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.
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...
... middle of paper ...
... take quick and decisive measures to end the practice while it still can.
Works Cited
Foglia Phil. “19th Century Mass. Gov. Elbridge Gerry knew all about gerrymandering of political districts - he invented it!” Daily News. New York Daily News. 14 March 2014. Web. 6 May 2014.
“Gerrymandering.” Britannica.com. Encyclopedia Britannica. 1 August 2013. Web. 3 May 2014.
Levinson, Sanford. “To End Government Shutdowns, End Partisan Gerrymandering.” American.Aljazera.com. Aljazeera America, 13 October 2013. Web. 10 May 2014.
Wilson, James Q and John J. Dilulio Jr. and Meena Bose. American Government: Institutions and Policies. 13th ed. Boston MA: Wadsworth, Cenage Learning, 2013. Print.
Winburn, Jonathan. The Realities of Redistricting: Following the Rules and Limiting Gerrymandering in State Legislative Redistricting. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2008. Print.
In his article, “Homestyle,” Richard Fenno seeks to answer one question: How does an elected representative's view of his/her district affect his or her political behavior? To answer this question, Fenno identifies what a Member of Congress’s
George Washington Plunkitt worked his way as a young boy in the New York city politics to become one of the most well know statesman that city has ever now. As a young boy, he became an “apprenticeship of the business “(RIORDON, Chapter, 1) of politics by “working around the district headquarters and hustling about the polls on Election Day” (RIORDON, Chapter, 1). He steadily built a following and became very clever in the political game. Plunkitt had definite idea’s as to what characteristics where needed to thrive in the political arena.
When America was first established, they had the highest voting turnouts ever in American history. Ever since, America’s voting turn-out has dropped (Fortin). The reason for the high turn outs were because American colonists wanted change from the British’s electoral system. As history writes, American colonist rebel and over time becomes one of the greatest countries ever. Today, Americans are one of the worst countries in vote to registration as they rank 120 in the world (Pintor). Over the summer, I got to learn more about Ohio’s electoral system and voting turn outs in a first hand experience. A decreasing number of voting to registration is not only a national problem, but a local issue as well and there are creative ideas in fixing these
Sabato, Larry, and Howard R. Ernst. "New Jersey Plan." Encyclopedia of American Political Parties and Elections. New York: Facts On File, 2006. N. pag. Print.
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.
Even though there was a difference of a quarter million popular votes, the same number of votes were provided. Thus, this system discriminates against people who live in states with high turnout. Rather than having statewide electoral vote distribution, vote distribution in congressional districts could be a little more effective in representing people’s will. Upon this defectiveness of electoral system, current system is failure the way it mislead results and misrepresent population.
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
Today, the citizens of the United States must push Congress to formulate an oversight measure to fix voter disenfranchisement. By itself, Supreme Court Ruling Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder does minimal damage to the voting process of the United States. The court ruled discriminatory practices of district actions half a century old unconstitutional, but left a responsibility for Congress to modernize the Voting Rights Act, to ensure that no district nor individual is discriminated against. Given the history of the United States’s voter suppression and the original need for the Voting Rights Act, a new, modern voter equality policy is of dire importance.
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
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.
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.
“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
Gerrymandering is the practice of manipulating the boundaries of Congressional districts so as to favor one party or class. The goal is to create more seats in legislature or protect the seats the party has by grouping people who will most likely vote for them. This is an issue because these boundaries can be manipulated so much that a party can lose the popular vote by a lot and still win the state. Obviously if Americans had an issue with George W. Bush winning the Presidency without winning the popular vote then they should be upset about this. Gerrymandering should not be allowed because it allows people who are in power to stay in power, regardless of what the people want.
In 2001 the Texas Legislature was in a deadlock of a new district map to coincide with the census. Because they were unable to agree on a map the state law requires a Legislative Redistricting Board which includes: the Lieutenant Governor, the Speaker of the House, Attorney General, Comptroller, and the Land Commissioner, to take on the task of creating the district map. The Republicans were seeking a new map increase their control of the State Congress. However, the Democrats felt the minority votes were being diluted by gerrymandering, as well as, violate the Voting Rights Law.