Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

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

Independent Voters Just Got Power in Nevada – if the Governor Lets It Happen

"On Las Vegas Boulevard" sign.

Photo by Wesley Tingey on Unsplash. Unplash+ license obtained by IVN Editor Shawn Griffiths.

Independent Voters Just Got Power in Nevada – if the Governor Lets It Happen

CARSON CITY, NEV. - A surprise last-minute bill to open primary elections to Nevada’s largest voting bloc, registered unaffiliated voters, moved quickly through the state legislature and was approved by a majority of lawmakers on the last day of the legislative session Monday.

The bill, AB597, allows voters not registered with a political party to pick between a Republican and Democratic primary ballot in future election cycles. It does not apply to the state’s presidential preference elections, which would remain closed to registered party members.

Keep ReadingShow less
Voter registration

In April 2025, the SAVE Act has been reintroduced in the 119th Congress and passed the House, with a much stronger chance of becoming law given the current political landscape.

SDI Productions

The SAVE Act: Addressing a Non-Existent Problem at the Cost of Voter Access?

In July 2024, I wrote about the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act when it was first introduced in Congress. And Sarah and I discussed it in an episode of Beyond the Bill Number which you can still listen to. Now, in April 2025, the SAVE Act has been reintroduced in the 119th Congress and passed the House, with a much stronger chance of becoming law given the current political landscape. It's time to revisit this legislation and examine its implications for American voters.

Read the IssueVoter analysis of the bill here for further insight and commentary.

Keep ReadingShow less
Independent Voters Gain Ground As New Mexico Opens Primaries
person in blue denim jeans and white sneakers standing on gray concrete floor
Photo by Phil Scroggs on Unsplash

Independent Voters Gain Ground As New Mexico Opens Primaries

With the stroke of a pen, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham enfranchised almost 350,000 independent voters recently by signing a bill for open primaries. Just a few years ago, bills to open the primaries were languishing in the state legislature, as they have historically across the country. But as more and more voters leave both parties and declare their independence, the political system is buckling. And as independents begin to organize and speak out, it’s going to continue to buckle in their direction.

In 2004, there were 120,000 independent voters in New Mexico. A little over 10 years later, when the first open primary bill was introduced, that number had more than doubled. That bill never even got a hearing. But today the number of independents in New Mexico and across the country is too big to ignore. Independents are the largest group of voters in ten states and the second-largest in most others. That’s putting tremendous pressure on a system that wasn’t designed with them in mind.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

"Voter Here" sign outside of a polling location.

Getty Images, Grace Cary

Stopping the Descent Toward Banana Republic Elections

President Trump’s election-related executive order begins by pointing out practices in Canada, Sweden, Brazil, and elsewhere that outperform the U.S. But it is Trump’s order itself that really demonstrates how far we’ve fallen behind. In none of the countries mentioned, or any other major democracy in the world, would the head of government change election rules by decree, as Trump has tried to do.

Trump is the leader of a political party that will fight for control of Congress in 2026, an election sure to be close, and important to his presidency. The leader of one side in such a competition has no business unilaterally changing its rules—that’s why executive decrees changing elections only happen in tinpot dictatorships, not democracies.

Keep ReadingShow less