Of course the extreme right-wing Supreme Court wants to leave the gerrymander stake through the heart of democracy. It is the only way they can win congressional and state legislative districts.
When Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry (trivia fact: Gerry was one of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence) figured out that he could use census data to carve up districts to political advantage in 1812, there were two relevant differences from today:
1. There were no computers to allow the very precise engineering of districts with the political precision of today, to the point where a state like North Carolina can have a roughly 50-50 partisan split in the vote but have districts won by Republicans 80% to 20%.
2. There was no Fourteenth Amendment (enacted in 1868) that guaranteed equal protection of the law, which is the basis for many of the other rulings that protect the rights of women (following the 19th Amendment) and minorities.
A number of states (including my state of California as well as twenty others to varying degrees, some just enacted via the 2018 midterm elections) have already outlawed gerrymandering by having the actual districts drawn by independent commissions with appointees from both parties and independents, and specifications in the laws that spell out how districts are to be drawn in terms of reasonable compactness, following natural and political boundaries where feasible, etc.
In the 21st century, with computerized precision and our Fourteenth Amendment, is defies logic and morality that any court could find gerrymandering constitutional. Of course, logic and morality are not characteristics usually associated with the Republican appointees on today’s Supreme Court.
In some states gerrymandering doesn’t matter. In Indiana, for example, Lake and Marion counties usually vote Democrat whilst the rest of the state is usually solidly GOP. There are occasional exceptions, of course, such as 2008, and Democrats do hold some positions around the rest of the state. Marion County is unique in one aspect: decades ago “Unigov” merged Indianapolis with the rest of the county as regards the governing structure, except for the enclaves of Speedway, Beech Grove, and Lawrence. That move increased the chances that Democrats would control Marion County rather than just the city. While Unigov isn’t gerrymandering per se, it does seem to have the same effect on the political structure in the county.
See where they’ve brought us? Both parties have been guilty of using gerrymandering but these days when I vote I just want to use a bar of Lava soap and scalding water afterwards, not straight lye and superheated steam so I can approach feeling clean again. Fair representation should be fair for the voters, not a fair piece of change for only one party. Equal representation under the law? I call BS!
There’s no question that gerrymandering is contemptible, but people in red or blue districts are free to vote either color IF THEY CHOOSE. The far bigger problem is voter suppression, which is accomplished in various ways: purging the voter rolls, reducing the number of polling places (thus creating long long lines, with many voters deciding to give up), and even holding elections on Tuesdays. I know the Constitution mandates that, but Congress could presumably declare election day a federal holiday. That wouldn’t help as many people as moving election day to Saturday, of course, and the Republicans don’t want to help the “wrong people” vote in the first place.
One wonders how the vote would have gone if the Democrats had managed to gerrymander most states. This is an appalling travesty of justice. Previously, the Supreme Court refused to consider these cases because they lacked a reliable measure. Now that we have reliable measures, they have gone out of their way to pass judgment on them – the wrong way, thanks in part to Brett Kavanaugh.
This was a “states rights” decision. We settled that the other way in 1865, people…
Maryland’s Baltimore County has four congressional districts. One is a lonely island in the middle of the first, and a third district protrudes into the fourth as if sticking out its tongue at the voters.
This is a Pearl Harbor of voting. Campaigns to make redistricting more "fair’ are too little, too late. We need a two-pronged approach on this crushingly anti-democratic decision.
1. Since Republicans are the ones who have so strongly weaponized redistricting, all Democratic-controlled states should gerrymander as intensely as possible. I saw a map for New York once that had districts consisting of thin lines, all with a portion of the district in NYC. It would have had a Democratic majority in every single district. We need that in every Democratic state.
2. In every state where citizen amendments to the state constitution are allowed, amend their constitution to establish multi-member districts using ranked choice voting, specifically Single Transferrable vote. This method establishes a virtual overlay of districts such that gerrymandering, as well as the effect of concentrated constituencies, can be mooted. It even makes it easier for minorities to get elected. (But, in Democratic states, do that only after a blow has been struck with extreme gerrymandering, and constitutions elsewhere have been changed).
My state, Mass, has been gerrymandered numerous times over the years by the dems. It was invented here. My district weaves it’s way from the eastern.central part of the state to the western part specifically to include a small group of towns that are extremely blue.
Both parties have been doing this and continue to do it. Republicans have been better at it of late, just like dems have mastered identity politics.
I don’t believe I could harbor more contempt for a public official than I do John Roberts. He’s single-handedly done more to undermine the institution of democracy than anyone in the Western hemisphere. If the Framers where alive today as their Revolutionary selves, I imagine more than a few would take him out behind the Supreme Court building to beat the shit out of him and then toss him in the Potomac.
Yep. They voted 5-4 to not make new law out of whole cloth.
Amend the Constitution. I’ve offered a plan several times that would be truly non-partisan. I don’t like gerrymandering either, but it is NOT unconstitutional.
DD Wiz Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Of course the extreme right-wing Supreme Court wants to leave the gerrymander stake through the heart of democracy. It is the only way they can win congressional and state legislative districts.
When Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry (trivia fact: Gerry was one of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence) figured out that he could use census data to carve up districts to political advantage in 1812, there were two relevant differences from today:
1. There were no computers to allow the very precise engineering of districts with the political precision of today, to the point where a state like North Carolina can have a roughly 50-50 partisan split in the vote but have districts won by Republicans 80% to 20%.
2. There was no Fourteenth Amendment (enacted in 1868) that guaranteed equal protection of the law, which is the basis for many of the other rulings that protect the rights of women (following the 19th Amendment) and minorities.
A number of states (including my state of California as well as twenty others to varying degrees, some just enacted via the 2018 midterm elections) have already outlawed gerrymandering by having the actual districts drawn by independent commissions with appointees from both parties and independents, and specifications in the laws that spell out how districts are to be drawn in terms of reasonable compactness, following natural and political boundaries where feasible, etc.
In the 21st century, with computerized precision and our Fourteenth Amendment, is defies logic and morality that any court could find gerrymandering constitutional. Of course, logic and morality are not characteristics usually associated with the Republican appointees on today’s Supreme Court.
saobadao almost 5 years ago
Love the cartoon but I think it would have been better if a person of color had the stake through their body…..
moosemin almost 5 years ago
Why am I not surprised?
A# 466 almost 5 years ago
In some states gerrymandering doesn’t matter. In Indiana, for example, Lake and Marion counties usually vote Democrat whilst the rest of the state is usually solidly GOP. There are occasional exceptions, of course, such as 2008, and Democrats do hold some positions around the rest of the state. Marion County is unique in one aspect: decades ago “Unigov” merged Indianapolis with the rest of the county as regards the governing structure, except for the enclaves of Speedway, Beech Grove, and Lawrence. That move increased the chances that Democrats would control Marion County rather than just the city. While Unigov isn’t gerrymandering per se, it does seem to have the same effect on the political structure in the county.
Display almost 5 years ago
See where they’ve brought us? Both parties have been guilty of using gerrymandering but these days when I vote I just want to use a bar of Lava soap and scalding water afterwards, not straight lye and superheated steam so I can approach feeling clean again. Fair representation should be fair for the voters, not a fair piece of change for only one party. Equal representation under the law? I call BS!
Masterskrain Premium Member almost 5 years ago
And thus begins the final ending of American Democracy under Republican Rule, just as Yertle the Turtle had planned it…
ideations almost 5 years ago
Isn’t that the point…non-white people don’t count?
Bookworm almost 5 years ago
“Stand up and (NOT) be counted!” /s
Godfreydaniel almost 5 years ago
There’s no question that gerrymandering is contemptible, but people in red or blue districts are free to vote either color IF THEY CHOOSE. The far bigger problem is voter suppression, which is accomplished in various ways: purging the voter rolls, reducing the number of polling places (thus creating long long lines, with many voters deciding to give up), and even holding elections on Tuesdays. I know the Constitution mandates that, but Congress could presumably declare election day a federal holiday. That wouldn’t help as many people as moving election day to Saturday, of course, and the Republicans don’t want to help the “wrong people” vote in the first place.
Motivemagus almost 5 years ago
One wonders how the vote would have gone if the Democrats had managed to gerrymander most states. This is an appalling travesty of justice. Previously, the Supreme Court refused to consider these cases because they lacked a reliable measure. Now that we have reliable measures, they have gone out of their way to pass judgment on them – the wrong way, thanks in part to Brett Kavanaugh.
This was a “states rights” decision. We settled that the other way in 1865, people…
Dani Rice almost 5 years ago
Maryland’s Baltimore County has four congressional districts. One is a lonely island in the middle of the first, and a third district protrudes into the fourth as if sticking out its tongue at the voters.
Cerabooge almost 5 years ago
This is a Pearl Harbor of voting. Campaigns to make redistricting more "fair’ are too little, too late. We need a two-pronged approach on this crushingly anti-democratic decision.
1. Since Republicans are the ones who have so strongly weaponized redistricting, all Democratic-controlled states should gerrymander as intensely as possible. I saw a map for New York once that had districts consisting of thin lines, all with a portion of the district in NYC. It would have had a Democratic majority in every single district. We need that in every Democratic state.
2. In every state where citizen amendments to the state constitution are allowed, amend their constitution to establish multi-member districts using ranked choice voting, specifically Single Transferrable vote. This method establishes a virtual overlay of districts such that gerrymandering, as well as the effect of concentrated constituencies, can be mooted. It even makes it easier for minorities to get elected. (But, in Democratic states, do that only after a blow has been struck with extreme gerrymandering, and constitutions elsewhere have been changed).
This is a war, not a croquet match.
guyjen2004 Premium Member almost 5 years ago
My state, Mass, has been gerrymandered numerous times over the years by the dems. It was invented here. My district weaves it’s way from the eastern.central part of the state to the western part specifically to include a small group of towns that are extremely blue.
Both parties have been doing this and continue to do it. Republicans have been better at it of late, just like dems have mastered identity politics.
This is a states issue. Fix it locally.
Radish the wordsmith almost 5 years ago
The politicians get to pick their voters.
buckman-j almost 5 years ago
Both parties do it, Rs are better at it. Dems need better planners. BTW, SCOTUS did decide to eliminate the “Citizen” question from the census
walkingmancomics almost 5 years ago
a wretched, wrenching decision.
goblue86 almost 5 years ago
First citizens united, now this. We’re doomed.
bakana almost 5 years ago
Kavanboof is just voting the way he was Paid to vote.
Andrew Sleeth almost 5 years ago
I don’t believe I could harbor more contempt for a public official than I do John Roberts. He’s single-handedly done more to undermine the institution of democracy than anyone in the Western hemisphere. If the Framers where alive today as their Revolutionary selves, I imagine more than a few would take him out behind the Supreme Court building to beat the shit out of him and then toss him in the Potomac.
Concretionist almost 5 years ago
There are any number of good ways to apportion districts fairly. These will never be used because they’ll founder on two issues:
1: Politicians don’t understand math, so the entire system seems to them to be magic.
2: “Fair” isn’t something any of them want.
Andylit Premium Member almost 5 years ago
Yep. They voted 5-4 to not make new law out of whole cloth.
Amend the Constitution. I’ve offered a plan several times that would be truly non-partisan. I don’t like gerrymandering either, but it is NOT unconstitutional.
gammaguy almost 5 years ago
“We voted 5-4 to leave it in…”
And unfortunately, theirs is the 2nd (or is it 3rd or 4th?) opinion.