Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gerrymandering corrupt the system
How does gerrymandering impact elections research paper
Gerrymandering corrupt the system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Gerrymandering corrupt the system
On January 22, 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court stated that the gerrymandering system violates the Pennsylvania Constitution. A gerrymandering system is a tool that both political parties use to “rig the system”, right now the Republicans are using the gerrymandering system to get extra republicans into the political battle between the two majority parties. The gerrymandering system was the reason that Pennsylvania went Republican in the previous election, and the Democrats are putting their foot down because the majority vote in Pennsylvania is democratic. If the gerrymandering system is revoked then, the new plan that they have does not set awkward boundaries but rather boundaries based on population, which I agree with. As you can see …show more content…
in the picture below the boundaries give the republican the upper hand with an outrageous 124 to 46. The new boundaries would be like a few counties in a 50-60 mile radius or at least fairer. So what I gathered from reading the rather short article and doing some research on the topic is that the republican used the gerrymandering system to steal votes, which would violate the democrats voting rights because then they would not count.
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
want. As a Republican know that without gerrymandering the Democrats would win by a landslide everytime in national or state elections, there is no competition between the two, but I also understand that for this country to function it needs to have equal voting power we were set up to do what the people want and if they have the majority then they should get it.
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 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...
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
A Democratic Party long ruled by moderates and conservatives succeeded in stunting what seemed like the natural growth of a successful Republican Party until the 1990s. Since then, various forces have contributed to the growth of the Republicans, and in the end, to an altering of the core membership of each party. Most recently, the state has seen the development of a dominant Republican Party that doesn't yet hold quite the dominion the Democrats enjoyed through most of the twentieth century. The Republican Party has certainly benefited from the defection of former Democrats, the arrival of Republicans and independents from out of state, and organizational difficulties in the Democratic Party. Thus, Republican officials dominate state government, and Democrats find themselves reduced, for the present, to the status of an embattled minority party seeking to recreate themselves among their voting and financial constituencies. This is showing that the newfound Republican dominance can be the beginning of a new strong party system, or if we are in a state of transition in which the terms of political competition are still in change. If it is a new party system, I don’t think it will be very durable or last too long for that matter. Now, it seems that Republican dominance of state government will
Society cannot let factions become disenfranchised and lose their self determination. The United States, a country founded upon the ideals of freedom and individual prosperity, cannot hold unjust elections brought upon by the current dominant political party. President Johnson created a bipartisan effort to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965, enriching democracy and continuing the American spirit of democratic values. Johnson united Congress with the simple message, “Our mission is at once the oldest and the most basic of this country: to right wrong, to do justice, to serve man.” (Johnson) Today, the citizens of the United States must push Congress formulate an oversight measure to fix voter
...n over bipartisan commission or even worse, by the state legislature. I think bipartisan commission could ultimately result in bipartisan gerrymandering. On the other hand, the party in control of the state legislature often draws district lines in favor of its own political interest. Independent commission guarantees fair non-political congressional districts plans which cannot be vetoed by the governor who also acts in favor of his political party’s interest. I believe democracy in a state is attainable when the people legitimately vote for the representatives they want but not vice versa.
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...
I noticed that when one political party covers almost the entirely of the map, their party will continue winning the election for several years. Like how the election of 1932, the democratic party had about 88% of the electors votes and about 60% of the popular votes. The democratic party continued to win the next four elections.
In closing, Washington had warned the people about the dangers of the political party saying that ‘ It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection.’ Its up to the people of America to realize the problem with two party system, and vote outside of the two major parties.
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.
The single-member district election system is the most common and best-known electoral system currently in use in America. It is used to elect the U.S. House Representatives, as well as many state and local legislatures. Under single member district systems, an area is divided into a number of geographically defined voting districts, each represented by a single elected official. Voters can only vote for their district’s representative, with the individual receiving the most votes winning election. This method of electing representatives is better than any alternative solution in various ways. Four compelling reasons to support the single-member district election system include the fact that single-member districts give each voter a single, easily identifiable district member; the way single-member district voting helps protect against overreaching party influence; that single-member districts ensure geographic representation; and finally, that single-member districts are the best way to maximize representatives’ accountability.
I would most likely engage in gerrymandering to ensure control for my party. As it a legal concept I would be willing to engage in the
Proportional representation system is an alternative voting system that Canada should really consider as it would be beneficial. Proportional system is a type of electoral system that produces a representative body which ensures that the voters are represented in the body according to how they voted (“Fair Vote Canada”, n.d). This voting system places more importance on creating an electoral result of votes corresponding with the amount of votes that were awarded in the legislature (“Canada in Comparative Perspective”, 2017, pg. 188). This is different from the First Past the Post voting system, where the candidate with the most votes doesn't always win and isn't always represented properly. According to Johnston (2001), this system presents
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.
unfair and wrong for political parties, or its affiliates, to sneakily find ways to keep