More Gerrymandering Thoughts

I’m a huge believer in California’s independent redistricting commission and believe the concept should be a national requirement. Partisan gerrymandering, which the Supreme Court said was constitutional decades ago, perpetuates incredibly undemocratic election results.

As you probably know, a partisan bomb was thrown into the works last year when the President told Texas to engage in mid-decade redistricting because he claimed he deserved five more GOP seats in the House of Representatives. For the uninitiated, mmid-decade redistricting is something that is rarely done, but Trump is gonna Trump, and Abbott and the Texas GOP are all too willing to go along with whatever he wants.

So, they approved new maps that are designed to give them give more seats in their House delegation. But some analyses have suggested that they may have shot themselves in the foot by turning previously safe GOP seats into competitive districts. Maybe they won’t get those five additional seats.

Of course, once Texas did that, Democrats decided they needed to fight fire with fire and started pursuing their own mid-decade redistricting efforts in states the Dems control. California took a ballot measure to the voters who approved the effort. This week, Virginia did the same with the same result. (Although a court in Virginia has already ordered that the vote didn’t matter because the ballot measure was unconstitutional.)

When Democrats seek to do what the GOP did in Texas (and a couple of other states), they are accused of being undemocratic and unfair. The biggest argument I see from Republicans is that, for instance, Virginia’s current congressional delegation accurately reflects the partisan split in the state and should remain that way. (Before the potential change, Virginia had 6 Ds, and 5 Rs in their congressional delegation. In the last Presidential election, Harris received 51% and Trump 46%. So there is something to be said for the accuracy of Virginia’s congressional delegation reflecting the partisan make up of the state’s voters.)

But … if a state’s congressional delegation is supposed to match the partisan makeup of the state’s voters, I’ve got bad news for the GOP.

Texas

Current congressional delegation consists of 13 Ds, and 24 Rs. If they get the results they want from their gerrymandering effort that would go to 8 Ds and 29 Rs. In the last Presidential election, Trump got about 56% and Harris 42.5%. Based on my rough, back of the envelop estimate, that means that Trump doesn’t deserve five more congressional seats in Texas. Instead, it should be the Democrats who get about 4 more seats, so the split would be 17 Ds and 20 Rs.

Florida

Current congressional delegation is 7 Ds and 20 Rs. The 2024 Presidential election was 56% for Trump and 43% for Harris. A fair split, using the GOP logic, would be 15 Rs and 12 Ds.

North Carolina

Current congressional delegation is 4 Ds and 10 Rs. The 2024 results were 51% for Trump and 47 for Harris. That fair split would 7 for each or maybe 8 for the GOP and 6 for the Dems.

Indiana

Dems have 2 seats, the GOP has 7. The 2024 results were 58% for Trump and 39% for Harris. A fair split would be 5 or 6 for the GOP and 3 or 4 for the Dems.

Missouri

Dems have 2 seats, the GOP has 6. The 2024 results were 58% for Trump and 40% for Harris. The Dems should have another seat in Missouri.

Ohio.

Dems have 5 seats, the GOP 10. The 2024 election results were 55% for Trump and 40% for Harris. A fair split would be 9 seats for the GOP and 6 for the Dems.

South Carolina

Dems have 1 seat, the GOP 6. The 2024 election results were 58% for Trump and 40% for Harris. Dems should have at least one, if not two more seats, if the GOP really meant what they said.

And I stopped there. I have no doubt that the GOP argument would work against their interests if applied to other red states. It also would likely have a similar impact in some blue states, but it is the GOP making this argument. It’s important to see just how hypocritical they are in making that argument.

The other thing that I simply don’t want to look into is the same kind of analysis of state legislatures. The same thing happens there. I have seen analyses over the years that show in some GOP controlled states, the GOP has a significant majority in the State Legislature even though the partisan votes each year are almost equal and in an occasional instance, more people vote D than R, but the GOP majority remains intact. Why? Because of partisan gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering in United States elections has gone on for a looooong time. It was first used in connection with the redrawing of a district in Massachusetts in 1812. Both sides, when they obtain power, have engaged in gerrymandering to try to hold on to that power.

The problem is that with ever improving technology and more and more partisanship defining political actions, gerrymandering has become an incredibly more powerful and anti-democratic tool that has turned most states into starkly blue states or deep red states. And when your district is drawn so that you don’t have to worry about losing an election to a candidate from the other party, you can move ever more to the left, or to the right, whatever the case may be based on your party affiliation.

This is one of the foundational reasons we have reached the divided state our country is in. Partisans have no reason to moderate their stances. They don’t need to. Their re-elections are assured by how the districts have been drawn.

On my wishlist for fixing our “democracy” is getting rid of Citizen’s United, getting money out of our elections by requiring public financing of campaigns, and ditching redistricting controlled by elected officials. These things are destroying our ability to act in any unified, democratic fashion.

But back to the point of this post … I think the GOP should get what they want. Every congressional delegation must match as close as possible the partisan split of the most recent Presidential election. I don’t think they’re going to like the results.