Redistricting Solution: Randomized Districts every 2 years

Since redistricting and gerrymandering is such a hot topic now, I was thinking about alternatives removing partisanship after this post to Wednesday yesterday:

quote:

---

And I'm all for making districts more purple, but partisans and politicians are not. It's too risky for them and will make election results, parties, and caucuses too unstable.

---

LINK

So, why not just completely randomize and redistribute these districts every 2 years via computer program. Of course this is assuming the VRA is largely gutted by the USSC, so that the algorithms effectively only need to rely on population numbers with some geographic contiguity.

What this would result in, is minor chaos. Your district would dramatically change every 2 years. There would be no consideration for party/partisanship, either, so, over the whole, there would be very little chance for gerrymandering and most districts would become a lot more purple and competitive.

The bonus would be that incumbents would be the biggest losers. This system would be the best way to attempt term limits without a Constitutional amendment, as incumbents would face drastically different populations every 2 years in the House. This would affect their relationships on the ground and, more importantly, the donor class. Big donors would also face new candidates every cycle or 2, so these long-term relationships would fade/deteriorate.

Now, here is the question: would voters want this? Voters show in every election how strong the incumbency bias is. Would they REALLY want to give up on that, their own relationship with their rep, and take the risk of a more purple district? I have a feeling most, especially today, prefer partisanship and in-group identification over all else, and since this endangers that, they would reject these plans and opt for more, increased insanity.

Now, this would do nothing for the Senate, obviously, also. Can't fix everything.