Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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

Diverse People At Voting Booth. Vote Here Elections Sign

A political scientist examines how automatic voter registration is quietly turning non-affiliation into America's largest voting bloc.

AndreyPopov/Getty Images

When Neither Party Is the Default: Rethinking Representation As America’s Electorate Changes

For most of my career as a political scientist, representation was the central theme of my teaching and research. Early on, I studied how legislators understood their responsibilities to constituents — whether they saw themselves as delegates carrying out constituent mandates, trustees exercising independent judgment, or politicos combining both. That work asked a question that still matters: What does it mean to represent the public in a changing democracy?

Today I find myself asking a related question: What happens when the electorate changes but the institutions built to represent it do not?

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

How 9/11’s Memory Continues to Shape American Citizenship

Twenty‑five years after September 11th, the burden of that day continues to affect us in ways that are difficult to express. It was a moment of profound loss, but also one that revealed both the vulnerability and resilience of our national fabric. The memories remain vivid for many of us: where we were, what we felt, and how the world appeared to change in an instant. Even now, a quarter century later, the impact of that morning continues to shape how we understand our country, our responsibilities, and our relationships with one another.

To help us all reflect on that day, I invited four contributors to the Fulcrum to share reflections not to revisit the tragedy, but to commemorate the ways it has persisted in our consciousness twenty-five years later.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close-up shot of a Black woman's hands receiving a mail-in ballot to vote in a USA Presidential, Senatorial, Congressional, or local election

An immigrant's perspective on why America's election debate over security vs. access is a false choice — and how USPS mail ballot rules fit in.

Jeremy Poland/Getty Images

Ballot Security and Voter Access Are Not Opposites: What the USPS Ballot Rule Gets Right

I came to the United States from India in 1982. In Indian elections, I watched officials check voter identity and mark a voter’s finger with indelible ink. Party representatives observed the process. The system was imperfect, as every large democracy is, but it sent a simple message: casting one vote is a serious civic act, and the process should make that clear.

When I later became an American citizen and cast my first ballot, the experience felt very different. A poll worker found my name on a list and handed me a ballot. In my precinct, there was no photo identification check. I was surprised—not because I expected voting to be difficult, but because I expected a system as consequential as an election to have clear, visible safeguards.

Keep ReadingShow less
A group of people wait in line to get their ballots to vote in the election.

Uncontested elections are more common than you'd think. From open primaries to multi-member districts, here's what states like California and Alaska are doing to bring real competition back to the ballot — and what it'll take to change political culture, too.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

What America Can Do About Its Uncontested Elections

Politics nerds have many ideas about how to strengthen American democracy; however, few directly address silent elections. For example, ranked-choice voting does nothing to encourage more candidates to run if there are not enough. Term limits increase turnover, but even newcomers can frequently run uncontested in general elections if they have won competitive primaries.

Fortunately, the cause isn’t hopeless. For one, tightening campaign finance laws would put potential challengers on more even footing with corporate-backed politicians, encouraging more candidates to run. Independent redistricting would also help. The Cook Political Report, a poll aggregator, considers only 69 of America’s 435 House districts competitive. Fair redistricting means more competitive districts and therefore more contested elections.

Keep ReadingShow less