Ending Gerrymandering

[aGDevil2k]

It seems that across the board, people inherently loathe gerrymandering. It passes in situations like California Prop 50 because people hate what happened in Texas, NC, etc. And, as a result, you have to fight fire with fire.

But at the end, most people wish that nationwide, gerrymandering was not a thing. The SCOTUS had a chance to end it, but they said whatever (because they are impotent).

So what is the solution? A law? An Executive Order (nah)? How do we finally get a nationwide ban on the practice so people elect their representatives?

And imagine how much more reasonable Washington would be without gerrymandering....

 

[lawtig02]

It seems that across the board, people inherently loathe gerrymandering. It passes in situations like California Prop 50 because people hate what happened in Texas, NC, etc. And, as a result, you have to fight fire with fire.

But at the end, most people wish that nationwide, gerrymandering was not a thing. The SCOTUS had a chance to end it, but they said whatever (because they are impotent).

So what is the solution? A law? An Executive Order (nah)? How do we finally get a nationwide ban on the practice so people elect their representatives?

And imagine how much more reasonable Washington would be without gerrymandering....

The solution is a law. Dems have been introducing this every year, but the Pubs won’t give it a vote.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3750/text

 

[Zoo_View]

It seems that across the board, people inherently loathe gerrymandering. It passes in situations like California Prop 50 because people hate what happened in Texas, NC, etc. And, as a result, you have to fight fire with fire.

But at the end, most people wish that nationwide, gerrymandering was not a thing. The SCOTUS had a chance to end it, but they said whatever (because they are impotent).

So what is the solution? A law? An Executive Order (nah)? How do we finally get a nationwide ban on the practice so people elect their representatives?

And imagine how much more reasonable Washington would be without gerrymandering....

I don’t think SCOTUS did nothing about gerrymandering because it’s impotent.

It did nothing because currently gerrymandering benefits the GQP.

 

[rodoheel]

I don’t think SCOTUS did nothing about gerrymandering because it’s impotent.

It did nothing because currently gerrymandering benefits the GQP.

Right - that's literally the opposite of "impotent."

But to answer the OP's question - Congress can/should pass a law, though its constitutionality would likely be challenged given that it arguably intrudes into state authority over elections. Individual states can/should also pass laws. The best solution would be a constitutional amendment, but that is not immediately realistic and would be a long-term project. But it would help if Dems would throw their support behind such an amendment.

 

[GoHeelsweeeehoooo]

It needs to be fixed in the US Congress but also in state legislatures as well and that is probably even harder to fix

 

[gregh1]

state legislatures as well

 

[HeelInTheOzarks]

There should be a massive election rights bill including:

Ending gerrymandering/non-partisan redistricting
Automatic voter registration
Election day as a holiday
Guaranteed absentee and early voting
Public election funding

Of course this type of thing has been tried but one side thinks it's more important for less people to vote because there is "massive fraud."

 

[aGDevil2k]

I do wonder if California and blue states starting to take the gloves off on this might change things. You know, we haven't played the same game for decades. But if the GOP starts to think it's unfair MAYBE then they can get enough folks to fix it.

It's wild....I cant think of another topic where more americans are aligned across the board. I mean maybe other than "murder = bad"

 

[Icky Mettle]

I don’t think SCOTUS did nothing about gerrymandering because it’s impotent.

It did nothing because currently gerrymandering benefits the GQP.

This is the correct answer. Had gerrymandering given Dems a strong advantage in Congress there is no question that SCOTUS would have done something to change that. They are outcome driven.

 

[dukeman92]

The solution is a law. Dems have been introducing this every year, but the Pubs won’t give it a vote.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3750/text

Because, like the EC, they know that it will mean their demise.

 

[Kingpin]

Because, like the EC, they know that it will mean their demise.

As MAGAs yes. As conservative Republicans no.

 

[RockyMtnHoo]

Have been off the board since Election Night 2024 and just took a general break from following politics, because of Trump burnout. But the government shutdown and VA gubernatorial election sucked me back in.

In practice, I hate gerrymandering and believe it’s at the root of a lot of the issues we have as a country. That said, with the majority we now have in VA after last night at the state level, I wouldn’t be too upset if they creatively reorganized the congressional districts, and turned a 6-5 Dem advantage into, oh, 8-3. If California is leading the charge, VA can give an assist.

 

[BillOfRights]

Have been off the board since Election Night 2024 and just took a general break from following politics, because of Trump burnout. But the government shutdown and VA gubernatorial election sucked me back in.

In practice, I hate gerrymandering and believe it’s at the root of a lot of the issues we have as a country. That said, with the majority we now have in VA after last night at the state level, I wouldn’t be too upset if they creatively reorganized the congressional districts, and turned a 6-5 Dem advantage into, oh, 8-3. If California is leading the charge, VA can give an assist.

Welcome back.

 

[Calheel]

The solution is a law. Dems have been introducing this every year, but the Pubs won’t give it a vote.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3750/text

That is an extremely difficult law to enforce. The “totality of the circumstances” test would tie up every state’s map in litigation as most districts favor one political party or the other. It is a bit like defining obscenity. You know when it is extreme, but it is not easy to define when a contiguous district has been gerrymandered. Of course, just limiting redistricting to once every 10 years would be helpful.

 

[aGDevil2k]

Have been off the board since Election Night 2024 and just took a general break from following politics, because of Trump burnout. But the government shutdown and VA gubernatorial election sucked me back in.

In practice, I hate gerrymandering and believe it’s at the root of a lot of the issues we have as a country. That said, with the majority we now have in VA after last night at the state level, I wouldn’t be too upset if they creatively reorganized the congressional districts, and turned a 6-5 Dem advantage into, oh, 8-3. If California is leading the charge, VA can give an assist.

I think VA has said they will indeed do it. Gerrymandering is awful. But it has to be an all or nothing thing. Just like the electoral college...if dems did proportional allocation and reds did winner take all, that would be asinine. So it has to be national.

Has anyone done a projection if fair maps existed everywhere, what the numbers in washington would be right now? It would be WAY more moderate, regardless

 

[Calheel]

I think VA has said they will indeed do it. Gerrymandering is awful. But it has to be an all or nothing thing. Just like the electoral college...if dems did proportional allocation and reds did winner take all, that would be asinine. So it has to be national.

Has anyone done a projection if fair maps existed everywhere, what the numbers in washington would be right now? It would be WAY more moderate, regardless

I think the studies show Republicans would pick up more total seats if everyone went max gerrymandering- especially if Section 2 of the voting rights act is struck down.

 

[aGDevil2k]

I think the studies show Republicans would pick up more total seats if everyone went max gerrymandering- especially if Section 2 of the voting rights act is struck down.

Oh that for sure. but if everywhere was fairly mapped....I wonder how it would break out

 

[Calheel]

Oh that for sure. but if everywhere was fairly mapped....I wonder how it would break out

I assume the reverse. If the maps were completely fair then Republicans would lose seats.

 

[NYCBlueBlood]

There should be a massive election rights bill including:

Ending gerrymandering/non-partisan redistricting
Automatic voter registration
Election day as a holiday
Guaranteed absentee and early voting
Public election funding

Of course this type of thing has been tried but one side thinks it's more important for less people to vote because there is "massive fraud."

"Public election funding"

I initially misread that as public erection funding...

 

[aGDevil2k]

I assume the reverse. If the maps were completely fair then Republicans would lose seats.

Gemini:

Given a current House size of 435 members, if Republicans currently hold a number of seats that is inflated by roughly 16 seats due to gerrymandering:3

Scenario	Current House Split (Approx.)	Rough Model without Gerrymandering (Estimated)
GOP	~219 Seats	~203 Seats
DEM	~213 Seats	~229 Seats
Net Effect	GOP Majority of 6 Seats	DEM Majority of 26 Seats (due to the 16-seat swing + current 6-seat gap)