Gerrymandering is one of the most dangerous threats to American democracy. It allows politicians to rig the political system, silencing voters and ensuring their own grip on power. Instead of voters choosing their representatives, gerrymandering lets politicians handpick their voters by manipulating district maps for partisan gain. Both parties have abused this tactic, but the real losers are the American people, whose voices are drowned out in legally-rigged elections. In this article, we’ll break down how gerrymandering works, its long history of corruption, and how it undermines democracy. Finally, we’ll lay out the only real solution: a constitutional amendment to ban gerrymandering, permanently.
How Does Gerrymandering Work?
In the U.S., political districts determine who represents you in Congress and state legislatures. After every U.S. Census (held every 10 years), states redraw these districts to reflect population changes. However, politicians in charge of redistricting often manipulate the maps to benefit their own party instead of making fair districts. They do this using two main techniques:
- Packing – This means stuffing as many voters from the opposing party into a single district. While this guarantees the opposing party wins that district, it also means they have fewer chances to win in other districts.
- Cracking – This involves splitting up voters from the opposing party across multiple districts so they don’t have enough numbers to win anywhere.
By using these tricks, a political party can win more seats than they actually deserve based on the number of votes they receive.
The History of Gerrymandering: How Politicians Have Been Rigging Elections for Over 200 Years
Gerrymandering is a tactic has been employed in the United States for over two centuries, influencing election outcomes and shaping the political landscape.
Origins of Gerrymandering
The term “gerrymandering” originated in 1812 in Massachusetts. Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a bill that redrew the state’s senate election districts to benefit his Democratic-Republican Party. One district was contorted into a shape resembling a salamander, leading a local newspaper to coin the term “Gerry-mander.” A political cartoon from that period depicted this oddly shaped district as a monster, cementing the term in political discourse.
Early Instances and Evolution
While the 1812 incident is the most cited origin, earlier instances of manipulating district boundaries existed. For example, in the 1789 election of the First U.S. Congress, there were attempts to draw districts favoring certain candidates, though the term “gerrymandering” wasn’t used then.
Throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, gerrymandering evolved with politicians from various parties exploiting it to maintain or gain power. Both major political parties in the U.S. have utilized gerrymandering when advantageous, leading to numerous legal battles and public outcry.
Gerrymandering in the Modern Era
In recent decades, advancements in technology have made gerrymandering more precise. Detailed voter data and sophisticated mapping software allow for the creation of districts that meticulously favor one party, often resulting in oddly shaped boundaries that split communities and dilute voting power.
This precision has led to significant political advantages. For instance, after the 2010 census, the Republican Party implemented the Redistricting Majority Project (REDMAP), leading to gerrymandered districts that secured their dominance in certain states, even when statewide vote totals favored Democrats.
Legal Challenges and Reforms
Gerrymandering has faced numerous legal challenges. The Supreme Court ruled racial gerrymandering unconstitutional but has struggled to address partisan gerrymandering effectively. In 2019, in a 5/4 decision along party lines, the Supreme Court ruled that the issue of gerrymandering is beyond the scope of federal court, effectively allowing the practice to continue. In some states, reforms have been implemented to combat gerrymandering, such as establishing independent redistricting commissions to draw fair and impartial district maps.
Why Is Gerrymandering So Dangerous?
Gerrymandering distorts elections and harms democracy in several ways:
- It allows politicians to stay in power without real competition. When districts are drawn unfairly, elections become predictable, and politicians don’t have to listen to voters.
- It creates minority rule. A party can win fewer total votes but still control the government by drawing maps that favor them.
- It makes voters feel powerless. If the outcome is already decided because of unfair districts, people may stop voting altogether.
- It increases polarization and political extremism. In heavily gerrymandered districts, politicians don’t need to appeal to a broad range of voters—just their party’s base—leading to more extreme policies.
How Gerrymandering Paves the Way for Authoritarianism
Democracy thrives on fair elections, where voters choose their leaders in a system that reflects the will of the people. But what happens when politicians manipulate the system to guarantee their own victories? This is exactly what gerrymandering does, and if left unchecked, it can slowly turn a democracy into something far more dangerous—an autocracy, where power is concentrated in the hands of a party that doesn’t have to listen to its constituents.
The Road to Authoritarianism
If one party can consistently win elections without real competition, the system begins to resemble an autocracy. Here’s how gerrymandering helps democracy erode:
- Consolidating Power: Once a party secures control through gerrymandering, they can pass laws that further entrench their power—such as voter suppression laws or limits on opposing voices.
- Weakening Checks and Balances: Gerrymandered legislatures can control the courts, redraw districts, and even change election rules to keep themselves in power.
- Silencing the Majority: Even if most voters want change, their voices don’t translate into representation. Over time, frustration grows, and faith in democracy declines.
- No Peaceful Transfer of Power: In an entrenched system, elections stop being real contests, and leaders never truly face the possibility of losing power—one of the hallmarks of an authoritarian regime.
How Other Countries Prevent Gerrymandering—And What the U.S. Can Learn
Gerrymandering is a uniquely American problem. While politicians in the U.S. manipulate district maps to secure their own power, many other countries have systems in place that prevent this kind of election rigging. By studying how other democracies handle redistricting, the U.S. can learn valuable lessons about how to create fairer elections that truly represent the will of the people.
How the U.S. Redistricting System Fails
In the U.S., congressional and state legislative district lines are redrawn every 10 years after the census. In many states, politicians—often the very ones running for office—control this process. This allows them to:
- Draw districts to protect their own party (partisan gerrymandering).
- Manipulate boundaries to suppress certain voters (racial gerrymandering).
- Create safe districts that eliminate competition, reducing accountability.
This system allows parties to remain in power even when they lose the popular vote, distorting democracy and undermining fair representation. But other countries have found ways to prevent this abuse.
How Other Countries Keep Elections Fair
1. Independent Redistricting Commissions (Canada, Australia, U.K.)
In Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom, politicians have no role in drawing district maps. Instead, independent commissions—composed of nonpartisan experts, judges, and statisticians—determine fair boundaries. These commissions use neutral criteria, such as population size and geographic continuity, to ensure fair representation.
Lesson for the U.S.: Independent commissions, rather than politicians, should be responsible for drawing districts.
2. Proportional Representation (Germany, Sweden, Netherlands)
Instead of drawing districts at all, many European countries use proportional representation. This means that if a party gets 40% of the national vote, they get about 40% of the seats in parliament—no district manipulation needed.
Lesson for the U.S.: Moving toward proportional representation in Congress could eliminate the need for district maps altogether.
3. Strict Redistricting Rules (Japan, France, South Korea)
In countries like Japan, France, and South Korea, redistricting is governed by strict legal standards that prevent politicians from manipulating district maps. These rules often include:
- Mathematical formulas to ensure fair district sizes.
- Bans on dividing communities to weaken their voting power.
- Automatic judicial reviews of newly drawn maps.
Lesson for the U.S.: Strict, enforceable laws should regulate redistricting, with automatic court reviews to ensure fairness.
What Needs to Change in the U.S.?
The U.S. could reduce gerrymandering dramatically by adopting reforms based on these international models:
- Establish independent redistricting commissions in every state.
- Implement stronger legal restrictions on how district lines can be drawn.
- Consider proportional representation to eliminate the issue entirely.
- Require automatic court reviews of district maps before they take effect.
Without reform, gerrymandering will continue to undermine American democracy, allowing politicians to choose their voters instead of the other way around.
The Case for a Constitutional Amendment to End Gerrymandering Once and for All
Temporary fixes, like court rulings and state-level reforms, have done little to stop gerrymandering. The only real solution is a constitutional amendment—a permanent, nationwide rule that ensures fair districting and protects the fundamental right to equal representation.
Why a Constitutional Amendment Is Necessary
Efforts to stop gerrymandering through state laws and court rulings have failed for three main reasons:
- The Supreme Court Won’t Fix It
In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that partisan gerrymandering is not a federal issue, leaving the problem up to individual states. This means that unless a state voluntarily reforms its system, politicians can continue to rig elections. - State Laws Are Too Easily Overturned
Some states have passed independent redistricting commissions, but these reforms are often repealed by politicians once they regain power. Without a constitutional amendment, any progress made can be undone. - A National Solution Is the Only Fair Solution
Some states allow extreme gerrymandering while others have fairer maps. This creates an unbalanced democracy, where votes in one state carry more weight than in another. A constitutional amendment would apply to all states, ensuring every American’s vote counts equally.
What Should a Constitutional Amendment Include?
A strong amendment to ban gerrymandering would include:
- Independent Redistricting Commissions: Maps should be drawn by nonpartisan experts, not politicians.
- Clear, Fair Districting Rules: Districts must be compact, follow natural geographic boundaries, and keep communities together.
- Automatic Court Review: All new district maps should be reviewed by federal courts to ensure fairness.
- Transparency and Public Input: The redistricting process must be open, allowing citizens to see and challenge unfair maps.
The Path Forward
DemocracyBillofRights.org is dedicated to helping people imagine and understand the constitutional amendments that we need to protect democracy. We’ve developed 10 hypothetical amendments to that do that. The most important is the Citizen-led Amendment Pathway, which would make it easier to pass future amendments and ensure that the people serve as a check on all three branches of government. Our plan is to first pass this pathway amendment, then move on to an amendment that tackles gerrymandering—an amendment we’ve already written as part of our Democracy Bill of Rights.
Ending gerrymandering is just as critical. Without action, a small group of politicians will continue to manipulate elections, silencing voters and pushing the country toward autocracy. A constitutional amendment is the only way to stop this undemocratic practice once and for all
Leave a Reply