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.

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

An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.
A pile of political buttons sitting on top of a table

Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.

Once again, politicians are trying to choose their voters to guarantee their own victories before the first ballot is cast.

In the latest round of redistricting wars, Texas Republicans are attempting a rare mid-decade redistricting to boost their advantage ahead of the 2026 midterms, and Democratic governors in California and New York are signaling they’re ready to “fight fire with fire” with their own partisan gerrymanders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

Wilson Deschine sits at the "be my voice" voter registration stand at the Navajo Nation annual rodeo, in Window Rock.

Getty Images, David Howells

Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

On July 24, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a Circuit Court order in a far-reaching case that could affect the voting rights of all Americans. Native American tribes and individuals filed the case as part of their centuries-old fight for rights in their own land.

The underlying subject of the case confronts racial gerrymandering against America’s first inhabitants, where North Dakota’s 2021 redistricting reduced Native Americans’ chances of electing up to three state representatives to just one. The specific issue that the Supreme Court may consider, if it accepts hearing the case, is whether individuals and associations can seek justice under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). That is because the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, contradicting other courts, said that individuals do not have standing to bring Section 2 cases.

Keep ReadingShow less