The League of Women Voters is dedicated to empowering voters and defending democracy, and we are deeply concerned by the gerrymandering efforts currently undermining fair representation – a strategy used by both political parties, making it a bipartisan crisis.
In the era of big data, the tools available for redrawing electoral districts are more powerful and precise than ever, in order to maximize political representation. Advanced software can sort voters with pinpoint accuracy – by race, income, neighborhood, education level, even by how long someone spent engaging with political content on social media. This new reality gives those in charge of drawing electoral maps extraordinary power to tilt the playing field, giving gerrymandering an even greater capacity to pre-determine election outcomes before the first vote is cast.
The U.S. House of Representatives has 435 members, with each seat representing an average of 760,000 people nationwide. Every 10 years, as populations change, the national census determines the number of seats each state receives, and the states redraw their district maps.
One of the most troubling aspects of gerrymandering is how it overturns a basic principle of democratic representation: that voters choose their representatives. When politicians manipulate district lines to secure their own reelection or protect their party, it becomes the politicians who are choosing their voters.
For instance, after the 2010 census, Republicans in Wisconsin used sophisticated statistical software and detailed voting information about people’s backgrounds, where they lived and other details to create maps that disproportionately favored their party. As a result, by 2018, although the Democrats won 53% of the statewide vote, they secured only a minority of state assembly seats – 36 out of 99 – as reported by Wisconsin Conservation Voters. Also in 2010, the Brennan Center noted that Maryland Democrats used gerrymandering to their advantage, successfully flipping a long-held Republican congressional seat.
In both examples, gerrymandering by both political parties wasn’t about reflecting the will of the people, but about cementing power that can last for decades. When the lines are drawn to protect political parties, voter choices are narrowed, and accountability erodes. Instead of answering to the public, legislators become insulated from their constituents.
A healthy democracy relies on competition with the best ideas rising through a genuine contest of vision and values. Gerrymandering undermines competitive elections by creating “safe” districts, where one party is virtually guaranteed victory. When genuine competition between parties disappears, the critical contest shifts to primary elections – races dominated by the most ideologically extreme voters. This dynamic forces candidates to cater to the fringes rather than the broad center, ultimately promoting polarization and discouraging moderation. Introducing reforms such as open primaries and ranked choice voting can incentivize candidates to appeal to a broader spectrum of voters, helping to restore healthy competition and curb extremism.
Recently, Texas passed a new redistricting plan that gerrymandered five additional congressional districts in favor of Republicans. This intentional lack of competition leads to further polarization and makes governing harder, as compromise becomes a political liability rather than a virtue. In response, California fast-tracked a legislative package and a proposed state constitutional amendment allowing voters to approve new districts countering Texas’ changes.
California and Texas are locked in a legal and political showdown, each advancing aggressive redistricting schemes that could reshape control of Congress through the 2026 elections. Missouri recently entered the fray when its Legislature passed a new congressional map, meant to secure an additional Republican House seat, further eroding the core principles of American democracy.
With gerrymandering, elections take on the appearance of legitimate democracy, but the process becomes a charade. If politicians “stack the deck” by designing districts with predetermined outcomes, the fundamental premise of a people-powered government is compromised. A recent Supreme Court decision, Rucho v. Common Cause, ruled that partisan gerrymandering is a political question beyond the reach of federal courts, unless it involves explicit racial discrimination. This hands-off approach has only emboldened those seeking to draw maps for personal gain.
Gerrymandering should be recognized as a form of corruption for the damage it inflicts: entrenching political power, stifling competition, shielding incumbents from accountability and warping the democratic process to serve those already in power.
A real democracy depends on vibrant contests, meaningful choice, and leaders who answer to the people. When these ingredients are missing, the “government of, by, and for the people” fades, replaced by cynicism, apathy, and polarization. To protect the integrity of democracy, we must demand that Congress pass a federal law requiring independent, nonpartisan redistricting commissions nationwide.
To get involved with the LWV La Plata, attend, “Action is the Antidote for Anxiety,” on Saturday, Oct. 4, from 3 to 5 p.m. at the Durango Public Library. Speakers will cover League policies, including health care, immigration, the environment and voter rights, and will offer tangible actions. Additionally, the League will host a Durango School District Board Candidate Forum on Oct. 12, from 3:30 to 5:15 p.m. at the VFW Hall. For more details about both events, visit lwvlaplata.org.
Wendy Pollak, Siggy Palmer and Jan Phillips of Durango serve on the League of Women Voters La Plata Voter Services sub-committee.
