One of the political facts of life in today’s America is the distance between popular opinion and electoral results. Polls and academic surveys consistently show support for policies that are inconsistent with–and loudly rejected by–candidates who win elections. That is especially true for those who are elected to the House of Representatives.
For as long as I’ve been writing these daily meditations (okay, rants), I’ve attributed that state of affairs to gerrymandering–the partisan redistricting that I am increasingly convinced lies at the very heart of America’s political dysfunctions.
Partisan redistricting–the drawing of congressional districts by legislators who are choosing their voters, rather than the other way around–subverts democracy by enabling minority rule. The practice was dubbed “gerrymandering” to “honor” Elbridge Gerry, who was responsible for drawing districts in Massachusetts that one publication said “looked like salamanders.” Gerry was born in 1744, so the practice of manipulating district lines is nothing new. What is relatively new is the precision in that line drawing that can now be accomplished with the aid of computers.
In states where one party controls redistricting, legislators can carve out districts with majorities of their voters, and cram the opposing party’s voters into a remaining few.
If you wonder where looney-tune officeholders like Jim Jordan, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert come from, that’s the explanation.
The New York Times has just figured that out–and documented it.
A New York Times analysis of the nearly 6,000 congressional and state legislative elections in November shows just how few races were true races. Nearly all either were dominated by an incumbent or played out in a district drawn to favor one party overwhelmingly. The result was a blizzard of blowouts, even in a country that is narrowly divided on politics.
Just 8 percent of congressional races (36 of 435) and 7 percent of state legislative races (400 of 5,465) were decided by fewer than five percentage points, according to The Times’s analysis.
Consequences from the death of competition are readily apparent. Roughly 90 percent of races are now decided not by general-election voters in November but by the partisans who tend to vote in primaries months earlier. That favors candidates who appeal to ideological voters and lawmakers who are less likely to compromise. It exacerbates the polarization that has led to deadlock in Congress and in statehouses.
The result of this practice is the wide gulf between voters’ actual policy preferences and the ideologues who emerge victorious. And–as the Times grudgingly acknowledged–although both parties engage in the practice, Republicans overwhelmingly do most of it.
The Times noted that demographic shifts and “political sorting” — the tendency of like-minded citizens to live in the same community–also have played a role, but the study confirmed the pre-eminent role of redistricting in creating unrepresentative Representatives.
While it is easy to focus on the candidates, the money, the message or the economy, increasingly it is the maps that determine the outcome. In North Carolina, they may have decided control of the U.S. House of Representatives.
Only one of the state’s 14 congressional districts was decided by fewer than five points. A Republican won the state’s next closest race — by 14 points.
In 2022, the State Supreme Court ordered a more competitive map, but it was tossed out after midterm elections shook up the balance of the court. The replacement, which was drawn by the Republican-led Legislature, gave three Democratic seats to the G.O.P. while making nearly every district safer for the party that held it.
It is impossible to know how elections held under the first map would have turned out. But, according to Justin Levitt, a redistricting law expert at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, “had every seat stayed the same as in 2022, those three seats would have made the difference, and Democrats would have had a one-seat majority” in Congress.
The Times article focused on several states where partisan line-drawing has produced results incompatible with the will of a majority of that state’s voters.
Even before Trump’s justices corrupted the Supreme Court, that body refused to put an end to the practice, calling partisan gerrymanders a “political problem” outside federal courts’ jurisdiction. Thanks to that unconscionable evasion, citizens in states which, like Indiana, lack referenda or initiatives, are helpless to correct the situation. Only the legislature–filled with “representatives” who benefit from the practice–can overturn it.
The only hope for Hoosiers is Democratic control of the U.S. House and Senate, and passage of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.
Our first chance is 2026, when–hopefully–Trump will have infuriated enough voters to spur turnout.
I would add that the Primary system is flawed and promotes the extremes of the respective party, not the moderate candidate.
Gerrymandering, Citizens United, and a primary system that is flawed, are all problems for our Democracy.
“The only hope for Hoosiers is Democratic control of the U.S. House and Senate, and passage of the John Lewis Voting Rights Act.”
I’m 87, my IU Health Care has changed its Medicare Advantage coverage to Elevance Health, the parent company of Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield which I have avoided for years. Watch the movie or read the John Grisham book “The Rainmaker” to understand why. My IU Health Care billing department was hacked months ago, my nearby IU Connected Care clinic is closing and moving to far east side. I doubt I will be here to see the outcome of 2026 so I am wishing all of you Good Luck! Truth be told; I don’t intend to try very hard to stay here.
The NYT has recently replaced our once trusted WaPo for truth and facts; I want/need to know WHERE IS EUGENE ROBINSON? I haven’t seen him or his columns and miss his wisdom and sense of humor.
WHERE IS EUGENE ROBINSON?
I see him on msnbc
Julia Vaughn, Policy Director, Common Cause Indiana, has been working to stop gerrymandering for decades. She’d love help!
The problem, as I see it, is that we have only two political parties, and those who represent us in Government are motivated to become the most loyal party members to maintain their respect, wealth status, and opportunities for advancement.
That makes party choice, especially to those attracted by the color red and all of its implications, a religion with all of the trappings.
MTV (Musk, Trump, Vance) have become superbeings for Republicans—the lives of everyone in the clergy depend on unquestioned loyalty to other earthly beings. Mar-a-Lago is their Vatican.
MTV, a trinity of a single mind, promises and delivers heaven on earth to the Republican clergy and congregations based on belief instead of knowledge.
This has been pulled off because people do not distinguish between beliefs centered in their imaginations and human knowledge of how the tangible Universe works.
Eugene Robinson is alive and well, so much so that trump recently has demanded his firing from WAPO for criticizing him.
My guess on the practice of gerrymandering and who does it, in response to the statement that both parties do, is that the GOP is the king of the hill and that the DEMs, when they do venture into that unfamiliar territory, are lousy at it and only perform out of self-defense.
Amen to a fervent wish that by 2026 everyone – even many of those who voted for trump and his gang and who have turned out to be the most vulnerable to the evil he and musk have perpetrated – will turn on them by either not voting or by actually voting for Democrat sanity.
But, with the gerrymandered, Republican stranglehold on legislative bodies, will turnout matter? Making turnout irrelevant to election outcomes is, after all, the point of gerrymandering.
There will be secession from gerrymandering until there is a Constitutional amendment that defines how districts are laid out based on simple population. Wyoming will still have only 1 representative in the house … unless the amendment also creates a minimum. Certain areas in west Texas, for example, are so sparsely populated that the district for 1 rep may be larger than the entire city of San Antonio.
But, tragically, idiots like Jordan, Greene, Boebert and a host of others will keep getting re-elected and our dysfunctional government will continue to splinter and become even more dysfunctional. The false motives mentioned above will continue to favor power and its continuation over service to the nation’s people.
Any other ideas?
Sorry. “There will NOT be a secession from gerrymandering … “
Apparently I have been checking MSNBC, CNN and on rare occasions Fox News and have missed Eugene Robinson’s appearances. Thank you for letting me know he is still alive and active enough to have pissed Trump off; sorry he is in Trump and likely Musk’s crosshairs with the rest of us. I read his columns in the Indianapolis Star for years and hesitated canceling my subscription due to his columns.
Good article!
Both parties gerrymander!
As you stated the Virginia state senate and representatives was decided in the courts
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/after-redistricting-heres-how-each-party-could-win-house
I know gerrymandering impacts election turnout, but who does that benefit?
It benefits the oligarchs and their hired hands. Once gerrymandering has taken place in a state to the liking of Charles Koch and Republican PACS, they don’t have to spend much money to collect votes. It also benefits the Democratic Party PACS because they don’t have to spend money either. If you looked at the significant spending leading up to November’s election, it was concentrated in the swing states.
SCOTUS is owned (corrupted) by monied interests, as is the uniparty. Do you think that only the Democratic Party knew that USAID was a slush fund for them to carry out coups in other countries? As of last night, Bolivia added itself to the list of victims initiated by the CIA cut-out. Both parties knew what was going on. The likes of Lindsey Graham favored it, and so did Tom Cotton.
Through inherited wealth and watered-down genes, the oligarchy isn’t as bright today as it once was. This allows the entire curtain to be pulled back so we can see the Wizard of Oz hurriedly pulling those levers. Musk and Trump’s access to social media is a GIFT to us all. They get to tell us directly what they’re thinking, or the absence of thinking.
For instance, within a few short days, Trump announced his plans to ethnically cleanse Palestinians by taking over Gaza and building an expansive Mar-A-Lago of the Middle East. Then yesterday, he sanctioned South Africa (falsely, I may add) for taking rich white people’s land. Both Musk and Trump announce their idiocy online many times a day. Articles in the New York Times about “gerrymandering” are a distraction.
This article provides many good references for those interested in public education. It explains what’s coming for the Department of Education and changes throughout the country, including higher education institutions.
https://globalextremism.org/post/afpi-has-taken-over-the-department-of-education/
Eugene Robinson frequently appears on Morning Joe.
Todd, it’s not Trump’s “idiocy,” but his delusional thinking, I believe. If I am right, the delusions serve to protect his twisted, Malignantly narcissistic point of view, a core feature of his being.
So, from one point of view, gerrymandering works to sustain the power of the wealthy, white, mostly male, Christian, dominators of our political system. And, the bigotry in the populace that they can call upon to support them is almost as scary as they themselves. For a Trump, if you are not “WHITE LIKE ME” you are simply expendable. Oh, my, how about that, sounds like Nazi thinking!
I’m guessing that in the next couple of years, we’ll know if the Constitution can be amended by an Executive Order (EO). What will remain to be seen is whether one must sign the EO with a Sharpie in order for it to be deemed a proper change.
The esteemed “Grey Lady” of the press sometimes seems to have a bit of dementia. The NY Times’ investigative reporters are usually pretty good. Their editorial board is another matter. I often find myself scratching my head after reading an editorial. They seem to be trying to balance policies that are bats..t crazy with those that are reasonable. If they really want to be fair and balanced, they need to call out the BS.
Sheila, remind me why Nancy Pelosi didn’t get that passed when we had the House—was it because it wouldn’t make it through the Senate? And yes. Julia Vaughn and I/LWV created All In For democracy to fight gerrymandering in Indiana but there is NOT one state that has ever been able to pass redistricting reform legislatively—so instead of trying to reform the redistricting process through code we needed to register voters and GOTV so we could have the legislative ability to put it on referendum—-our legacy non partisan
civic organizations could not figure that out soon enough! That’s why Hoosiers for Democrats was created—an alternative advocacy process.
Our state legislature in Indiana wants to do more to limit voting. Go to a closed primary system and ban college IDs as acceptable identification.
On the subject of the USAID, Declan Walsh reports in the NYTimes about its impact in Africa. Their health systems are dependent on USAID funding. It’s where a family member has spent 20+ years working in public health, until USAID was shuttered and his job with an NGO eliminated. I’d encourage everyone to read it.
There is too much attention paid to Trump. He is just a figurehead. Does anyone really think that he is developing, thinking and writing up all those executive orders himself? He just signs whatever is put in front of him that day. He gets the limelight, but others get the payoff.
Theresa, many of the EOs are prepared by Russ Vought at the OMB. He helped write Project 2025 and is executing the plan that Trump knew nothing about. LOL
Also, the NY Times has known all about USAID for decades yet never took it down for being a CIA cut out. Why?
And since they protected it, why would you trust anything coming from them?
They didn’t attack Harvey Weinstein but knew about his behavior. $$$
They even lied about the “Hamas attacks against Israel on 10/7.” Now we are learning about the Hannibal Directive by Israel. Soon we’ll learn the whole thing was staged.
Citizens United, Gerrymandering, Electoral College…all seem to discourage voters in all states. I wonder what will happen when they are finally done with. Can we ever get to “one person, one vote?” And you wonder why millions don’t bother to vote.
JoAnn, Please hang around as long as you can. We need your voice and will miss you terribly when you’re not around. Love to you.
I see that King Donald has appointed himself as head of the Board at the Kennedy Center. When is the first Kid Rock concert?
Again with the equivocation.
If both sides picked their “extremes” in the primaries, AOC would be in the conservative wing of the Democratic Party.
One side picks their extremists; one side decided to not cooperate with their counterparts to limit the effectiveness of a Black President; only one side redistricted twice in a decade (1993 after winning back the legislature in Texas – the Democrats could have, but did NOT, respond in kind).
As for multiple parties, minority parties tend to get unpopular concessions in return for their votes in many parliamentary systems. Beyond gerrymandering, external funding has made both parties less effective at achieving balance, obeying the money rather that trying to build reasonable governing coalitions of voters, although here again, one side has been pulled further than the other. CFPB and pro-union measures have come from Democrats, even though the monied interests were not aided by these.