Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Utah's initiative to end gerrymandering

Opinion

Utah's initiative to end gerrymandering

"The Salt Lake City metro area has been split like a pizza between our four congressional districts so that the community's voting power is diluted," writes former Rep Karen Shepherd.

Utah Elections

Shepherd represented Utah in the House of Representatives from 1993 to 1995 as a Democrat.

First a personal story. Shortly after President Trump was elected, I attended a town hall meeting called by my congressman. It was held in the large auditorium of a Salt Lake City high school, and about 2,000 people attended. As a former member of Congress who had held many of my own town hall meetings before anxious and upset people, I was interested in watching how this meeting would be managed. I knew the audience was mostly made up of Democrats and the representative was a Republican. Most of his constituents did not live in the city and neither did he.

After an introduction by the district director, the congressman came forward to speak. His first words, after welcoming us and noting the huge size of the crowd, were to say he assumed people were there because they didn't agree with his stands on many issues. Then he pointed to a pie chart showing where in Utah he had won votes in the last election. "As you can see here," he said smiling, "it doesn't really matter what you think about me or these issues." He then pointedly noted his votes had come from elsewhere in the state – the mostly rural, much more conservative part of Utah.

A solidly Democratic region in the middle of a mostly Republican state, the Salt Lake City metro area has been split like a pizza between our four congressional districts so that the community's voting power is diluted. As a result, unrepresented voters alternate between desperate attempts to overcome the system and total indifference to the political process. Meanwhile, voters in Republican areas, always sure their candidates will win all but the rare competitive races, often stay home. As gerrymandering has increased, Utah's voting record has declined. Democrats don't vote because they know their vote doesn't count and Republicans don't vote because they know their vote isn't needed.


Neither Democrats nor Republicans like what gerrymandering was doing to democracy in Utah, so we came together to form a bipartisan coalition, Better Boundaries, that successfully passed a redistricting reform ballot initiative last fall. Fortunately, the Utah Constitution enshrines the right of citizens to make laws directly without the approval of those who most benefit from gerrymandering.

It's important to be clear about the psychology of gerrymandering. It's not a partisan issue. Democrats are as fierce as Republicans about holding onto power when they have it. No one, absolutely no one, gives up power easily. That is why it took a whole initiative, two years and hundreds of thousands of people in Utah to insist that it be done.

People want their voices to count and to be heard. In gerrymandered districts neither can happen. People want their elected officials to listen and to be accountable. In gerrymandered districts, that does not happen. Good government relies on giving people pathways to their government so that they don't feel helpless, or indifferent, or angry. Gerrymandering seals off all those pathways.

Finding a fair and balanced way to draw district lines so elections are competitive and all are represented is critical to the health of our democracy. The Utah lesson, perhaps, is that if a fair and balanced solution to redistricting can win voters' approval here, it can be done anywhere.

Read More

U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less
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