Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A grade for West Virginia's map, just in time for the primary

Opinion

West Virginia redistricting map

A state legislator reviews the proposed congressional district map submitted by Gorrell.

Perry Bennett

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

In March, a map accompanying an article in The Fulcrum showed West Virginia with a finalized congressional map. As a longtime opponent of partisan gerrymandering, I feel obligated to step in where purportedly unbiased analysts have failed to review West Virginia’s new district lines.

Since Oct. 26, 2021, I have periodically monitored the Redistricting Report Card to learn which grade the Princeton Gerrymandering Project gives West Virginia. The PGP identifies and rates each state's congressional redistricting plans based on partisan fairness, competitiveness and geography.

But the Redistricting Report Card shows West Virginia as one of five states without draft maps even though, on Oct. 22, Gov. Jim Justice signed bills establishing legislative and congressional maps that will be in place until the 2032 election cycle. West Virginia became the fifth state to complete congressional redistricting, and that was six months ago.


As tracked by All About Redistricting, West Virginia is not among 16 states that face pending lawsuits related to approved congressional maps.

I find it mysterious that West Virginia has not been scored yet, despite having only two congressional districts for the next decade. The map is simply drawn, posssibly because the state Constitution requires that congressional districts be compact and contiguous, as well as preserve county lines.

The PGP has not scored any congressional maps since March 18 and it is crystal clear the group will not score West Virginia, which is holding its primary today. So I, as a sixth-generation West Virginian, have to volunteer to analyze the West congressional map based on the PCP methodology for The Fulcrum’s readers.

County Splits: A+

The joint redistricting committee decided to keep counties intact for the 2020 election cycle. Historically, West Virginia had never divided a county between two or more congressional districts. The committee’s decision was supported by the 2012 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Tennant v. Jefferson County Commission.

Geographic Features: A-

The question on creating the two congressional districts was whether to divide the state north-south, east-west, or northwest-southeast.

West Virginia is almost entirely mountainous. In fact, West Virginia has more mountainous land per square mile than any other state. Also, it has flat strips that lie along the major rivers.

Minority Composition: A+

West Virginia must meet two federal requirements for drawing congressional districts, including compliance with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (prohibited discrimination based on race). As Owens Brown, a state senator and president of the West Virginia NAACP, told a joint redistricting committee on Aug. 24, 2021: “There is a heavy population of minorities in the southern part of the state. … That’s what we hope will happen.”

And it came to pass, as a result, 26 of 27 counties identified in the NCAAP’s proposal were incorporated into the southern district of the new congressional map.

Partisan Fairness: Incomplete

While redistricting in many other states is a hyperpartisan exercise, West Virginia has no problem with partisan fairness.

A veteran Democratic strategist, James Carville, told Vox on Jan. 27, "Understand that [Sen.] Joe Manchin is a Roman Catholic Democrat in a state where not a single county has voted Democrat [for president] since 2008. I repeat: not a single county has voted Democrat since 2008.”

When you drive through the Mountain State today, all you see would be hundreds of Trump signs and a few obscene Biden signs. Therefore, it is incomplete in grading.

Compactness: A+

The state is also required to draw congressional districts that are approximately equal in population and compact. The Senate Redistricting Committee compiled with the state code for “compactness” by selecting the a map with a deviation of 0.17 percent.

On the other side of the gold-domed capitol, the House Redistricting Committee adopted the map with a deviation of 0.09 percent.

The difference between the two maps was the handling of two counties. The Senate had Ritchie County in the southern district and Pendleton County in the northern district, and the House map flipped that.

The Senate agreed to the House map due to more compactness and minor deviation.

Competitiveness: Incomplete

As the state became heavily Republican, Manchin was the only Democrat in West Virginia's congressional delegation or holding statewide office in 2021.

There is a fascinating Republican primary race in the new 2nd district, where Rep. David McKinley of the old 1st district and Rep. Alex Mooney of the old 2nd district are facing off. This matchup is one of five House races involving two incumbents in the same district.

Communities of Interest: C+

Testifying before the joint committee on Sep. 17, I exclaimed, “I am a little disappointed that West Virginia is one of 23 states that does not have criteria for preserving communities of interest.” I proposed keeping gas-producing communities together, as well as coal-producing communities and others with solid economic links, to better serve those interests.

My proposed map would divide the state northwest-southeast. The adopted map happens to be a north-south shape, so it has split my “communities of interest” map into halves. Therefore, I am giving a C+.

Litigation?

West Virginia Mountaineers are always free while all five bordering states are entangled in the redistricting litigation.

“The people of West Virginia are a proud and independent people — typical of the best in American life,” John F. Kennedy said during a campaign stop in Charleston on Apr. 20, 1960.

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