Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Poll: 82% of Americans Want Redistricting Done by Independent Commission, Not Politicians

News

Poll: 82% of Americans Want Redistricting Done by Independent Commission, Not Politicians

Capitol building, Washington, DC

Unsplash/Getty Images

There may be no greater indication that voters are not being listened to in the escalating redistricting war between the Republican and Democratic Parties than a new poll from NBC News that shows 8-in-10 Americans want the parties to stop.

It’s what they call an "80-20 issue," and yet neither party is standing up for the 80% as they prioritize control of Congress.


The NBC News poll, conducted from August 13 to September 1, surveyed respondents on a variety of topics, including President Donald Trump’s approval, the top issue for voters right now, and even what voters think about vaccines.

These things have been broadly covered in the press. But what has received less coverage now that the focus has shifted away from what is happening in Texas, California, Missouri, New York, and more is the threat mid-decade redistricting poses to voters.

The poll found that 82% of respondents said they want redistricting done by a nonpartisan commission, not the party in power. Even most members of the majority party in their state do not think politicians should be picking their voters.

NBC Poll: For example, 71% of Republicans in GOP-controlled states say they would prefer redistricting done by a nonpartisan commission. Yet in the same week as the poll’s release, Missouri’s Republican-majority advanced their own mid-decade gerrymander.

This, of course, follows a new map approved in Texas, which is ground zero for this tit-for-tat redistricting fight. Texas did it, so California did it. Missouri is doing it, so New York or Maryland or Illinois may do it.

And yet, 88% of Democrats in states controlled by their party also prefer a nonpartisan redistricting commission over legislative-drawn maps. The No on Prop 50 campaign in California sent out the NBC News poll results over email.

Proposition 50 will be on a November 4 special election ballot, where voters can approve or reject a new congressional map drawn by the legislature.

If approved, the map could give the Democratic Party over 90% representation in the state’s congressional delegation.

Those responsible for the proposition, including Governor Gavin Newsom, know how their voters feel about legislative gerrymandering. He says he wants to see independent redistricting commissions used at a national level but insists that his party must “fight fire with fire.”

- YouTube www.youtube.com

In fact, Proposition 50 includes a section in its summary that says it “[e]stablishes state policy supporting use of fair, independent, and nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide” – even as it will do exactly what most voters say they don’t want.

In other words, it will implement a partisan gerrymander approved by the Democratic majority in the legislature. It will sidestep the state’s independent redistricting commission, approved by voters in 2008 and 2010.

Prop 50 does not abolish the independent commission. It says the new congressional map will be in place until the commission redraws and approves new maps after the 2030 census. However, it is worth noting that this means 3 congressional election cycles under the new map.

Whether it is Texas or California, the question to ask is: What happens to the trust and confidence of the political minority when the majority says to them that on a whim, they will take away their opposition’s representation all but completely?

Texas’ maps will have to be struck down in court while California voters are left to wonder what happens the next time the Democratic majority decides they need to “fight fire with fire” again.

The answer to the question is: The partisan majority doesn’t care. When the system puts the self-serving interests of private political parties over meaningful and accountable representation, it all becomes a game to Republican and Democratic leaders.

“They did it, so we have to do it.” Then the other side will turn around and say, "They cheated first."

Even now, 82% of voters say they want politicians out of the business of choosing whose vote matters. Yet, Texas and California were only the beginning. More states are trying to expand the controlling party's majority in Congress or nullify the other side’s gains, completely ignoring what voters want.

Poll: 82% of Americans Want Redistricting Done by Independent Commission, Not Politicians was first published on IVN and re-published with permission.

Shawn Griffiths Is An Election Reform Expert And National Editor Of IVN.us.


Read More

An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
  • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
  • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
  • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

Keep ReadingShow less
Towards a Reformed Capitalism
oval brown wooden conference table and chairs inside conference room

Towards a Reformed Capitalism

Despite all the laws and regulations that apply to corporations, which for the most part are designed to make corporations more responsive to the greater good, corporations have wreaked great harm on our environment, their workers, their customers, and the general public. Despite all the rules, capitalism can still pretty much do what it wants.

The problem is not that the laws and regulations are not enforced, although that is partly true. The problem is more that the laws and regulations are weak because of the strong influence corporations have on both Congress (this is true of Democrats as well as Republicans) and those responsible for regulating.

Keep ReadingShow less
Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

The Bring Our Families Home campaign brought together loved ones of Americans wrongly detained overseas to display portraits in the Senate Russell Rotunda on Wednesday, May 6.

(Jacques Abou-Rizk, MNS)

Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

WASHINGTON – American journalist Reza Valizadeh visited his elderly Iranian parents in March 2024 for the first time in 15 years. Valizadeh’s stories for Voice of America and other U.S. government-funded outlets often criticized the Iranian regime. So before traveling, he sought and received confirmation that he would be safe from a high-ranking commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of Iran’s armed forces. However, in September that same year, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps arrested Valizadeh, and Tehran’s Revolutionary Court sentenced him to ten years in prison for “collaboration with a hostile government.”

In the Rotunda of the Senate Russell Building last week, the Bring Our Families Home campaign set up portraits of Valizadeh and 12 other Americans currently wrongfully detained overseas. The group, family members of illegitimately detained Americans, appealed to Congress to push for their safe return. Each foam poster board included the name, home state, and country of detainment. The display also included portraits of the 33 people released after advocacy by the James W. Foley Foundation.

Keep ReadingShow less
DHS Funding During the Shutdown
Getty Images, Charles-McClintock Wilson

DHS Funding During the Shutdown

When Congress failed to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of this fiscal year in February, almost all of its employees began to work without pay. That situation changed, however, on April 3, when President Donald Trump issued a memorandum ordering the DHS secretary and director of the Office of Management and Budget to “use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS” to pay its employees and issue back pay.

Trump shifted money to avoid the political embarrassment that would be caused by the collapse of airport security screening through the actions of disgruntled agents and the disruption to air travel that would ensue. But it’s legally dubious.

Keep ReadingShow less