Redistricting, The Process Of Adjusting States

The first proposal, of changing the electoral system for the House of Representatives, would mean that each state is represented in proportion to its population. This entails that states with higher populations will receive more votes because they have more seats in the House. Less populous states may argue against this reform because they will have a disadvantage when it comes to voting on legislation. However, the reform also includes having each state serve as electoral districts. In this case, multi-member districts will be needed—proportional representation will require a larger district magnitude. Having these territorial subdivisions will help create an efficient legislative system because there would be less possibility of manipulating the votes—not as relevant to election results when seats are proportional. Having the votes distributed in this manner may help avoid a deadlock and therefore, allow for a faster process when passing legislation. In addition, minorities will have chance to be represented by possibly gaining a seat in a particular district—a highly populous

Forgette Richard, Garner Andrew, and Winkle John. “Do redistricting principles and practices affect US state legislative electoral competition? State Politics and policy quarterly, 20(9) (2009): 151 175.

Riker argues that these bold uses of gerrymandering are made possible, and even encouraged, by two landmark Supreme Court Cases. Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims were two similar cases from the 1960’s that addressed the unequal representation caused by the unwillingness of politicians to adjust the electoral districts to accurately reflect the major population changes of the twentieth century.15 Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims forced Congress and state legislative bodies to correct this inaccurate political representation by mandating equally sized voting districts.16 In fact, Reynolds v. Sims went so far as to require a voting population difference of no more than ten percent between the largest and smallest electoral districts.17 Furthermore,

“The Republicans are going to have their hand on the computer mouse, and when you have your hand on the computer mouse, you can change a district from a D to an R.” - The New York Times Dec 24,2010. Redistricting plays a role in electing representatives and state legislators. There is this thing called gerrymandering that allows the drawing of the new districts to be in their favor.

Politics in the United States is a complex structure that is comprised of many systems. While most of these systems appear to work well, there are a few that are broken. A perfect example of a broken system is the district boundaries and the likelihood of gerrymandering. Multiple states across the country are subjected to gerrymandering, which is the act of dividing a county into election districts that provide one political party with an unfair advantage over the other. Gerrymandering is used to help or prevent a particular demographic from gaining adequate representation. In Florida, for example, there is controversy over Congressional District 5, which extends from Jacksonville down to Orlando in a way that creates a “minority-majority” district.

When I thought of the topic Gerrymandering, I thought perhaps it would be too far-fetched when it came to the Rubric designed in a women studies class. But, on further review of the subject matter I realized how important this practice is to study, and how it can be used for both good and evil concepts in the political scheme of things.

In 1787, one of the most debated issues was the size of the House of Representatives. During the Constitutional Convention, the delegates proposed that 40,000 citizens should be represented by one congressional district. However, George Washington intervened and argued that 40,000 was too high, and reasoned that 30,000 was more reasonable and allow people to be represented adequately Washington’s proposal was incorporated in Article One, Section Two of the Constitution which states “representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State.” While the number of representatives did increase throughout the history of the United States, the number has been set at 435 members since 1929. Congress in 1929 passed the Permanent Apportionment Act that set the number of representatives at 435, which was set after a 1910 census. Currently each representative represents 700,000 citizens and congressional seats are redistricted around the nation based on population changes. But the currently number of representatives does not adequately represent the present population and a single district cannot represent a huge number of people. Therefore, the current number of representatives must be increased.

In the “Redrawing the Electoral Map: Reforming The Electoral College With the District-Popular Plan,” Craig J. Herbst discusses the reformation of the Electoral College, using a different method for elections, and the U.S. Constitution. The author argues that District-Popular Plan method is better for the nation because if it is used candidates will have put more effort into developing strategies for the popular vote, and people would be more knowledgeable about politics with those developments. Herbst notes that District-Popular Plan can help groups of people who are disadvantaged and underrepresented. He also states that the only and the best way to do this to have a constitutional amendment which is so hard to pass. Ultimately, he concludes the article with explaining the benefits of having the District-Popular Plan. Craig J. Herbst’s article was published in Hofstra Law Review which is and academic and credible source because it is peer-reviewed by experts on the issue. The purpose of this source is to inform people about the Electoral College and the U.S Constitution, and an alternative way for the Electoral College. I will use this source to get more information

The article, “In Praise of Gerrymandering” written by Kevin D. Williamson, talks about gerrymandering, which is when politicians are cheating to be elected and shares his opinion that Republicans have become “too good” at this. He then illustrates that Democrats need to demonstrate better ways of obtaining votes.

Gerrymandering may prevent the purpose of members being elected on a single-member district basis because districts can be drawn favoring one political party. Gerrymandering is when districts have been drawn so the boundaries of legislative districts in bizarre or unusual shapes to favor one party. Gerrymandering protects incumbents and discourages challengers and it strengthens the majority party while weakening the opposition party

Gerrymandering, is a way for certain parties- Democrats, and Republicans- to legally rig an election. The way it works is every ten years the electoral maps have to be re-drawn, meaning the districts that our votes are counted towards are redrawn every ten years. Now this might sound very innocent but the way it is set up is so a commision can draw the districts on the map, meaning they can take a very highly saturated Democratic or Republican county, and break it up so that they can group parts with other places that don't have many other people of that same party. Now this may sound like it will hurt them because they're splitting up their strong front but the commissions are much more strategic, they only break up their strong holds to place them into other districts that they can easily win. Or they break them up to shift them into districts where they need more help. Now this may make you angry that the system is built this way, but their is some good news and that is this only works in six states, and also president Obama is trying to change it so that it is not possible anywhere.

If I were to choose an improvement to make an American political institution better, I would choose to improve the process of redistricting. I would change redistricting in a way that would make it fairer such as getting someone who is not in either major party to draw the lines for new districts after every census instead of someone from the current party in power. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, (NCSL), redistricting is “the process of redrawing state legislative and congressional district boundaries every 10 years following the decennial United Census.”(Redistricting) Basically redistricting is the election of state legislators, Congress members, and many country and municipal offices who are grouped into districts

Redrawing the districts to give a political advantage is not sophisticated. It ruins the point of the Fifteenth Amendment which allows the right to vote no matter the race, sex, or personality. The right to vote doesn’t matter because of the unfairness and the corruption of the districts. These voters will be confused about these uncanny district shapes. Because of these lines, the citizens will not know which office to vote for. For Example, the first ever

Once every ten years, at the end of each decade, the United States Census Bureau fulfills its constitutional obligation by completing a census. A census is an instrument used by the government to collect information about the country 's population. One of the most important applications of the information collected is for use in apportioning the House of Representative, as stated in the Constitution. Apportioning is assigning each state a number of seats in the House of Representatives that directly correlates with their population; the states with larger populations have more seats than the states with lesser populations. Each of the state’s seat(s) have a representative that is voted on by the people of their electoral district. Once the states have been assigned their number of seats, it is up to the states to draw their own boundaries for these electoral districts. The drawing of electoral district boundaries is know as “redistricting.” In this paper I will be discussing how the districts are drawn by most states, how a few states differ, and some possible superior alternatives.

Voting is a staple of freedom in the United States, it allows for the people to participate in their government by electing officials they feel advocate for their beliefs and values. Throughout American history, threats and practices of disenfranchisement have occurred to various people groups. These attacks upon civil liberties have never been allowed to stand as activists have united to combat these types of circumstances. There have been long harsh battles waged in the struggle for all inclusive representation and it seems that another has once again rose for decision. This battle manifests itself as SCOTUS case: Evenwel v. Abbott. The case’s conflict is based in redistricting, and it implores the court to decide whether representation based on voting population or physical population is a more constitutional process. It is in regards to this subject that People’s United beseeches the court to decide on the side of representation based on physical population. It is our belief that this would be a fairer system of redistricting because its basis of representation, the equality that it entails, and the validity of the claim that those who support the voting population method make.