Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

In time for landmark ruling, political gerrymandering as only a game

In time for landmark ruling, political gerrymandering as only a game

With Mapmaker, politicians aren't the only ones who can gerrymander. In this four-way scenario, the elephants win with five out of 15 districts.

Sara Swann/The Fulcrum

Gerrymandering for partisan advantage has been a game only politicians could play. The Supreme Court is poised to decide if those contests can continue under the currently loose rules. But whatever the outcome, mapmaking like a professional will become a pastime the whole family can enjoy.

That's because of Mapmaker: The Gerrymandering Game, produced by three board game enthusiasts from a politically engaged family in Texas. It's been issued ($40 on Calenders.com or Amazon) just in time for a landmark ruling, expected this week, on whether there's a constitutional limit to the cartographic contortions both parties employ to capture as many congressional seats as possible.

While players of the game handle their balsa wood pieces for half an hour at a time, the justices are handling something much less tangible – but with consequences that could last decades.


The court has been examining two U.S. House maps. The one for North Carolina was drawn to give the Republicans a 10-3 lock on the delegation even though the state's congressional vote has been almost dead even all decade. The one for Maryland was drawn successfully to benefit the Democrats 7-1 even though the party routinely gets only three of every five congressional votes statewide.

If the court decides the minority party members in each state have a constitutional right to a fairer shot at more representation, the justices will be compelled to determine what standard should govern the partisan limit to mapmaking.

The rulings will affect two other states, Ohio and Michigan, where federal courts have ruled the House maps are unconstitutionally partisan gerrymanders benefiting Republicans. Several state legislative maps, starting with the one drawn by Republicans in Wisconsin, also hang in the balance. And so will the ground rules for the nationwide round of redistricting all states will begin after the 2020 census decides how many House seats will be assigned to each state.

The intense and highly consequential legal battle, of course, is nothing like the bouts of levity and interpersonal gamesmanship that crop up when playing the board game contrived by young adults Joshua, Louis and Rebecca Lafair.

The goal when playing the siblings' Mapmaker is, predictably, to win by drawing more districts in your favor than your opponents can contrive. Not only does the game call attention to the pervasive personality shortcomings of those who carve up political power for a living – the scheming, strategizing and underhanded deal cutting – but it also shows how easy it is to fall into such a competitive mental frenzy.

The game is set up with a solitaire option, in which the singleton is rewarded for carving up the map of a fictional state as equitably as possible. Playing the game this way can be a rewarding way to cultivate the better angels of one's inherent political nature.

But add one, two or three more players to the mix, and the stakes suddenly get much higher. Once red elephants, blue donkeys, yellow porcupines and green leaves are on the board, any other motive than victory readily evaporates. Consideration for the opposing political parties falls to the wayside as players use black borders to wall off their districts.

In the end, Mapmaker is just a board game, but it reflects real-life issues of political power across the United States.

And that was part of what attracted the Lafairs, who live in a part of liberal redoubt Austin captured at the fringes of the 10th district of Texas. The 5,00-square-mile territory, the shape of a bone-in leg of ham, stretches across 170 miles of conservative rural farmland toward the suburbs of Houston. The district was drawn by Republicans to be a safe bet for Republicans, by making sure their voters in the middle far outnumbered the Democrats on the urban edges. (It's now held by Michael McCaul, the senior Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee.)

Combining their political engagement and love for board games, the Lafairs crafted Mapmaker over the course of two years. It officially launched in March as the Supreme Court listened to arguments for the redistricting cases in Maryland and North Carolina.

To actually get the game off the ground, the Lafairs used a Kickstarter campaign. In 28 days, almost 1,500 people pitched in to help raise a total of more than $67,000. Among the donors was former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican who gave $3,000 to send finished copies of the game to all nine Supreme Court justices, 32 governors and 37 state legislatures with power over redistricting.


Read More

With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting at voting booths.

A little-known interstate compact could change how the U.S. elects presidents by 2028, replacing the Electoral College with the national popular vote.

Getty Images, VIEW press

The Quiet Campaign That Could Rewrite the 2028 Election

Most Americans are unaware, but a quiet campaign in states across the country is moving toward one of the biggest changes in presidential elections since the nation was founded.

A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is happening mostly out of public view and could soon change how the United States picks its president, possibly as early as 2028.

Keep ReadingShow less