The ramifications of redistricting are large. While many states have embraced a system in which minorities have a say in determining the boundaries of electoral districts, some states do not. The purpose of redistricting is to ensure that elected officials represent all voters fairly. In this article, we will discuss the issues and challenges surrounding redistricting. And we’ll examine what redistricting looks like in every state and how the process will impact our democracy.
Politicians draw electoral district boundaries
Redistricting maps are drawn by the state legislature. Some states have independent redistricting commissions. Redistricting maps determine political power and who gets to represent certain areas. Although the redistricting process may be difficult process, the results can affect local governments and congressional districts. For example, redistricting can help prevent a certain neighborhood from being crowded out by an opposing district.
The problem with gerrymandering is that it allows political parties to pick the voters they want to represent. This often results in a legislature that is skewed toward one party. In Wisconsin, for example, former Gov. Scott Walker lost by less than thirty thousand votes statewide but won 63 out of 99 State Assembly districts. In other words, the political parties get a significant advantage because the redistricting process favors them.
Minorities have a say in the process
Despite the fact that racial gerrymandering and political gerrymandering are often linked, the courts will not consider the impact of maps on partisan control. The best way to determine if a map gerrymanders against minorities is to analyze election results. As a result, minority voters may lose their representation in elections. While the impact of racial gerrymandering on minority voting is unclear, election results show that minorities support Democratic candidates more than Republicans.
The recent Wisconsin redistricting process has been the subject of controversy, but Republicans are defending their plan. The Wisconsin Supreme Court ordered that lawmakers make the fewest changes to the current map. However, the People’s Maps Commission plan would have reduced the number of districts with a majority of Black voters to two and drawn five districts with a Black population of between forty-five and forty-nine percent.
Issues at stake
The next redistricting cycle in the U.S. will begin after the 2020 census. By paying attention to what is happening, you can help hold line drawers to account. Call state legislators and demand a fair redistricting process. If you live in a district that has been affected by recent redistricting, take part in community mapping exercises to get your voice heard. Eventually, lawmakers will introduce redistricting reform measures.
Independent redistricting commissions could provide evidence to convince more states to adopt this practice, although opponents say they can be rigged for political purposes. The redistricting process following the 2010 census was marred by legal challenges, court determinations, and legislative deadlocks. Now, both sides are gearing up for a new round of intense litigation. In recent years, Supreme Court decisions have given states more flexibility over how their districts look.
While redistricting is widely recognized as a critical issue in American politics, few states have a commission in place to redraw district lines. Even fewer states have a commission to create new district lines, and those that do are often heavily influenced by party politics.
The process of state redistricting is fraught with complications and challenges. A recent nightmare case involved Shasta County, California, which redrew 112,000 voter districts in two weeks. The county held its election under outdated maps. Because the county did not have an updated map, the computer system couldn’t accommodate the two sets of data. Added to this, supply chain problems forced the scramble to obtain envelopes for a redrawn map.
Lessons from the last round of redistricting
Often cited as the number one problem with redistricting, COVID-19 detained the data collected by the Census Bureau for the most recent round of state redistricting, and delayed its processing, delivery, and public input hearings. As a result, the nation did not receive its apportionment data until April 26, 2022. That data revealed no change in the number of state representatives or electoral college votes.
While the independent citizens redistricting commission in California did not face lawsuits, it was hammered in the public and on social media. Despite the negative publicity, the commission was able to draft 120 new legislative and 52 congressional districts for California voters. It also created four new state Board of Equalization districts. But the process was marred by problems that made the process a mess.