Skip to content

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Fair maps advocates sound the alarm over gerrymandering in three states

Anti-gerrymandering sign

Fair maps advocates are raising concerns over several states lacking transparency in the redistricting process.

Bill Clark/Getty Images

With the 2021 redistricting cycle in full swing, one-third of the country has already solidified some of its new state and federal districts for the next decade.

Sixteen states have completed at least one redistricting plan so far, with 11 of them finalizing maps for both Congress and the state legislature (setting aside states with one congressional district). But the mapmaking process is far from over due to several legal challenges already filed against states for potential voting rights violations.

Fair maps advocates are raising the alarm over a lack of transparency and particularly egregious redistricting plans in North Carolina, Ohio and Texas — three states with a history of partisan gerrymandering.

Advocates say that these such instances of partisan gerrymandering could be thwarted if Congress were to pass the Freedom to Vote Act, a broad electoral reform bill. But Republicans have used filibusters to block the legislation from moving forward.

"This redistricting cycle is not yet over. There is still time to salvage the next decade of elections for millions of Americans. The Freedom to Vote Act provides the tools voters need right now to secure national redistricting reform that puts power back in the hands of the people, where it belongs," said Kathay Feng, national redistricting director at Common Cause.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

North Carolina

The North Carolina Legislature has finalized its maps for the state House, the state Senate and Congress. All three plans have received failing grades from the Princeton Gerrymandering Project for significantly advantaging Republicans.

Bob Phillips, executive director of Common Cause North Carolina, said during a press call that his organization is concerned these maps will harm minority voters and make it harder for Black lawmakers to be re-elected.

"We have 36 African American lawmakers in the General Assembly and by the way these maps have been drawn, 25 percent of these folks may not come back," Phillips said. "We care about the process, not the outcome, but I'm just stating, factually, what the outcome is."

Additionally, there was a lack of transparency throughout the redistricting process, Phillips noted. None of the public meetings were livestreamed by the government so Common Cause North Carolina recorded them instead. It was also difficult to discern which lawmakers were involved in the drawing of maps and whether racial or partisan data was being considered in the process, he added.


For the first time, Ohio is using a hybrid commission system to draw its maps. For congressional maps, the Legislature must attempt to pass plans with bipartisan approval. If that fails, the mapmaking authority goes to a seven-member commission, and if that commission also fails to approve maps, it goes back to the Legislature and maps will only be in effect for four years.

However, Ohio's bipartisan redistricting commission only held one meeting, in which members heard testimony but did not vote on any proposed maps of their own. Because the commission failed to produce and approve redistricting plans, the mapmaking authority has now been punted back to the Republican-controlled Legislature.

"For months, Ohioans have pleaded with state leaders for a fair, transparent and participatory redistricting process. Yet even after voters overwhelmingly approved redistricting reform in 2018, those in power are showing that they will continue to shut out the voters to manipulate the process and district lines to their political advantage," said Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio.

While the congressional maps are not yet finalized, drafts proposed by lawmakers so far have received failing grades from the Princeton Gerrymandering Project due to significant Republican gerrymanders.

The maps for the state House and state Senate were finalized in early October. The state House map received an F because it gives Republicans a significant advantage. The state Senate map was more fairly drawn, with only a slight Republican advantage, more compact districts and fewer county splits, so the Princeton Gerrymandering Project graded it a B.


In Texas, the lawmaker-drawn maps for Congress and the Legislature did not receive glowing report cards from the Princeton Gerrymandering Project. The congressional maps were graded an F for giving significant advantage to Republicans and including non-compact districts and more county splits than usual.

The state Senate maps also got a failing grade for advantaging Republicans and being very uncompetitive and non-compact. The state House maps were graded a C for only slightly favoring the GOP, but giving considerable advantage to incumbents.

As state lawmakers drafted and approved these maps, there was very little transparency and few opportunities for meaningful public input, said Anthony Gutierrez, executive director of Common Cause Texas. Map proposals were published only a few days before public hearings, so advocates and citizens did not have an adequate amount of time to review them, he said.

Although Texas' election maps have been finalized, several lawsuits have been filed challenging them for potentially violating the Voting Rights Act by diluting the voting power of Black, Latino, Asian American and Pacific Islander and other minority voters.

"Texas is just the latest state to suffer through an unfair redistricting process and gerrymandered maps. Without action from Congress this year, we won't be the last," Gutierrez said.

Other states have also earned poor marks, but were not cited by Common Cause. For example, mapmakers in Illinois earned an F for both the congressional and state Senate maps, which heavily favor Democrats.

Read More

People standing near 4 American flags

American flags fly near Washington Monument.

Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images

A personal note to America in troubled times

Harwood is president and founder of The Harwood Institute. This is the latest entry in his series based on the "Enough. Time to Build.” campaign, which calls on community leaders and active citizens to step forward and build together.

I wanted to address Americans after the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump. Consider this a personal note directly to you (yes, you, the reader!). And know that I have intentionally held off in expressing my thoughts to allow things to settle a bit. There’s already too much noise enveloping our politics and lives.

Like most Americans, I am praying for the former president, his family and all those affected by last weekend’s events. There is no room for political violence in our nation.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Chief Justices Roberts, Marshall responded to presidential bullies

How Chief Justices Roberts, Marshall responded to presidential bullies

Breslin is the Joseph C. Palamountain Jr. Chair of Political Science at Skidmore College and author of “A Constitution for the Living: Imagining How Five Generations of Americans Would Rewrite the Nation’s Fundamental Law.”

This is the latest in “A Republic, if we can keep it,” a series to assist American citizens on the bumpy road ahead this election year. By highlighting components, principles and stories of the Constitution, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, the “most interesting in the world.”

Chief Justices John Roberts and John Marshall share more in common than their ordinary forename and stressful day job. They both fiercely defended the reputation of America’s courts; they both presided over thenastiest politicaltrials of their times; and they both couldn’t quite contain their disdain for some of the presidential antics that occurred under their watch.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump and Biden at the debate

Donald Trump and Joe Biden engage in the first debate of the 2024 election.

Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images

American presidents only debate during presidential debates

Anderson edited "Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework," has taught at five universities and ran for the Democratic nomination for a Maryland congressional seat in 2016.

About 25 years ago, the noted political scientist and sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset invited me to lunch at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington, D.C. I was a young academic teaching various courses in ethics and political philosophy at George Washington University. He asked me: "What do you think is the most important quality a person needs to be president?"

I thought for about 30 seconds and replied, "Give a great speech."

He said, "No, schmooze."

Keep ReadingShow less
Brain examination
Science Photo Library/Getty Images

A simple solution for Biden, for Trump, for America

Butler is a husband, father, grandfather, business executive, entrepreneur and political observer.

I have said it before, and I will say it again:We deserve better.

It is bad enough that our only real choices for president come November will be old, white, polarizing men tainted by scandal. After nearly four years in what is arguably the most demanding and stressful job in the universe, Joe Biden, whose cognitive capabilities were subject to question even in the last campaign, now appears even to ardent supporters to be too old for the job. Whether they question his ability to do the job or his ability to win the election is unclear.

And while it may be less obvious, Trump provides his own evidence that he is not the man he used to be, neurologically.

Keep ReadingShow less
Isaac Cramer
Issue One

Meet the Faces of Democracy: Isaac Cramer

Minkin is a research associate at Issue One. Van Voorhis is a research intern at Issue One.

More than 10,000 officials across the country run U.S. elections. This interview is part of a series highlighting the election heroes who are the faces of democracy.

South Carolinian Isaac Cramer developed a passion for politics and elections at a young age, witnessing his mother cast her first vote after achieving her long-standing dream of American citizenship. He joined the Charleston County Board of Voter Registration and Elections in 2014 and began serving as its executive director in March 2021. He oversees election administration for more than 300,000 registered voters in South Carolina’s third most populous county. Charleston spans along the state’s southern coast and shares a name with the largest city in the state, where Cramer resides.

Cramer, who is not affiliated with any political party, has received prestigious honors for his extensive efforts to reform election administration and ensure elections are fair and secure. He earned a Clearinghouse Award from the Election Assistance Commission in 2022 and the J. Mitchell Graham Memorial Award from the South Carolina Association of Counties in 2023. He is also a two-time recipient of the state’s Carolina’s Excellence in Elections award. Earlier this summer, he was appointed president of the South Carolina Association of Registration and Election Officials.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Keep ReadingShow less