Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

When Politicians Draw Their Own Victories: Why and How To End Gerrymandering

Opinion

When Politicians Draw Their Own Victories: Why and How To End Gerrymandering

Alyssa West from Austin holds up a sign during the Fight the Trump Takeover rally at the Texas Capitol on Saturday, August. 16, 2025.

(Aaron E. Martinez/Austin American-Statesman via Getty Images)

From MAGA Republicans to progressive Democrats to those of us in the middle, Americans want real change – and they’re tired of politics as usual. They’re craving authenticity, real reform, and an end to the status quo. More and more, voters seem to be embracing disruption over the empty promises of establishment politicians, who too often live by the creed that “one bad idea deserves a bigger one.” Just look at how both parties are handling gerrymandering in Texas and California, and it’s difficult to see it as anything other than both parties trying to rig elections in their favor.

Instead of fixing the system, politicians are fueling a turbocharged redistricting arms race ahead of high-stakes midterm 2026 elections that will determine control of the U.S. Congress. In Texas, Republicans just redrew congressional lines, likely guaranteeing five new Republican seats, which has sparked Democratic strongholds like California and New York to threaten their own gerrymandered counterattacks.


This isn’t democracy. This destroys democracy. It’s a corrupt game where politicians choose their voters — not the voters selecting their representatives, as enumerated in our U.S. Constitution.

We represent different parties, but we have both seen the severe damage gerrymandering has done to American democracy. At this point, less than 12 percent of House races are expected to be competitive in 2026. That means in nearly 9 out of 10 House districts, voters may not have a genuine choice of candidates or be able to vote in an election that politicians do not already fix. That translates into 385 of the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives will be pre-determined. The result? Increased hyper-partisanship, little to no incentives for bipartisan compromise in Congress, and, most importantly, a vast majority of moderate middle voters (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans) like us whose voices and proposals are lost.

Fixing gerrymandering would put voters back in the driver's seat, ensuring their choices determine election outcomes and that elected officials are truly accountable to the people they serve. For the sake of our democracy, we need bold and bipartisan actions that put power back where it belongs: with the voters.

First, in the immediate term, all voters should make their voices heard. We should not settle for the status quo or mutually assured destruction by supporting either party's position to gerrymander. Attend a town meeting and contact your representatives to demand that they oppose all efforts to gerrymander by both parties. In recent days, a few political leaders, including Republican Governor of New Hampshire Kelly Ayotte and Democratic Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, have said ‘no’ to this mid-decade redistricting.

Second, Congress should pass redistricting reforms that prohibit partisan gerrymandering. These reforms should establish minimum standards for drawing congressional maps, which would require districts to be drawn using neutral, transparent criteria, such as equal population, geographic contiguity and compactness, and consideration of communities of interest and existing political boundaries.

Third, all states should adopt independent, nonpartisan state redistricting commissions, which would remove legislators from the process. Eleven states that already use independent or bipartisan redistricting commissions, and evidence shows these commissions tend to create fairer maps, increase electoral competitiveness, and boost voter trust in the process. Polls have shown strong voter support across the political spectrum for independent commissions.

Better yet, to make sure this reform takes hold nationwide and to prevent future gerrymandering battles from escalating, Congress should require all states to set up independent redistricting commissions. This latest escalation shows that it only takes one “bad apple state” to spark a multi-state gerrymandering battle. That is why Congress must act now.

There have been bipartisan reform efforts in recent years, including the Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act and the Redistricting Transparency and Accountability Act. But in each case, Congress has failed to do what is best for voters, instead acting on its own cynical partisan interests. Passing and abiding by redistricting reforms requires compromise, cross-partisan collaboration, and courage – values that have been eroded by the effects of decades of gerrymandering. But this latest escalation of gerrymandering threats shows why Congress cannot wait any longer.

Benedict Arnold, Joseph McCarthy, and Elbridge Gerry (from whom we derive the term “gerrymander”) are all names that are vilified in American history. While gerrymandering has been around for centuries, it is long past time to retire this wretched and corrupt practice. It is a direct threat to representative government, democratic ideals, and American values. Beginning in Texas, we must unite and oppose all efforts by states to manipulate the outcome of our elections. Now is the time for We the People to demand that Members of Congress declare publicly whether they support reform or choose the corrupt old ways.

Charles Boustany (R-LA), a former U.S. representative serving Louisiana’s 3rd and 7th congressional districts, and Amb.

Tim Roemer (D-IN), a former ambassador to India and U.S. representative serving Indiana’s 3rd congressional district, is a part of Issue One’s ReFormers Caucus, a group of nearly 200 former members of Congress united to fix our broken political system.



Read More

Cardboard ballot box with a voter slip being placed into it by a hand, with a blue and red coloured background.

Cardboard ballot box with a voter slip being placed into it by a hand, with a blue and red coloured background.

Getty Images

The Leverage Ethic and the Spirit of Tripartisanship

I made the immodest proposal in my edited interdisciplinary volume Leveraging: A Political, Economic, and Societal Framework that the contemporary analogue to what Max Weber called the "Protestant Work Ethic" in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism was what I called "the Leverage Ethic."

Moreover, I suggested that the Leverage Ethic has more or less replaced what the late Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell called the "Consumer Ethic" in his classic book The Cultural Contradictions of Capitalism, which he argued more or less replaced the Protestant Work Ethic.

Keep ReadingShow less
“We Will Not Let This Destroy Our Sacred Sites”: Indigenous Leaders Fight Trump Administration’s Border Wall

Lorraine Marquez Eiler, a Hia-C’ed O’odham elder, listens as Tohono O'odham Chairman Verlon Jose speaks during a news conference at the Quitobaquito Springs site on Monday, Aug. 24, 2026.

Stephanie Casanova

“We Will Not Let This Destroy Our Sacred Sites”: Indigenous Leaders Fight Trump Administration’s Border Wall

Standing near the pond at Quitobaquito Springs, Lorraine Marquez Eiler, a Hia-Ced O’odham elder, shared how her ancestors held ceremonies at the sacred site — a desert oasis in a national park that the federal government is set to bulldoze for a new border wall.

She pulled out a photo of her great-great grandparents and her great-grandparents, who would walk about 50 miles through the Sonoran Desert to the springs. The O’odham call the water flow A’al Vaipia. She showed the image of her ancestors to a group that included Indigenous leaders and a U.S. congressional representative — all there on Monday to condemn the border wall construction.

Keep ReadingShow less
 Unrecognizable doctor prescribing pharmacy to patient.

After a 30-year decline, U.S. abortions are rising again. Texas data suggests bans may shift where abortions happen — not whether they do.

Natalia Gdovskaia/Getty Images

Pro-Life and Pro-Choice: Bridging the Gap

Introduction

We have spent decades arguing about abortion policy on ideological grounds. I think we now have an opportunity to step back, look at what actually happened, and ask a more fundamental question: What policies actually reduce the number of abortions?

I believe that is a question on which pro-life and pro-choice people should be able to agree. Whatever our differences about abortion itself, surely, we can agree that fewer abortions would be a good outcome.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less