Understanding Gerrymandering

4 Nov

Gerrymandering is the practice of drawing electoral district boundaries to give one political party or group an unfair advantage over its rivals. It manipulates the geometry of representative democracy.

This process happens every ten years after the U.S. Census when the states redraw their legislative and congressional district maps (a process called redistricting). While maps must follow basic rules—like making districts equal in population—state legislatures or non-partisan commissions ultimately decide the lines, and this is where gerrymandering occurs.

The term "gerrymander" is a mashup of "Gerry," referring to former Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry, and "salamander," because a district drawn under his watch in 1812 resembled the shape of the lizard.

The Two Main Techniques

Gerrymandering is usually achieved using two main techniques:

"Cracking" (Dilution): Spreading out supporters of the opposition party across many districts so that they are a minority in every one. This dilutes the opposition's voting power, preventing them from winning a majority in any single district.
"Packing" (Concentration): Concentrating as many opposition voters as possible into a few districts. This ensures the opposition wins those few districts by huge margins, wasting their "excess" votes and allowing the dominant party to win the majority of the remaining districts with smaller, safer margins.

Why Gerrymandering Is a Problem for Everyone

Gerrymandering is not inherently partisan; it is a tool that any party in power can use to secure an advantage. It harms the democratic process by prioritizing the political needs of incumbents over the will of the people, creating problems that affect all voters, regardless of party affiliation.

1. It Increases Partisan Polarization

Gerrymandering makes districts safer for one party. When a district is "packed" with one party's voters, the incumbent knows they cannot lose the general election to the opposing party.

The Problem: The only real threat to the incumbent comes from a primary election challenge by someone even more extreme within their own party. This forces candidates to appeal only to the most passionate base of their party, leading to more extreme views and less willingness to compromise with the other side in Congress. Both Democratic and Republican parties become less moderate.

2. It Decreases Voter Turnout and Interest

When a district is engineered to be safely Republican or safely Democratic, the outcome of the general election is essentially predetermined.

The Problem: Voters in these non-competitive districts often feel their vote doesn't matter, leading to apathy, lower turnout, and a sense of disconnection from their representative. Why bother voting when the winner is already decided?

3. It Insulates Politicians from Accountability

Gerrymandering allows politicians to choose their voters instead of voters choosing their politicians.

The Problem: An incumbent with a safely drawn district has little incentive to represent the interests of the entire district, especially those who belong to the minority party. They are essentially immune to general election challenges, reducing their accountability to the broad public.

4. It Skews Representation and Policy

Gerrymandering can create a situation where a party wins a majority of seats in the legislature despite only receiving a minority of the statewide popular vote.

The Problem: This distorts the concept of majority rule. If one party can control the legislature without winning the most votes, the laws and policies they pass may not reflect the preferences of the state's total population. This is frustrating for voters on both sides who feel their statewide voice is being ignored.

A Non-Partisan Solution

Because both Republicans and Democrats have historically engaged in gerrymandering when they hold the power to do so, a growing number of states have moved toward using Independent Redistricting Commissions.

These commissions are often composed of citizens who are not elected officials and are selected for their non-partisan status. The goal is to draw districts based on neutral criteria like:

Population equality.
Contiguity (districts must be one continuous piece of land).
Respecting existing local boundaries (keeping cities, towns, and counties together).
Compactness (avoiding oddly shaped, sprawling districts).

By taking the map-drawing power out of the hands of partisan politicians, these commissions aim to create genuinely competitive districts that force candidates to appeal to a wider range of voters.