Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gerrymandering process
Essays on gerrymandering
Essays on gerrymandering
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gerrymandering process
If you have ever seen the 435 congressional districts on a map you would probably think to yourself that it resembles something similar to one giant jigsaw puzzle. These districts vary in size and certainly in shape. Unlike how county lines are decided within states, the congressional districts change every ten years after the Census is released. Why do they have to change exactly? Well, the answer to that question receives the same frustrating answer heard again and again: It’s politics. The official name for the act of changing congressional lines to benefit a political party is “gerrymandering.” It has been the cause of many debates as well as many negative effects. Gerrymandering has had an unfair advantage in politics throughout history, as it has tarnished the system and should be changed. 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... ... middle of paper ... ...stricts is so each American can have a fair representation in their government, but that tends to get out of the way when politicians are seeking to destroy that foundation. Population based geographical squares are the only way to ensure a fair representation, and until that happens, gerrymandering will continue to corrupt America. Works Cited Barasch, Emily. "The Twisted History of Gerrymandering in American Politics." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 19 Sept. 2012. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. Buckler, Justin. "Population Equality And The Imposition Of Risk On Partisan Gerrymandering." Case Western Reserve Law Review 62.4 (2012): 1037-1055. Academic Search Premier. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. "Party Divisions of the House of Representatives*." Party Divisions. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2014. "Where Are the Lines Drawn?" All About Redistricting. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.
A direct consequence of partisan elections is extremely referred to the limited variation in the share of the vote delivered by judicial candidates. Thus, the majority of Texas judges are elected in accordance with their legal qualifications and not with their own campaign
In this essay, I will explain why Texas should retain the partisan election of judges. Texas is one of the few states that elect their judges using a Partisan voting method. Partisan elections can be unfair and can misinform the voter. A high legal position such as a judge should never be chosen in such a manner. Partisan elections often cost more than nonpartisan elections in campaigning. Partisan elections are also more likely to lead to straight ticket voting or mindless voting. Partisan elections also lead to more campaign contributions and can increase the power of constituencies. Lastly partisan elections can cause an imbalance in equal represent the population. Therefore, Partisanship voting does not belong in the courts of Texas and
Throughout American History, people of power have isolated specific racial and gender groups and established policies to limit their right to vote. These politicians, in desperate attempt to elongate their political reign, resort to “anything that is within the rules to gain electoral advantage, including expanding or contracting the rate of political participation.”(Hicks) Originally in the United States, voting was reserved for white, property-owning gentleman
Redistricting is the legislative political process of redrawing the geographic boundaries of congressional district based on population following the decennial census. Each state is obligated to adhere to certain Supreme Court requirements regarding redistricting. Respective districts within a state should ensure population equality, contiguity, compactness and no discrimination against minority. Districts can be drawn to protect incumbents. The process of deliberately modifying districts in order to increase the partisan advantage of a particular political party is called gerrymandering.
The United States of America has engaged in the battle known as political polarization since before its foundation in 1776. From the uprising against the powerful British nation to the political issues of today, Americans continue to debate about proper ideology and attempt to choose a side that closely aligns with their personal beliefs. From decade to decade, Americans struggle to determine a proper course of action regarding the country as a whole and will often become divided on important issues. Conflicts between supporters of slavery and abolitionists, between agriculturalists and industrialists, and between industrial workers and capitalists have fueled the divide. At the Congressional level there tends to be a more prevalent display of polarization and is often the blame of Congress’ inefficiency. James Madison intentionally designed Congress to be inefficient by instating a bicameral legislation. Ambition would counter ambition and prevent majority tyranny. George Washington advised against political parties that would contribute to polarization and misrepresentation in his Farewell Address of 1796. Washington warns, “One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts.” Today, the struggle to increase power between political parties results in techniques to gain even the smallest marginal gains. To truly understand political polarization, we must examine data collected through a variety of means, the effects of rapidly changing technology, and observe what techniques are used to create such a polarized political system.
In American politics today, many practices exist that greatly harm the American public. One of these dangerous practices, known as gerrymandering, occurs in nearly every state. While some claim that the practice helps America, in reality gerrymandering harms American democracy and safety. Gerrymandering greatly affects society, and must become illegal to insure fair representation, the democratic processes in America continues, and America continues to thrive.
“Political gerrymandering makes the incentive for most members of Congress to play to the extremes of their base rather than to the center” (Obama, n.d.). Redistricting Happens after every census because the house seats are reapportioned between the states. Gerrymandering in U.S. politics, takes place when voting districts are restructured to benefit one political party over the other in elections. “The term is derived from the name of Governor Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, whose administration enacted a law in 1812 defining new state senatorial districts. The law consolidated the Federalist Party vote in a few districts and thus gave disproportionate representation to Democratic-Republicans. The outline of one of these districts was thought
No voter probably wants to hear that the state legislature is simply playing game when drawing the lines for the voting districts in their state. They might be horrified and disgusted to know that their ability to vote for who they want to represent relies on the childish way of making candidates of happy with perfectly drawn districts to give them the advantage at the polls. That how I felt when I first learned about gerrymandering. I couldn’t feel it was wrong in some way. It seemed unfair and the voting of was going to be rigged for the candidate who chooses to runs that district. It was like if you could make a game about drawing district it be easy, and maybe I thought a computer could do it. But, as I began to play the redistricting game I saw it wasn’t child’s play with came to drawing districts, and I also saw towards the end of mission that creating districts in this way had benefits for the voters.
Gerrymandering is very essential in our society because it entitles equal representation of seats that represents each district. No state will have too many seats nor too little depending on the census, which is conducted every ten years. Gerrymandering is a method that filters too little representation or too much representation. This term brings a balance of representation to not just the districts, but to the House of Representatives. It is important that each states district has an equal representation because one state can dominant another when it comes to passing, voting, or creating new laws. Our society since the days of our founding fathers spoke about equal representation. However, from reading this issue our society is still struggling with the issue of equal representation.
On the voting day last semester in November I stood outside Central High School and supported the Republican party under the same tent as the Democrats. I’ll admit I can be a little judgemental towards Democrats, okay, really judgemental. Anyhow I was able to have a peaceful talk about politics with an elderly democratic lady, who I judged as an old cat lady, and it was very interesting to hear and learn from her perspective, and actually, she changed my mind about some democratic views making some stronger and some weaker. But to get back to the point, while I was there she taught me about gerrymandering, she told me about how both Democrats and republican draw the lines to help their party as much as possible. I do not think that the issue is with Pennsylvania but all states that use the gerrymandering system. I believe as a United States citizen that all people should have equal say in how their country is going to run in the future and when they use the rigged up system they are creating an oligarchy, which the two major political parties are like small groups that control everything they can and rather need to listen to what the people
“A plan is a gerrymander if it enables a party to convert its votes into seats more efficiently than its adversary” according to Nicholas Stephanopoulos and Eric M. McGhee . While this 1812 instance was the first time a name had been applied to this form of redistricting, it had existed since the earliest days of American democracy. Permitting state legislators to draw the borders of districts unsurprisingly, led them to draw districts that were beneficial to them, or their party. Even during the early stages of American democracy the drawing of politically motivated districts was viewed as an abuse of the power. The so-called “gerrymander” was represented as a monstrosity, an affront to democracy, and an abuse of power on the part of Governor Gerry and the Massachusetts state legislature. The long history of anti-gerrymandering sentiment and its continued prevalence in contemporary journalism would indicate that it is a major obstacle to fair and representative democracy. In some ways, this belief is correct. Gerrymandering, and redistricting in general can negatively affect proper political representation and it is possible that gerrymandering is partially
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
Williams, N. R. (2012). Why the National Popular Vote Compact Is Unconstitutional. Brigham Young University Law Review, 2012, 1523-1583
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.
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