For my civic issues blog, I’ve decided to focus on the history of gerrymandering and the severe ramifications that it has had on political representation and law/policy in the US.
Since this is my first post, I’d like to begin by providing a brief overview of gerrymandering. About once every decade, each state will redraw its electoral districts. These are the districts that determine which people will be represented by which politician. In certain states, independent commission handle the drawing of district lines; but most states lack these safeguards, which results in politicians gathering around computer screens, attempting to figure out how to manipulate district lines to maximize the power of their political party and minimize the power of their opponents. Moreover, to put it simply, gerrymandering is the political manipulation of electoral district boundaries.
This blog post is going to focus on the negative effects that gerrymandering has on political representation. To do that we are going to analyze examples of gerrymandered districts. The first being, Ohio’s 9th Congressional District:
It’s safe to say that this district has a rather odd shape. It’s long and skinny and stretches all the way from Toledo to Cleveland. In fact Ohioans often refer to it as “The Snake by the Lake” due to its shape and geographic location. The 9th district was formed following the 2010 census, and was designed by the [then] Republican-controlled state legislature. The redesigned 9th district attempted to pack as many Democratic voters as possible in to a single district. It also ended up getting rid of a Democratic House member, as the new 9th district absorbed a portion of the 10th district in which a Democratic House member lived. This action resulted in two incumbents living over 100 miles apart competing for one seat in the House. There’s also an incredibly amount of socio-economic differences across the district. For example, Cleveland is known for its [scientific] industry, whereas Toledo is far more rural and dependent on agriculture. While major cities were being packed together in the 9th district, smaller more rural communities in Ohio [like Florence who only had 2,400 residents and 2 representatives] were being given far more representation. Moreover, packing large cities together while spreading small communities out, only creates a disproportionate inequitable form of representation that completely alters the political representation of the state as a whole.
The next district that I want to analyze is Maryland’s 3rd district:
Sources like the Washington Post, amongst others, refer to Maryland’s 3rd district as the most gerrymandered district in the nation. It’s been described as “a blood splatter, a Rorschach test, [and] a praying mantis.” Living up to its name, the districts boundaries are quite tumulus, as it encompasses parts of Baltimore, Howard, Anne Arundel, and Montgomery counties and Baltimore city. In fact one sliver [of the district] in northeast Baltimore is no wider than two city blocks.
The district was fairly compact–until 2011. In 2011, Maryland had not only a Democratic governor, but a democratic state legislature as well. Congressmen, like John Sarbanes, saw the redistricting as an opportunity to move more wealthy Democratic voters into the 3rd district–“potential donors for [his] future Senate campaign,” the New Republic suggested in 2012. The idea that any given representative could simply alter democratic representation for personal gain proves how truly dangerous gerrymandering is. Democracy is meant to allow people to vote for who represents them, but it seems like gerrymandering is allowing representatives to choose who they represent instead. Moreover, Maryland’s 3rd district is further indicative of the adverse complications that come with partisan gerrymandering.
The final district that I’d like to analyze, as part of a discussion on partisan gerrymandering, is yet another district in Maryland. Maryland’s 6th district:
Maryland’s 6th district was yet another district gerrymandered during the 2010 redistricting cycle. This district in particular was created under the influence of a Democratic legislature. To create this district the legislature moved a total of 353,088 people into the district and 358,074 people out of it. That’s a great deal of movement. Eventually in federal court, Democrats were forced to admit that their goal was to move enough voters around to dilute GOP voting power and deter Republican candidates from winning legislative positions. By admitting to this, Democrats from Maryland’s 6th district, blatantly admitted to gerrymandering the district. Moreover, it is evident that this gerrymandering was done to make the state more vote in favor of Democrats more–regardless of the opinions of its people.
Furthermore, partisan gerrymandering subverts the views of the American people in favor of a political party. From these three districts alone it is clear that Republicans and Democrats alike will draw absurd district lines in order to give themselves power or in order to keep themselves there. Redistricting, however, comes at the expense of the American people. In the case of Ohio, major cities with societal and economic differences were confined to one district, in order to subvert the Democratic vote. Meanwhile in Maryland, the legislature created distracts with the goal of diluting the GOP vote.
In 2019, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 [in the case of Rucho v. Common Cause] that “Federal judges have no license to reallocate political power between two major political parties, with no plausible grant of authority in the Constitution, and no legal standards to limit and direct their decisions.” This ruling means that federal courts cannot get strike down district maps simply because they are designed to help/hurt a particular political party. This ruling raises the question, how do we combat gerrymandering then? That question becomes more and more relevant as election years approach. One solution would be to force individual states to take action–as state constitutions are permitted to have policies regarding gerrymandering. Regardless, it is incredibly important that we, as a nation, find a way to combat gerrymandering, as the system takes away political representation and in a way poses a limitation to democracy.
Sources:
Court Cases and Gerrymandering — Vox
Gerrymandering Districts — Fulcrum
Is Gerrymandering Good Now? — Rothman
District Images –Fulcrom/Meyers
This was really interesting to read because my mini-team in my deliberation is actually analyzing gerrymandering on Tuesday! So, selfishly, it’s great that you and some others have some background to be able to contribute to the deliberation 😛 ! Those three districts you showed were great examples of the ridiculousness of gerrymandering and how blatant it is that both politically parties use practices such as “packing” and “cracking” in order to amplify or suppress the voting power of the other party in an election. It does not accurately represent citizens and does not allow for competitive elections in which everyone feels like their vote counts. I’m looking forward to what you unpack next week on this topic!
Hi! I think this is a really great topic and one that is very relevant as well. The pictures that you included were also really helpful to visualize the districts you are talking about! I think gerrymandering is definitely a serious issue that needs to be tackled because it skews what people actually want out of their government and it is a manipulation of power. I have heard about the Ohio “snake by the lake” district before, but seeing the picture really put it into context. I think this was a great topic to choose and I’m excited to see what you post next time!