“Gerrymandering is good, and we need more of it.”

My friend Kurt Schlichter, in a column at Townhall earlier this week, was spot-on in defense of gerrymandering as a political act, and in advocating its aggressive use in red states:

Gerrymandering is good, and we need more of it. It’s especially beneficial because mid-census cycle gerrymandering, currently being executed in red states, is likely to increase the number of Republican House seats significantly. Democrats object to this on purely moral grounds that they’ve already massively gerrymandered blue states, and therefore, this would hurt them, thus making it bad for Republicans to do it. We should laugh at them and shaft them as hard as we can.

Gerrymandering means creating sometimes bizarrely shaped legislative districts designed to make it more likely to elect a member of a particular party. Contrary to the conventional wisdom of unwise people, there is nothing wrong with doing that. It’s a moral necessity. It’s a good thing. The states decide on their own districts, and they should decide that the way that they decide everything else. That is, they should do it in the way that the winning political party wants – majority rule. Yes, they can leverage it so that the out party gets less representation in the House of Representatives. So what? We have to decide on district boundaries somehow, and we ought to decide on them through votes. And we should vote in our self-interest. ….

Continue reading >>>>>>>>>>>>>