Redistricting

For years, FairVote has highlighted how our nation's reliance upon winner-take-all elections and single member districts for Congressional elections without national standards has left our voting process open to the abuses of unfair partisan gerrymandering. Insiders for decades have known how powerful redistricting can be for elected officials to protect friends and undermine opponents. It's a blood sport that both parties have exploited, thereby minimizing the role of voters in the political process. By gerrymandering the districts, legislators and their political cronies have used redistricting to choose their voters, before voters have had the opportunity to choose them.

 



For the historical development of redistricting, see All About Redistricting.

 

What's the Problem with Redistricting?

Redistricting encourages manipulation of our elections by allowing incumbent politicians to help partisan allies, hurt political enemies and choose their voters before the voters choose them. The current process is used as a means to further political goals by drawing boundaries to protect incumbents and reduce competition, rather than to ensure equal voting power and fair representation.

Solutions to the Redistricting Problem

FairVote encourages a number of short-term solutions such as national standards for transparency and public input, as well as replacing the partisan system with independent commissions at the state level. However, resolving the gerrymandering dilemma is only part of the problem. To achieve competitive elections, legislative diversity, and other public interest goals, fundamental change requires multimember districts with proportional voting. These reforms will help ensure all voters have choices and no strong prospective candidate is shut out of a chance to participate.

Read about other redistricting reform work and analysis from two coalitions backed by FairVote: Americans for Redistricting Reform and EndGerrymandering.com.

Redistricting Blog Posts

  • Primaries Spotlight Sharp Decline in U.S. House Moderates

    May 8, 2012

    On April 24, t two moderate Blue Dog Democrats, Tim Holden and Jason Altmire, lost in Pennsylvania's primary election. They are the latest examples of an accelerating  "no-more-moderates" trend within both major parties. But fair representation of the left, right and center is essential to the health of a democracy. Grounded in its unique the-rules-matter perspective, FairVote explores how winner-take-all voting rules today disadvantage candidates willing to seek bipartisan solutions to problems.

  • Congressional Redistricting Matters, and It’s Hurting This Country: a Response to Michael Barone

    March 22, 2012

    Recently, pundit Michael Barone argued in The National Review that redistricting in 2011 has turned out to “matter less than we thought.” But Barone is mistaken, overly concerned about redistricting’s impact on each major party rather its effect on voters already trapped within a troubling winner-take-all framework. Furthermore, Barone is wrong to say that partisan redistricting in 2011 has produced “clean” lines. It has not. With our unique take on redistricting and focus on voters, not political parties, FairVote sets the record straight in its rebuttle to Barone. 

  • No More Gerrymanders: Missouri's Partisan Plan versus the Fair Voting Alternative

    March 15, 2012

    Lawmakers in Missouri have recently passed a congressional redistricting plan that gives Republican candidates a strong advantage in 6 of 8 seats and protects nearly all incumbents. There's a better way--fair voting systems in multi-seat "super-districts." Read the latest in our fair voting plan series.

To hear the latest news, follow @endgerrymander on Twitter!