Section 1 Section 2 Section 3

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

The gerrymandering process allows the majority party within a given state to maximize the number of seats it can win in the future elections. This leads it into creating as many districts as possible where it constitutes the majority. By doing this, those who support the minority parties are packed into the remaining few districts. This results in more electoral security for the minority party and less electoral security for the members of the minority parties. It also produces greater homogeneity within the districts while reducing competition for the house seats. Apart from the positive effects of gerrymandering, there are a number of negative effects associated with partisan gerrymandering. This process results in more competitive districts when compared to the non competitive districts and this in turn ambiguously affects polarization. Partisan gerrymandering also affects the state legislative electoral competitiveness as it has severe partisan biases. Excessive partisan gerrymandering is the violation of the equal protection clause since it consigns the

     In the following essay I will be talking about the disadvantages and advantages of partisan elections for state politics. I will also examine the last couple year’s election results and costs. Finally, I will discuss if partisanship made a difference in the vote, as well as if a judge should be decided by partisan vote. In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics.

The House of Representatives consists of 435 elected members that are divided among the fifty states in proportion to their population. There are also six

The term gerrymandering refers to the practice of altering voting districts in order to achieve electoral results favorable to one person or party, usually the incumbent politician or party creating the new voting regions.1 This term, dating back to 1812, is an established method for incumbent politicians to improve their heresthetical “defense,” by manipulating the dimensions of the political landscape.2 This tactic is extremely common in the United States and a prime example of politicians acting as manipulators. This essay will argue that politicians are manipulators, as evidenced by the gerrymandering of voting districts to improve odds of maintaining power, and opposition attempts to counteract this electoral

“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.

In the following essay I will be talking about the disadvantages and advantages of partisan elections for state politics. I will also examine the last couple year's election results and costs. Finally, I will discuss if partisanship made a difference in the vote, as well as if a judge should be decided by partisan vote. In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics.

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 article, the author uses numerous facts, as well as quotes from experts who have elaborated on the subject as well. One quote said by Paul Smith was,“Partisan gerrymandering of this kind is worse now than anytime in recent memories.” This is significant because he is talking about how much the republicans have taken advantage of gerrymandering and have used it to their best interest.

This worked out to satisfaction of the smaller states and for the larger states they were given a House of Representatives that would consist of a larger body of representatives for each state in proportion to the amount of the people in that state.

The lack of representation has resulted in the “cut off from the seats of power by geography, alienated by the state’s left-leaning politics and tendency toward regulation, enduring stubbornly high unemployment, facing the decimation of traditional industries such as logging, and harboring few prospects for economic growth”, says Goodyear. All these problems could be resolved by one simple, but very complex solution; separating California into two different states: The State of California and The State of Jefferson. Separating California into two or more states would be the most effective option in lowering taxes

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

After the 2008 election, the future of the Republican Party looked grim. Obama took Republican strongholds like Virginia and North Carolina and Democrats took control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate during the election. Chris Jankowski, a member of the Republican State Leadership Committee, came up with a plan to help the Republicans gain control of the state legislatures. He realized the importance of the 2010 mid-term elections with the upcoming census, whichever party controlled the state legislatures got to control the redistricting process for congressional districts in 42 of 50 states (Daley 2016). Jankowski had $30 million dollars to invest in states that Republicans could control both governors office and the legislature. His REDMAP team would create priority lists of swing states, to state houses, and finally to state senates that they had to win. Republicans focused their time and energy on areas that they believed that they could swing red or keep red by calling, sending mail, billboards,

The delegates compromised, deciding that seats in the House of Representatives would be distributed according to population and that seats in the Senate would be distributed equally among the states. The small states could rely on the Senate to defend their interests if the House passed legislation that threatened their rights. The framers of the Constitution specified that House members would be elected by popular vote every two years, so members of the House would be constantly in touch with the citizens that they represent. In contrast, the framers decided to shield the Senate from popular pressures by giving senators six-year terms.