Magazine | April 3, 2017, Issue

Letters

The Limits of Proportional Representation

One must wrestle with two related issues when discussing gerrymandering:

(1) If a state is divided 60–40 between Party A and Party B, and its ten neatly drawn districts each have the 60–40 split, is it desirable for that state’s congressional delegation to have zero members of Party B, four, or somewhere in between? If the answer is zero, then gerrymandering is wrong.

(2) If another state with a population deserving ten districts is divided 90–10 between Party A and Party B, and there are four groups of like-minded Party B people each with 2.5 percent of the population at the corners of the state, would it be fair to gerrymander those people into an oddly shaped district to give them one seat out of the ten? If the answer is yes, then this means your philosophy is that people more properly belong in a district with faraway kindred spirits than in a district with geographic neighbors with whom they have little else in common.

Is the main purpose of representatives to fight for perks for their geographic district, or to advocate a particular view of government for like-minded citizens of their state?

Bruce Spidell

Boca Raton, Fla.

Dan McLaughlin responds: The answer to Mr. Spidell’s first question, about the 60–40 split, is zero, without any gerrymandering; that is the necessary result of the traditional American winner-take-all election system. The alternative of a proportional-representation system gives us the European problem of parties of the far right and far left that get 10 percent of the vote. The answer to his second question is likewise no, although, in both cases, Voting Rights Act–driven racial gerrymanders proceed on the opposite assumption.

As for representatives’ standing for the narrow interests of their districts, that’s why the Constitution gave us a House, Senate, and president each elected by different electorates.

First Loyalty

Nationalism versus conservatism (“For Love of Country,” February 20)? Cut to the chase. The first issue is always: Which “first loyalty”? Self or God?

Lincoln reminded us in 1863, when he resoundingly reasserted the pledge of the Founders in the first sentence of the Declaration of Independence: Natural law. Madison established that the freedom championed in 1776 by the American people was “freedom of conscience.” Lincoln spoke at Gettysburg of “this nation, under God.” We are “rightly” understood, as Tocqueville first observed in 1831, as a people of conscience, not ego. Some of us seem not to know that we were founded on an idea: natural law. Our survival as the people of an “exceptional nation” is at stake. Can we still return to being, as G. K. Chesterton put it, “a nation with the soul of a church”?

Piers Woodriff

Orange County, Va.

NR Editors includes members of the editorial staff of the National Review magazine and website.

In This Issue

Articles

Features

Books, Arts & Manners

Politics & Policy

Glittering Prizes

The disaster that overtook this year’s Oscar telecast in its closing moments, like so many strange events of the last two years, seemed almost scripted in its wild implausibility.

Sections

Politics & Policy

Poetry

THE APOTHEOSIS OF DON JUNE Promiscuous as moonlight on sand, He pondered heaven by the foaming surf; And staring at its brilliant text he saw He’d never been voluptuous enough. There were so many things ...
Politics & Policy

Letters

The Limits of Proportional Representation One must wrestle with two related issues when discussing gerrymandering: (1) If a state is divided 60–40 between Party A and Party B, and its ten neatly ...
Politics & Policy

The Week

‐ He pounds his chest, he roars, he perches on high-profile Manhattan real estate, and he can only be tamed by a clever blonde lady: Who could have seen this ...

Most Popular

Film & TV

A Sad Finale

Spoilers Ahead. Look, I share David’s love of Game of Thrones. But I thought the finale was largely a bust, for failings David mostly acknowledges in passing (but does not allow to dampen his ardor). The problems with the finale were largely the problems of this entire season. Characters that had been ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Great Misdirection

The House Democrats are frustrated, very frustrated. They’ve gotten themselves entangled in procedural disputes with the Trump administration that no one particularly cares about and that might be litigated for a very long time. A Washington Post report over the weekend spelled out how stymied Democrats ... Read More
World

Australia’s Voters Reject Leftist Ideas

Hell hath no fury greater than left-wingers who lose an election in a surprise upset. Think Brexit in 2016. Think Trump’s victory the same year. Now add Australia. Conservative prime minister Scott Morrison shocked pollsters and pundits alike with his victory on Saturday, and the reaction has been brutal ... Read More
NR Webathon

We’ve Had Bill Barr’s Back

One of the more dismaying features of the national political debate lately is how casually and cynically Attorney General Bill Barr has been smeared. He is routinely compared to Roy Cohn on a cable-TV program that prides itself on assembling the most thoughtful and plugged-in political analysts and ... Read More