Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

What happened to the worst gerrymandered districts?

Opinion

Ohio's "Snake by the Lake"

Ohio District 11 Gerrymandered Map

Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Every 10 years, states draw new congressional and 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.”

The Fulcrum ran a story in November 2019 by David Meyers that identified the 12 worst examples of gerrymandering in the House of Representatives. Meyers pointed out that you know you've seen a gerrymandered district when it looks like a duck or a snake, or even a pair of earmuffs. But he also noted that it’s not always obvious that the mapmakers played games with the contours in order to ensure a particular electoral outcome inside those boundaries.


One clear example cited was Ohio's “snake by the lake” 9th district. Jason Fierman, founder and managing director of The Redistrict Network, noted that the district – which stretches from Toledo to Cleveland – is “so thin and strangely shaped that they actually drove to Lake Erie to monitor sea levels with respect to the contiguity of the district. They are concerned that climate change could make the district non-contiguous and consequently altered in the next round of redistricting.”

This is just one of the many bizarre districts mentioned.

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

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

In February 2022, The Fulcrum reported that a poll found a majority of Americans oppose partisan gerrymandering

Fast forward to 2024.

In a survey of leading voices in the democracy reform movement, ending partisan gerrymandering and moving to independent redistricting was the third highest priority for this year (coming in after open primaries and ranked-choice voting).

In December, New York's highest court, ordered the state’s Independent Redistricting Commission to submit a revised congressional redistricting plan to the state Legislature, based on data from the 2020 Census. But on Monday the Legislature rejected the commission’s plan and assumed responsibility for drawing new lines. Democrats hold the majority and are expected to devise a plan that helps their party at the expense of Republicans.

And in Louisiana, the Legislature recently passed a new congressional map, which Republican Gov. Jeff Landry has signed into law. The latest district map was precipitated by a federal court ruling that the district lines drawn in 2022 violated the Voting Rights Act by diluting Black representation. Whether this new map will be taken to the courts again remains to be seen.

And the list goes on and on. In Wisconsin, Democrats have sued over the congressional map. North Carolina and Alabama both have new congressional maps. And in Texas, the congressional map faces several legal challenges.

Undoubtedly the redrawing of congressional lines to satisfy partisan goals will continue – as will the ensuing legal battles. In the coming weeks and months The Fulcrum will continue our coverage on this critical issue and work to identify the worst gerrymandering districts.


Read More

Voters lining up to vote.

Voters line up at the Oak Lawn Branch Library voting center on Primary Election Day in Dallas on March 3, 2026. Republicans' decision to hold a split primary from the Democrats and to eliminate countywide voting forced Dallas County voters to cast ballots at assigned neighborhood precincts, leading to confusion. Republicans have now decided to use countywide polling locations for the May 26 runoff election.

Shelby Tauber for The Texas Tribune

Dallas County GOP Will Agree To Use Countywide Voting Sites for May 26 Runoff Election

Dallas County Republicans will agree to allow voters to cast ballots at countywide voting sites for the May 26 runoff election after a switch to precinct-based voting sites caused chaos, the county party chair said Tuesday.

Dallas County Republican Chairman Allen West supported the use of precinct-based sites earlier this month, but said using precincts again for the runoff would expose the county party to “increased risk and voter confusion” because the county is planning to use countywide sites for upcoming municipal elections and early voting.

Keep ReadingShow less
A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

An analysis of Trump’s SAVE Act strategy, the voter ID debate, and how Pew data is being misused—exploring election integrity, voter suppression, and the political fight shaping U.S. democracy.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Stop Fighting Voter ID. Start Defining It.

President Trump doesn't need the SAVE America Act to pass. He only needs the debate to continue. Every minute spent arguing about voter suppression repeats the underlying premise — that noncitizen voting is a real and widespread problem — until it feels like an established fact. The question is whether Democrats will contest Republicans’ definition before the frame hardens.

Trump's claim that 88% of Americans support the bill traces to a Pew Research Center survey — a survey that found 83% support a “government-issued photo ID to vote,” not extreme vetting for proof of citizenship. That support included 95% of Republicans and 71% of Democrats, indicating genuine, broad, bipartisan support for a basic civic principle. That's worth taking seriously.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less