Redistricting Pros And Cons

665 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Negative effects of gerrymandering

Voters should care about redistricting because it cherry-picks voters, can be used to eliminate an incumbent, eliminate an opponent, skews state-wide representation, dilutes minority voting, and splits up communities. The lines are tailored more to fit the representatives and not the voters.

The negative effects of political redistricting is there is no compromise left when one party draws the lines so that they will win and the other will lose. Competition is critical when voters want or need something passed, but when one group has more control, then there is no need for compromise. It dilutes minority voting because the maps can be redrawn for a certain incumbent if the incumbent is losing that minorities votes. Redistricting
Another positive effect is that if the vote were based on one to one votes, cities would have more say than suburbs and rural communities. I do think a positive to redistricting, if used correctly, would help to protect minorities and give them a voice.

Redistricting should be determined by mathematics to make impartial districts. I am sure there is a formula someone could come up with to align with court rulings, divide up the districts evenly in population, contiguity, and compactness. This would make the districts more fair and representative of the people and we would not need the biases of a few people to draw the lines in their favor. Redistricting more impartial districts would also help raise competition and make the incumbents work for their votes.

According to Ballotpedia, both California and Arizona seem to be the only states that actually attempts to be bipartisan by having an independent commision draw the lines for both congressional and legislative district lines. Ballotpedia (2017) FairVote says redistricting is done in most states by the state legislature to draw both state legislative and congressional district lines. FairVote

Show More
Related

  • Pros And Cons Of Partisan Elections

    614 Words  | 2 Pages

    Despite the overwhelming critics, Texas remains one of several states that keep supporting the concept of partisan judicial elections, where voters cast a straight-ticket vote. In fact, electing judges by the public leads to a number of ethical problems which necessarily require compromise between judicial integrity and independence. Most of the allegations of wrong-doing have caused a number of professional and citizen groups to become disaffected with the existing system.

    Read More

  • The New Jersey Plan for the Constitution

    777 Words  | 2 Pages

    To begin with the unequal representation of the states in the Virginia Plan was of great concern and controversy while the New Jersey Plan retained equal representation of the states. Virginia proposed a bicameral legislature that included elections by the people and appointments by those elected. This system used both wealth and population as a determining factor in regards to the number of seats in both houses. New Jersey on the other hand proposed single house legislature that allow each state a single vote. Votes based on population would put small states at a disadvantage. The states that were more populated would be in control of the legislative branches, leaving small states without a voice. Concerns about who was to be counted in the population also ...

    Read More

  • Larry J. Sabato's Thoughts on Constitutional Revisions

    1076 Words  | 3 Pages

    I see no immediate advantage to expanding the Senate, primarily because states are equally represented, and giving more populated states more representation just does not seem like a great idea. Having more representatives from densely populated states would increase the opportunity to have either a more Democratic representation, or a more Republican representation. In the Senate currently, there are already enough Republicans and Democrats so what is the basis of having more? The only reason that I can think of is to have a more biased, and enlarged, group of people arguing about issues. What the Senate most certainly does not need are more people from larger states to argue over minute details of issues, and indecipherably present their opinion on such matters.

    Read More

  • Gerrymandering: Corruption Crippling the Country

    1088 Words  | 3 Pages

    The history of gerrymandering is one that has caused some major shakeups in how politics are done. A man named Elbridge Gerry, governor of Massachusetts back in 1812, started it all. The governor had the idea of redistricting his states lines in order to benefit his political party. One specific district was so badly morphed that it almost resembled a salamander, and thus you get the name, gerrymandering (Barasch). But it didn’t just stop in 1812 Massachusetts; it became one of the most common strategies in American politics. We even see it happening in modern day. For example, Texas in 2003 had realigned its districts in such a way that it put ten Democratic Congressman in heavy red, conservative districts (Barasch). This move was done to lessen their power within the house. As a result, half of them were not voted back in for the next election. The act of gerrymandering is not just as simple as redrawing districts, the un...

    Read More

  • The Redistricting Game

    1392 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...n over bipartisan commission or even worse, by the state legislature. I think bipartisan commission could ultimately result in bipartisan gerrymandering. On the other hand, the party in control of the state legislature often draws district lines in favor of its own political interest. Independent commission guarantees fair non-political congressional districts plans which cannot be vetoed by the governor who also acts in favor of his political party’s interest. I believe democracy in a state is attainable when the people legitimately vote for the representatives they want but not vice versa.

    Read More

  • The Detrimental Practice of Gerrymandering

    988 Words  | 2 Pages

    When gerrymandering occurs, a political party draws the boundaries of an electoral district in a way that helps their party win elections over the other parties. For example, if a Republican controls a state, and it appears like the party will lose a seat in the future, the Republicans will draw the district in a way to exclude as many Democratic voters as possible. Perhaps they will do this by removing a democratic stronghold from one district and adding it to another district that will either easily go Republican or will have a Democratic representative no matter what happens. Before 1964, the majority party could draw districts in any way they wanted to, and chaos ensued. Consequently, in 1964, the U.S Supreme Court legislated that the districts “had to contain equal population, and be as compact as possible” (“Gerrymandering”). Every ten years the U.S. issues a census to determine the population of each state. After this, each state receives their share of the 435 seats, and then the state gets to break the population into the corresponding number of districts. This whole process, known as reapportionment, takes weeks to determine, and in many cases, courts must determine the shape and area of each district. Even though the districts must contain equal population, gerry...

    Read More

  • Electoral College Advantages

    1473 Words  | 3 Pages

    This is unfair because this suggests that voting power changes with your geography. Election of 1824, 1876, 1888 and 2000 reveals that sometimes a candidate with fewer popular votes can still win a majority of the electoral votes. This is a disadvantage because the state’s popular opinion is being neglected. Another thing to consider is the winner take all system, a system in which the “winner of their statewide popular vote gets all of their allotted votes in the Electoral College System which poses another disadvantage. The winner take all system is also known as the “Congressional District Method”; all states follow this except Maine and Nebraska. Maine and Nebraska tend to divide the votes proportionally. The winner take all system is however inequitable because in a state there is a vast amount of opinions, and this system prevents the minority from being discerned. This system “ does nothing to provide representation to any group making up less than half of the population in a given voting district.” Winner take all is a discriminatory rule as it tends to under represent minority. Winner take all is also a binary system, so if you are a Democrat living in Alabama (which is primarily a Republican state) your opinion is less likely to her

    Read More

  • What Are The Pros And Cons Of Federalism

    1610 Words  | 4 Pages

    On may 25 , 1787 the constitutional convention begain at independence Hall in Philadelphia inorder to amend the Articles of Confederation . It was apparent to the framers of the Constitution that the Articles of Condeferations lacked central authority over foreign and comestic commerece threw many conflicts over time after the Revolutionary War . this wouldn’t be a harmonious amendment either . Between the federalists and the Anti – Federalist the spent the entire summer creating a new government unlike any before . Leaving no one happy proving their creation was fair . One of the biggest conflicts was the balancing of powers between the national and state powers in our feredal sytem (KTP 74).

    Read More

  • Gerrymandering Reflection

    979 Words  | 2 Pages

    At first, I thought that just splitting up the population into districts with relatively square shaped would be the correct way to make the candidates happy. I attempted to make their houses the center of the district and expanded from there until I got the population equal. Voters in states like Idaho wouldn’t benefit from this. There are other problems when it comes to gerrymandering. While a candidate from the majority party has the advantage, it doesn’t allow for a third party candidate to have as much of a chance.

    Read More

  • Single-Member Districts

    764 Words  | 2 Pages

    The single-member district election system is the most common and best-known electoral system currently in use in America. It is used to elect the U.S. House Representatives, as well as many state and local legislatures. Under single member district systems, an area is divided into a number of geographically defined voting districts, each represented by a single elected official. Voters can only vote for their district’s representative, with the individual receiving the most votes winning election. This method of electing representatives is better than any alternative solution in various ways. Four compelling reasons to support the single-member district election system include the fact that single-member districts give each voter a single, easily identifiable district member; the way single-member district voting helps protect against overreaching party influence; that single-member districts ensure geographic representation; and finally, that single-member districts are the best way to maximize representatives’ accountability.

    Read More

  • Reapportionment Essay

    1052 Words  | 3 Pages

    This does not mean that every district has the same number of people. For example, Wisconsin have 8 congressional districts, 33 senate districts, and 99 assembly districts. Then, each of the 8 congressional districts have to have roughly the same number of people as each other, and each of the 33 senate districts have to have roughly the same population, and so on. According to the Wisconsin Constitution, there are some additional rules on reapportionment. The assembly district cannot be divided in the formation of the senate district. That is, the senate district needs to have a full number of assembly districts. In Wisconsin, the ratio is usually three assembly districts to one senate district. The districts need to be as compact as possible, as in the area of the district should be as close together as possible and not spread out in order to prevent political gerrymandering. Lastly, the redistricting needs to rely on previous political divisions such as town and

    Read More

  • Political Science Final Exam

    758 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...d I believe that proportional representation would be the most effective system to further the goals of democracy. If we use the single member plurality system we automatically ignore and exclude the voice of the people who didn’t win the election in a first past the post method. On the other hand in the proportional system rather than all seats being given to the party with the most votes every party gets the seats equal to the amount of votes they were able to obtain. This would allow all the people who voted to have their ‘”voice” represented in the government even though the party they voted for did not end up winning the election. This would encourage and engage many citizens to become involved in the political process; who otherwise would be discourage to vote at the fact that even if they vote, if their party loses their vote would be useless.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay: The Reform Of The Electoral College

    1097 Words  | 3 Pages

    Instead of taking each state vote as one. This reforms divide the votes up by the district and the extra votes would be given to the individual that has the most votes. As stated on the Fair Vote website, “basing electoral vote allocation on congressional districts as well would raise the stakes of redistricting considerably and make gerrymandering even more tempting”. I agree with them. The Congressional District already have enough problems on their hand. We shouldn’t add another one.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of A Divided Government

    539 Words  | 2 Pages

    One negative effect of a divided government is the amount of bickering and undermining that is created between the two sides. While it may

    Read More

  • Structure of American and California Governments

    9636 Words  | 20 Pages

    The legislative branch of America helps create the laws or legislation. Ideally, it works to create a society that is safe for all members. The State of California like the federal government has a bicameral legislature, in other words, composed of two chambers. The upper chamber is called the senate, while the lower is called the assembly. A unique process for the state level is that it allows for the initiative. This process circumvents the state congress and can create laws without their aide. In the state of California, every ten years, following a US census, which collects demographic information, state legislators draw redistricting plans for itself, California seats in the US House of Representatives, and the State Board of Equalization. There have been attempts to create a “non-partisan” redistricting commission, but this has been turned down by voters numerous times. Proposition 14, 39, 118, and 119 were all turned down by voters to create a non-partisan districting commission. Every decade a large portion of the state congress’s energy is spent on redistricting. In fact, two of the last four censuses, Supreme Court has had to step in to break a deadlock. In 1970, Ronald Reagan, a Republican, vetoed all together the Democratic redistricting plan. The Supreme Court had to step in and created its own plans for California to follow. Then in 1981, Democrats proposed redistricting as well as congressional delegation redistricting. The Republicans stopped this by adding referendums to the state ballot. Because it was too close to elections though, Supreme Court overturned these referendums in 1982. In 1984, they officially passed the new redistricting plan which was very similar to the original plans.

    Read More

More about Redistricting Pros And Cons

Open Document