Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Should Harris-Walz embrace gerrymandering reform?

Should Harris-Walz embrace gerrymandering reform?

Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris and her running mate, Tim Walz take the stage at a campaign rally in Philadelphia on Aug. 6.

Kyle Mazza/Anadolu via Getty Images

Gorrell is an advocate for the deaf’s rights, a former Republican Party election statistician, and a longtime congressional aide.

Supporters of gerrymandering reform are wondering whether Vice President Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, will support the Fair and Impartial Redistricting for Meaningful and Accountable Political Systems Act.


Democratic Rep. Wiley Nickel's bill, more commonly known as the FAIR MAPS Act, "requires States to carry out congressional redistricting in accordance with a redistricting plan developed by an independent redistricting commission."

This legislation is similar to a bill Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren (Calif.) introduced in eight consecutive Congresses, from 2005 to 2020, to stop gerrymandering by enabling each state to establish an independent redistricting commission. It died in committee each time because it lacked adequate support from the Democratic leadership to advance.

Despite Harris’ connection with former Attorney General Eric Holder, it is still unclear where she stands on true nonpartisan gerrymandering reform

Holder now chairs the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, which describes itself as "the centralized hub for executing a comprehensive redistricting strategy that shifts the redistricting power, creating fair districts where Democrats can compete." He claims that his program's purpose is to combat gerrymandering, but Republicans have long claimed that the independent redistricting commission wants to draw maps in favor of Democrats.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

According to IRS filings, the organization aims to "build a comprehensive plan to favorably position Democrats for the redistricting process through 2022."

After being assigned by President Joe Biden to lead efforts to pass voting rights legislation on June 1, 2021, Vice President Harris issued a Statement on the Administration's Voting Rights Efforts, which did not mention gerrymandering or redistricting.

In November 2000, Arizona voters passed a citizen initiative that amended the state Constitution by removing the power to draw congressional and state legislative districts from the Legislature and reassigning the task to an independent redistricting commission. In November 2008, California voters passed a similar proposition authorizing a state redistricting commission. In 2015, the Arizona commission was sued by its Legislature, and Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission, went to the Supreme Court. The IRC attorney asked Harris, then California’s attorney general, to file a friend-of-the-court brief. She ducked the request. But what if she had agreed to join the effort?

Since arriving on Capitol Hill as a junior senator in 2017, Harris has yet to show interest in ending partisan gerrymandering and establishing an independent redistricting commission in all states, despite her strong advocacy on voting rights.

The same can be said for Walz. As governor, he signed a law ending prison gerrymandering last year, but he has made no statement responding to state House Majority Leader Jamie Long's recent proposal to create an independent citizens redistricting commission in Minnesota. While in Congress, he did not co-sponsor any of Lofgren's redistricting bills.

Back to Nickel's bill. It has been endorsed by many advocacy groups, including the Campaign Legal Center, the Communications Workers of America Union, Common Cause, Democracy Green, Down Home North Carolina, End Citizens United, Equality North Carolina the League of Women Voters, the NAACP, North Carolina Asian Americans Together, the North Carolina Justice Center and North Carolina Counts.

Can you believe that the National Democratic Redistricting Committee had no comment about the bill?

On the Republican side, former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Sen. J.D. Vance (Ohio) have not commented on the idea of establishing independent redistricting commissions.

The voters seem tired of hearing both parties cry "Save democracy!" with little action. Since the 93rd Congress (1973-75), none of redistricting bills has seen any meaningful movement..

Several polls tell us that over 50 percent of Democratic and Republican voters support independent redistricting commissions — so it could be the purest way to "Save democracy!"

When will our federal legislators get serious about listening to long-time requests for nonpartisan gerrymandering reform?

Read More

Half-Baked Alaska

A photo of multiple checked boxes.

Getty Images / Thanakorn Lappattaranan

Half-Baked Alaska

This past year’s elections saw a number of state ballot initiatives of great national interest, which proposed the adoption of two “unusual” election systems for state and federal offices. Pairing open nonpartisan primaries with a general election using ranked choice voting, these reforms were rejected by the citizens of Colorado, Idaho, and Nevada. The citizens of Alaska, however, who were the first to adopt this dual system in 2020, narrowly confirmed their choice after an attempt to repeal it in November.

Ranked choice voting, used in Alaska’s general elections, allows voters to rank their candidate choices on their ballot and then has multiple rounds of voting until one candidate emerges with a majority of the final vote and is declared the winner. This more representative result is guaranteed because in each round the weakest candidate is dropped, and the votes of that candidate’s supporters automatically transfer to their next highest choice. Alaska thereby became the second state after Maine to use ranked choice voting for its state and federal elections, and both have had great success in their use.

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Supreme Court
Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Gerrymandering and voting rights under review by Supreme Court again

On Dec. 13, The Fulcrum identified the worst examples of congressional gerrymandering currently in use.

In that news report, David Meyers wrote:

Keep ReadingShow less
Rear view diverse voters waiting for polling place to open
SDI Productions/Getty Images

Open primary advocates must embrace the historic principles of change

This was a big year for the open primaries movement. Seven state-level campaigns and one municipal. Millions of voters declaring their support for open primaries. New leaders emerging across the country. Primary elections for the first time at the center of the national reform debate.

But with six out of eight campaigns failing at the ballot box, it’s also an important moment of reflection.

Keep ReadingShow less