Attended some great sessions yesterday at Reboot America, and the keynote sessions were from two of my favorite politicians. I'd like to discuss Senator Warner's comments, and then the challenge of gerrymandering and how Big Data might be able to help solve it.
I had a great Congressman, Tom Davis (R), now at Deloitte, who came knocking at my door several times during his terms in office, always polite, smart, and shared both his own views as well as those of his constituents. Senator Mark Warner also spoke about his views as an entrepreneur and then later as an investor, and drew the linkages between investing in a startup and investing in America. In a nutshell, there is an intense global war for capital and talent.
Sen. Warner described three conversations he would have as an investor with those pitching him ideas or companies.
First, tell me about your workforce, location, education and development.
Second, describe your PPE (Plant, Property, Equipment), capital acquisitions, supply chain efficiencies, distribution channels.
Third, given the globalization trends, talk to me about your R&D, how do you plan to invest in competitive advantage, Porter's 5 Forces discussion.
Sen. Warner then talked about the challenges of the United States, and drew the comparison of those three entrepreneurial conversations to what we must do for America. Simply, investment in the education of our citizens, investment in the public infrastructure (roads, schools, power grid, bridges, tunnels, waterways, public health and safety), and investment in our research and development, that which gives the United States sustained competitive advantage over foreign nations in the global war for talent and capital.
As Jeff Jarvis so eloquently stated the other day, we don't have an impending fiscal cliff, we have a crisis in government, management, and obstruction, and this assumption is based upon the premise that gerrymandering is indeed a problem. Hold the gerrymandering thought in your mind for a moment while I switch gears and then I'll draw the linkage.
Conor Friedersdorf over at The Atlantic has a very popular article about how conservative media failed their readers and viewers when when compared to the predictive models developed by Nate Silver at the NY Times and his popular statistical blog, Five Thirty Eight. Now, Conor's article has some liberal bias, and most conservatives dislike the New York Times and pundits moaned on and on about Silver's bias to, BECAUSE HE WORKS FOR THE NY TIMES. Regardless of your political viewpoints, what you can't dispute is the validity and accuracy of his forecast models. The power of big data indeed.
Which brings me back to the point of gerrymandering. I believe it is a problem, because it means the politicians are picking their voters, not the other way around. Gerrymandering means the two parties nominate extremists who are solely concerned with preserving the status quo, and NOT governing and working on the big problems facing our nation. If you think about it, the only reason the GOP still has a majority is because of the gerrymandered districts that they were able to draw during the last census.
While putting my thoughts together for this piece, I came across an excellent piece from Professor Douglas J Amy at Mount Holyoke entitled; How Proportional Representation Would Finally Solve our Redistricting and Gerrymandering Problems.
The only way Congressional gerrymandering can be eliminated is a state-by-state referendum.
The choice on the ballot is the status quo, or proportional representation. The current elected politicians cannot vote for gay marriage or pot legalization, and they certainly aren't going to vote against their own interests and gerrymandered seats.
I call for a state-by-state movement to put proportional representation on the ballot by voter referendum.
