The Fight Over Gerrymandering
WASHINGTION D.C. - On the second day of its 2017-18 term the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case likely to determine the balance of power between Republicans and Democrats for decades to come. The Court is considering the issue of partisan gerrymandering the process of drawing legislative district lines to entrench one party’s political power.
When lawmakers engage in partisan gerrymandering they essentially pick who the representatives will be before anyone ever sets foot in a ballot box. This is deeply and imminently important because in the endless election cycles that dominate American politics, the 2018 midterms are just around the corner. Democrats are emphasizing the need to win it back. Republicans highlight the importance of keeping their majority in Congress.
Despite the difficult 2016 campaign and a deficit of 24 House seats, political markers are giving the democrats hope. The president's party usually loses seats in midterms. This is particularly true when it controls both the senate and the House of Representatives. Progressives shouldn’t celebrate victory just yet. Democrats may not be able to translate their strong support into political victory and the reason has almost nothing to do with their platform or voters, but has everything to do with the issue of partisan gerrymandering.
Let’s say that in a state 60 percent of registered voters are democrats, 10 percent are independents, and 30 percent are republicans. Not all registered voters show up, but the current climate indicates that Democrats are more likely to go to the polls this midterm cycle, and independents are likely to lean towards Democratic candidates. Given these variables, one might predict Democrats will win more than half of the state legislative races. But, if Republicans were in power after the last census, when the district lines were drawn, it is the GOP that will likely be the big winners on November 7.
This is because lawmakers draw district lines they tend to want to keep their jobs and help fellow party members keep theirs. They do this by “packing” and “cracking” voters when drawing district lines. When lawmakers pack voters, it means that they put many of one type of voter in a few districts. Democrats, for example, could win by huge margins in a few districts, but never obtain enough votes to win the majority of districts.When lawmakers crack voters, it means they spread one type of voter across many different districts. Republican lawmakers could fan out Democrats throughout the state. So they would have a difficult time getting a critical mass of voters to elect the candidate of their choice.
The first question the Supreme Court will tackle is whether or not it can even consider claims of partisan gerrymandering. If the Court believes that it can review these political disputes, the second question the Court will consider is the standard that should be applied to determine when partisan gerrymandering goes too far and crosses a constitutional line. This case, like so many others, likely rests in Justice Kennedy’s hands, and after oral arguments there may be some reason for optimism. Now the voting rights of millions of Americans may rest with that one vote, that of Justice Kennedy. If a majority of the court adheres to the view that federal courts should not or cannot review claims of partisan gerrymandering, that would be a deeply dissatisfying result for many of us who believe the judicial branch has a responsibility to protect voting rights.
