This work is a systematic approach to one of the major problems within the American voting system, namely partisan gerrymandering. In response to the urgency of solving the problem of partisan gerrymandering, the origins of gerrymandering are depicted, followed by a comparison of suggested standards and solutions which have been proposed in light of recent court decisions, and an analysis of why none of them can satisfactorily solve the problem. Therefore, this paper takes a different approach and outlines how the problem can be diminished and ideally prevented in the future by approaching the problem in a more fundamental way.
The right to cast an effective, meaningful vote in fair elections is at the core of every democratic system of government around the world. Even though this right has been embedded in the U.S. Constitution more than 200 years ago, the United States is now struggling more than ever before to provide this exact right to voting citizens. Partisan gerrymandering, the division of geographic areas into voting districts in a way that gives one party an unfair advantage in elections, increasingly poses a threat to the constitutional integrity of U.S.-American elections.
Recently, the United States Supreme Court once again refused to set out a standard on the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering in two cases pending before it, delaying a clear answer to this perennial problem for another few years. This continues to leave lower courts, political scientists and legal scholars second-guessing the Supreme Court’s possible approach in the future.
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. A Typically American Problem? Origins of Gerrymandering in the United States
1. Setting Constituency Boundaries for Congressional and State Elections
a) Prerequisites of Redistricting
b) The Power of Redistricting
2. First Past the Post – a Factor Favoring Gerrymandering
III. Common Practices of Gerrymandering – “Packing and Cracking”
IV. The Legal Realm of Gerrymandering
1. The Justiciability of Voting
2. Racial Gerrymandering
3. The Struggle of Finding a Legal Standard for Partisan Gerrymandering
a) Nonjusticiability of Partisan Gerrymandering Before Davis v. Bandemer
b) The Two Prong Test Established in Bandemer
c) The Justice’s Continued Search for a Standard in Vieth v. Jubelirer
d) Measurement of Fairness in LULAC v. Perry
e) The Continued Search after Gill v. Whitford and Benisek v. Lamone
V. Suggested Standards and Solutions to Counteract Partisan Gerrymandering in Science and Literature
1. Using Geography
a) The Shortest Split-line Method
b) Measurement of Compactness
c) Geography as an Indicator for a Map’s Unconstitutionality
2. Minimizing or Eliminating Intent to Gerrymander
a) Commissions instead of Politicians
b) Using Big Data – the Right Way
aa) Redistricting through Nonpartisan Computer Technology
bb) Standard of Maximum Neutrality
3. Reviewing Adverse Effects on One Party Through Social Science
a) Simulating Nonpartisan Principle Conforming Districts on the Computer
b) The Symmetry Standard
c) The Efficiency Gap Measurement
4. Conclusion: None of the Suggested Standards will Fix the Problem of Unintentional Gerrymandering Caused by the Urban-Rural Divide
VI. Why only a Standard of Maximum Proportionality can fix Partisan Gerrymandering in the Long Run
1. Reasons for the Decline of Proportional Representation in the American Voting System
2. The Constitutional Requirement of Maximum Proportionality
3. Suggested Proportional Representation Systems
a) Mixed Member Proportional Voting
b) Party List Voting
c) Ranked Choice Voting
4. Proportional Representation in State and Municipal Elections
VII. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
This work examines the constitutional threats posed by partisan gerrymandering in the United States and evaluates the efficacy of proposed mathematical and structural reforms. The primary research question centers on whether traditional redistricting standards can sufficiently ensure fair representation, or if a systemic shift toward a requirement of maximum proportionality is necessary to protect the democratic integrity of elections.
- The origins and mechanics of gerrymandering, specifically "packing" and "cracking."
- The historical judicial struggle to establish justiciable standards for partisan gerrymandering.
- The limitations of geographic and data-driven solutions in addressing unintentional bias.
- The necessity of proportional representation as a sustainable and constitutional reform.
Extract from the Book
III. Common Practices of Gerrymandering – “Packing and Cracking”
Now that the origins of Gerrymandering have been carved out of the structural foundations of the United States system, the next question arising is how Gerrymandering is conducted. Gerrymandering operates through the use of “packing” and “cracking”. Packing refers to putting a lot of voters voting for the other party in one district, whereas cracking means splitting opposing voters up in order to prevent them from gaining a majority in any district. Packing and cracking work best if combined.
The image above shows a hypothetical example of packing Democratic voters in district 6 and cracking these voters in districts 1 to 5. Because of the way the districts are drawn, the Republican Party gains 5 out of 6 available seats, despite the fact that there is an equal number of voters for each party, fifteen apiece. In other words, the Republican party gets 83.3% of the available seats with 50% of votes because of the way the districts were drawn. It is notable that this outcome could have resulted by coincidental as well as by intentional districting, and no “bizarre shapes” are required to produce this result, all of which makes gerrymandering incredibly difficult to classify and distinguish from normal redistricting. It has accordingly been said that “all districting is gerrymandering.”
Summary of Chapters
I. Introduction: Introduces the challenge of partisan gerrymandering as a threat to U.S. democratic integrity and outlines the paper's thesis regarding the necessity of proportionality.
II. A Typically American Problem? Origins of Gerrymandering in the United States: Explores the historical roots of redistricting, the concept of "one person, one vote," and how the "First Past the Post" system inherently enables bias.
III. Common Practices of Gerrymandering – “Packing and Cracking”: Details the technical manipulation methods used to dilute opposing votes and secure legislative majorities.
IV. The Legal Realm of Gerrymandering: Provides a comprehensive overview of Supreme Court jurisprudence, tracing the evolution from non-justiciability to the current search for a standard.
V. Suggested Standards and Solutions to Counteract Partisan Gerrymandering in Science and Literature: Analyzes various proposed remedies, including geographic, algorithmic, and commission-based approaches, and explains their inherent limitations.
VI. Why only a Standard of Maximum Proportionality can fix Partisan Gerrymandering in the Long Run: Argues for a transition toward proportional representation systems to address both intentional and structural (unintentional) gerrymandering.
VII. Conclusion: Summarizes the argument that proportional representation is the only lasting constitutional solution to ensure fair and effective voter representation.
Keywords
Partisan Gerrymandering, Redistricting, Proportional Representation, Efficiency Gap, Packing, Cracking, Supreme Court, Voting Rights, Equal Protection, Constitutional Law, Maximum Proportionality, Electoral Reform, First Past the Post, Democratic Integrity, Urban-Rural Divide.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The work addresses the erosion of fair representation in the U.S. due to partisan gerrymandering and evaluates whether current legal and scientific remedies can resolve the issue.
What are the primary themes analyzed in the study?
Key themes include the historical origins of districting, the evolution of legal standards in the Supreme Court, the failure of algorithmic solutions, and the proposal for a proportionality-based voting system.
What is the main objective of the author?
The primary goal is to demonstrate that existing proposed standards fail to account for unintentional bias and to advocate for a "standard of maximum proportionality" as the only sustainable reform.
Which scientific methods are evaluated in the book?
The author evaluates several technical approaches, including the "shortest split-line method," measurement of compactness, computer simulations of nonpartisan districts, and the "efficiency gap" measurement.
What does the main body discuss?
The main body systematically reviews the failure of courts to define a clear legal standard, critiques proposed technical solutions, and argues that systemic electoral change is required.
How would you characterize the keywords defining this work?
The work is characterized by terms related to electoral systems, constitutional jurisprudence, mathematical measurements of electoral bias, and systemic reform strategies.
How does "natural packing" impact the gerrymandering debate?
Natural packing describes the clustering of voters in urban areas, which creates unintentional partisan bias that persists even when maps are drawn neutrally, complicating legal claims against gerrymandering.
Why does the author propose proportional representation as a unique solution?
The author argues that because proportionality allows for results to match voter intent regardless of district boundaries, it solves the "political thicket" problem that has historically prevented the courts from intervening effectively.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Ricarda von Meding (Autor:in), 2018, On the American Political Problem of Partisan Gerrymandering, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/490618
