Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How does gerrymandering impact elections research paper
Importance of Democracy
Main principles of democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Many Americans seem to be baffled by whether to praise the role of courts in the reapportionment of state legislatures, or to lament it. Reapportionment is the process of dividing the total number of seats, or memberships (435) in the House of Representatives among the 50 states. The passage from Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution is the foremost base for conducting a decennial census. In 1790, the first decennial census was conducted in direction of Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State at that time. With the help of census data, the number of House seats each state is entitled to have over the period of next ten years is calculated (“Reapportionment and Redistricting”, p. 7). Gerrymandering is the process of manipulating …show more content…
Since gerrymandering is the process of dividing legislative districts with a clear motive of attaining the most seats in legislature as possible, we can say that this is done for partisan gain and not for the good of the country and general people. In a sound democratic system, voters should be able to choose their representatives through elections. However, when representatives get the chance to draw their own legislative district lines, lawmakers have the power to choose their voters instead. When one political party has control over the state government, voters in the opposition party are unable to come up with an effective strategy within a reasonable time-frame. Everyone: Voters, representatives and our democracy all lose. Gerrymandering is not just the geographical division, but those lines can often lead to cut traditional legislative districts off from one another. For instance, if someone from a particular region is bounded to some cultural and traditional practices and if the area was gerrymandered in irregular manner, it would completely cut off cultural, traditional and historical communities from one another. This practice cripples the power of voters, has continued for a really long time and must come to an …show more content…
In the past couple of years, courts have over and again demolished maps that press down the voices of Americans based on race. Some maps that have been struck down by the courts include one in Florida, North Carolina, Texas and Virginia for unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. In my personal opinion, since the Supreme Court is the highest law governing body of the nation, it should intervene in such matters that has drawn concerns of huge proportion of the American population. This battle for equal representation of people all around the nation is extremely important for protecting the democracy and making the nation’s administration responsible to the general population. This broken framework needs to be settled and the Supreme Court plays the most significant role in achieving
elections is debatable—and the non-inclusiveness of early American elections undeniable— the Constitution unequivocally establishes regular elections for seats in the House of Representatives and for the executive office (articles I and II respectively), a key component of Poloni-Staudinger and Wolf’s definition of liberal democracy (35). Moreover, the inclusion of a series of individual rights appended to the Constitution (U.S. Const. ams. 1-10) buttresses Constitutional protection of individual civil rights and civil liberties, two popular protections imperative for any state seeking the designation liberal
For weeks convention delegates have been argued over representation in congress, Large States want it based on population. Small states want each states to have the same number of votes. representative s shall be apportioned according to population. The number of shall not exceed one for every thirty thousand, but each state shall have at least one representatives. This piece of evidence relates to the argument because they said that big states has more power than small states that is why big states only need one representative.
Ferguson was shaped by two key components of our system of government: precedent and federalism. Although the precedent, “separate but equal”, influenced the Supreme Court’s decision, this court case helped the formation and affirmation of the later established doctrine. Furthermore, this case required the assessment of federalism on a more complex level. The division of power between two governments was looked upon when the case was introduced with different laws put in place by different governments. In conclusion, two vital components, federalism and precedent, were used to constitute tradition and clarify the laws in place in the late 19th
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
Gerrymandering is a way for a political party to keep control of a state by drawing the district lines unevenly. They make sure to keep a majority of the people in the districts are a part of their party, so their party will have more seats in the House of Representatives. This is a big problem because in most districts, there is no way for the minority party to win in those districts.
Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution states that, “Representatives…shall be apportioned among several states...according to their respective Numbers.” Apportionment is the mathematical process of dividing and allocating the four hundred and thirty five seats in the House of Representatives among the fifty states based on the population figures collected by the Census Bureau. This process, according to the Constitution, must be conducted “within every subsequent Term of ten Years.” Each of the fifty states is guaranteed one representative. The number of House of Representatives from each state fluctuates every ten years due to population deviation.
Every ten years after a census, politicians redraw the district boundaries that determine the house and state legislature. The problem with this system is that the same politicians who redraw the district boundaries are the ones who are being elected by the
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...
In America, voting for the President is a privilege and a lie. Many Americans think when they go to the polls in November, they are voting for the President of the United States; but really, they are voting for a group of electors who have pledged to support a nominee for the President. The Founding Fathers were concerned that presidents would always come from a populous state and wondered whether the public would have the knowledge of various candidates necessary to make a wise selection. They did not have access to technology like the internet or smart phones as we do. In most states, as the result of the election, the state awards all its electors to the winning candidate (Belenky 1308). A Presidential a candidate must win 270 Electoral
One of the most important principles behind voting is the idea that each citizen or voter has equal input, a principle often referred to as “one person, one vote”. Theoretically for each vote to carry equal weight, each voting district should contain the same number of voters, however with populations constantly shifting this can be difficult to achieve. In order to accomplish this equality, redistricting allows states to redraw the boundaries of their electoral districts following the census every ten years. Typically the majority party has control over redistricting and uses it to redraw districts in order to give their candidates the best chance at winning each district. This practice, known as gerrymandering, has been a major and controversial aspect of redistricting since its inception.
Debates over how the division of powers between the states and federal government should be handled have been predominant from the very beginning. The founders understood that this decision would have an enduring influence on the types of policies implemented along with how the impact would be felt by the citizens. This would all be dependent on if the laws were coming from Washing D.C. or the state capitals (Barbour and Wright, 78). In light of this the founders established the United States government based on a fair division of powers between Federal and State governments as highlighted in the constitution and tenth amendment. However, in the past few years I believe the country has shifted towards giving more power to the federal government. In this paper I argue that despite the current transition towards a strong centralized government a balanced system based on the federalism intended by founders is the best option for the distribution of power.
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.
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.
It is important that each case is treated equally when carrying out justice to keep the United States a safe place, to form a nation with good education, and to teach people to judge right from wrong. However, sometimes rights are taken from the wrong people. Our legal system is creating a dangerous path for African Americans in our country because of its’ highest per capita incarceration rate, its’ favoritism towards those in power, and its failure to carry out justice to protect people from the dangerous acts of those who are defined as criminals. Was justice really served in the “State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman” case? Is our justice system fair to all races?
Vance, D.A. (1994). State-imposed congressional term limits: what would the Founders of the Constitution say?. Brigham Young University Law Review, 1994, 429.