Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

The worst gerrymandered state no longer?

Supreme Court

The Supreme Court decision likely means Louisiana voters will elect a second Black member of their congressional delegation.

Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty Images

On May 15 the Supreme Court directed Louisiana to move forward with two majority-Black districts. The ruling allows the state to use a new congressional map for the 2024 elections.

The Supreme Court ruling overturns a lower federal court decision that barred the state from using the new map on the grounds that state legislators had relied too heavily on race when the lines were drawn earlier in the year. This ruling was unsigned, which is the custom in emergency applications to the Supreme Court. The action was taken after state Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill urged the Supreme Court to act quickly since the Louisiana secretary of state indicated that May 15 was the deadline to prepare for the 2024 elections.


“This year, [Black voters] will have the opportunity to elect a candidate of their choice in two of the state’s six congressional districts as Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act requires,” Marina Jenkns, executive director of the National Redistricting Foundation, said after the ruling was issued. “What unfolded in Louisiana underscores that anti-democratic forces will continue to do all they can to gerrymander, and we must remain vigilant, but today they have again been stopped. Tomorrow, the fight to protect the Voting Rights Act will continue.”

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The ruling is particularly impactful given the slim, four-seat majority the Republicans have in the House of Representatives and the likelihood that the additional Black district will elect a Democrat.

Gerrymandering reform has long been a top priority of the democracy reform movement. While this Supreme Court ruling is not a legislative reform, it is consistent with the goals of the movement. Reformers have long argued that the redrawing of congressional lines to satisfy partisan goals must stop in order to have more competitive congressional elections. According to polls, 81 percent of Americans said they’d like to end partisan gerrymandering and stop the manipulation of congressional district lines that it brings.

Reformers are working on a variety of proposals to ensure that redistricting commissions are truly independent and free of political influence. This could be done if the commissions included members of several parties and represented independent votes and if enforceable standards were established for district maps.

Most Americans oppose partisan gerrymandering, but half do not know whether the practice occurs in their states.

The Fulcrum will continue its coverage on this critical issue to keep the public informed. We previously reported:

Two-thirds of Americans told pollsters for The Economist and YouGov that states drawing legislative districts to favor one party is a “major problem” with just 23 percent saying it’s a “minor problem.” But 50 percent said they do not know whether districts are drawn by the legislature or an independent commission in their own state.

We will continue to identify the worst gerrymandering districts and to keep our readers informed of pending and adjudicated court rulings.

While the districts certainly may have changed in the latest round mapmaking, the depth of the problem has not. Both Democrats and Republicans continue to design maps to ensure that their party maintains power.

Every 10 years, states draw new congressional and state legislative district lines. Often, mapmakers engage in gerrymandering — drawing lines in a way that artificially advantages one person, party or group over another. The anti-corruption group RepresentUs explains the ensuing problem:

“Instead of voters choosing politicians, it’s the other way around – politicians are choosing their voters. They do it by gerrymandering voting districts to guarantee their own re-election. That’s corruption at the core of our political process.”

Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who launched a anti-gerrymanding organization that primarily helps Democrats, had this to say:

“This is an unequivocal victory for Black Louisianians, who have fought tenaciously for the equal representation they deserve as American citizens. The state, consistent with the law, will now have a second Black opportunity district in its congressional map this fall. It is also a clear message to those who intend to gerrymander in order to increase their illegitimate power at the expense of voters of color: you will be stopped.”

Read More

A better direction for democracy reform

Denver election judge Eric Cobb carefully looks over ballots as counting continued on Nov. 6. Voters in Colorado rejected a ranked choice voting and open primaries measure.

Helen H. Richardson/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

A better direction for democracy reform

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

This is the conclusion of a two-part, post-election series addressing the questions of what happened, why, what does it mean and what did we learn? Read part one.

I think there is a better direction for reform than the ranked choice voting and open primary proposals that were defeated on Election Day: combining fusion voting for single-winner elections with party-list proportional representation for multi-winner elections. This straightforward solution addresses the core problems voters care about: lack of choices, gerrymandering, lack of competition, etc., with a single transformative sweep.

Keep ReadingShow less
To-party doom loop
Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America

Let’s make sense of the election results

Drutman is a senior fellow at New America and author of "Breaking the Two-Party Doom Loop: The Case for Multiparty Democracy in America."

Well, here are some of my takeaways from Election Day, and some other thoughts.

1. The two-party doom loop keeps getting doomier and loopier.

Keep ReadingShow less
Person voting in Denver

A proposal to institute ranked choice voting in Colorado was rejected by voters.

RJ Sangosti/MediaNews Group/The Denver Post via Getty Images

Despite setbacks, ranked choice voting will continue to grow

Mantell is director of communications for FairVote.

More than 3 million people across the nation voted for better elections through ranked choice voting on Election Day, as of current returns. Ranked choice voting is poised to win majority support in all five cities where it was on the ballot, most notably with an overwhelming win in Washington, D.C. – 73 percent to 27 percent.

Keep ReadingShow less
Electoral College map

It's possible Donald Trump and Kamala Harris could each get 269 electoral votes this year.

Electoral College rules are a problem. A worst-case tie may be ahead.

Johnson is the executive director of the Election Reformers Network, a national nonpartisan organization advancing common-sense reforms to protect elections from polarization. Keyssar is a Matthew W. Stirling Jr. professor of history and social policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. His work focuses on voting rights, electoral and political institutions, and the evolution of democracies.

It’s the worst-case presidential election scenario — a 269–269 tie in the Electoral College. In our hyper-competitive political era, such a scenario, though still unlikely, is becoming increasingly plausible, and we need to grapple with its implications.

Recent swing-state polling suggests a slight advantage for Kamala Harris in the Rust Belt, while Donald Trump leads in the Sun Belt. If the final results mirror these trends, Harris wins with 270 electoral votes. But should Trump take the single elector from Nebraska’s 2nd congressional district — won by Joe Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2016 — then both candidates would be deadlocked at 269.

Keep ReadingShow less