in one of the most gerrymandered districts in the country - created by Republicans to water down
the progressive vote. More votes are cast for Democrats, but you will never see them in office.
If Republican policies are so unpopular, I don't understand their insistence on winning by gaming the system vs listening to the needs of their constituents.
The more power Republicans have, the deeper they will solidify that power.
Wake up
145
@Al Yes New York is highly Dem and this article is about New York.
@Al I lived in NC a long time, and watched the Republicans slowly take over, cheating, lying and stealing to force their corporate owned, racist, misogynist representatives into office by any means necessary, not by representing majority vote. When neighbours stopped talking to each other I left. NC is a perfect miniature example of the entire U.S. - we have to care enough to stand up and take action, not just complain - action (voting is action!) is the only way to fight the Reps bad actions. Use don't abuse Democracy!
2
New York City is highly Dem. New York State, not so much.
1
In 2012, I represented one of the many towns in the newly created 101st Assembly District that is the subject of this item. The town of Wawarsing, that includes the great Village of Ellenville was part of that pearl-string district created in collusion with leaders of both parties to punish an unpopular Republican. It was a case of bald disenfranchisement.
I shed no tears for the Assemblymember who was being punished. She probably should have made more friends. Besides, we who seek office take our communities as we find them. But the result was nothing short of a travesty for the people of that district.
10 years earlier, I pleaded, lobbied and begged for the inclusion of Ellenville and the surrounding community to be part of the Assembly District that comprised most of the rest of the county. I was successful then and came to know the salt of the earth folks in this hardscrabble town as the kindest, most industrious and engaged people in the entire district. The brazen, thoughtless act of depriving them of full representation in the Assembly to vent a personal grievance was one of the most despicable acts I have ever witnessed in a place with a not so stellar reputation to begin with.
I voted against that travesty then and electorate willing, I will wholeheartedly support Chad McEvoy in his efforts to correct this gross injustice as soon as we can.
Assemblymember Kevin A. Cahill
(103rd District)
199
I wish him good luck with that.
Twenty minutes after swearing-in, he'll be pulled aside by close aides to the governor and speaker, and told that he'll do as ordered from on high or he will not see so much as a spoonful of asphalt in his district for as long as he serves.
74
A bit of a hollow threat to not fund an electoral district that, saints be praised, is not long for this world anyway.
1
Chad, this is the kind of courageous and sensible leadership we need in upstate NY. Thank you for running to be our Assembly representative!
248
This is the kind of issue whose impact extends far beyond the particulars of the district. Think of people like McEvoy who might either continue their work in politics, local and beyond, or give up in frustration due to a system set up to specifically disenfranchise the opposition. It's a shame not only for the constituents of the 101st but for everyone seeking ways to participate in a representative democracy.
65
Thank you Chad. I’m just outside your district and I’m rooting for you. We need more people like you in government.
145
Hooray for Chad, an articulate, sensible intelligent man who cares about New York State and our electoral process.
Irene, please send him a few bucks, even if you do live outside his district!
3