Is Gerrymandering a Controversial Topic? Gerrymandering is a process where the ruling political party uses the map of their state to draw lines that create voting districts in favor of their party. The result of this is that it doesn’t reflect the voters political views. For about 200 years the government has used gerrymandering during political elections and it continues to be used today (King, Elizabeth) . But recently gerrymandering has become more controversial because people feel that it has taken away their rights as a voter and it swings the votes to one side by a big percentage. Current cases are before the courts to decide if gerrymandering is legal. Some states have been discussing whether it should still be allowed during elections. “Many efforts are underway to remedy this political …show more content…
It allows them to use tactics such as packing and cracking which can have a tremendous impact on elections. Packing is when politicians draw out district maps for each party based on population. Packing can swing the vote because the population of one party could out weight the population of the minority party within the same district, causing the entire district to swing with the majority. Voters feel that the other tactic, cracking, gives them a disadvantage because the political parties are being spread out between multiple districts which causes one district to have the majority party in multiple areas (King, Elizabeth). When the politicians of the party in power have drawn out the voters’ map, they maintain power over the lines of the map. This allows the politicians to select one representative from each district to represent the majority of the voters in that district. This can benefit a political party because it allows them to have more seats in the house. “Eliminating gerrymandering would not by itself dramatically increase the competitiveness of house and state….between the two major political parties” (Mann, Thomas
The greatest reform of democracy came from the people pushing the boundaries of what a democracy should be—the Progressive Movement. If there is to be hope of abolishing partisan gerrymandering and bringing true voting equality, or at least moving toward equality, for the first time in U.S. history, it is going to require another social movement, similar to the Progressive
Gerrymandering is the process of redrawing boundaries to benefit the political party in power. An example is Nevada, in which the four districts show the three forms. Gerrymandering was made after Elbridge Gerry, who was the governor of Massachusetts and Vice President of the U.S., signed a bill that redistricted the state to benefit his party, which was later called Partisan Gerrymandering. An individual observed the oddly shaped district as a "gerrymander" causing a newspaper reporter to print a cartoon of a monster based on it.
This is shown in an article written by Quartz that states that “Wisconsin’s partisan gerrymandering deprived citizens of their constitutional right to a vote with value” in other words would diminish a person's
State Rep. Randy Dunn D-Kansas City, has filed House Bill 497, which would adopt an agreement to elect the President of the United States by the nation popular vote instead of by the decision of the Electoral College. House Bill No. 497 comes in response to outdated and unjust Electoral College system. “Every Missourians’ vote should count the same,” said Dunn. “Whoever the majority votes for that given person should be the victor.
In that document he was talking about the head of the rival party. Political parties were also responsible for gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is when the political party with the most power gets to draw districts, so they group up as many of their parties members in one district as possible in order to get more votes. Political parties had negative effects on the
This is depicted when the states turns red if a state votes for the majority Republican, or the turns blue if the state votes primarily Democratic despite if there is a close margin. Fiorina discusses the uses the illustration to present the false illusion of political division and the influence media has on the public. The strengths in the text are Fiorina’s ability to persuade the audience. The persuasiveness is achieved by relating to the people.
The United States of America has a rich history filled with success, failure, courage, and drive. Millions have come seeking the “American Dream” and to live in the land of the free. The past is what has shaped this nation’s present and future. Yet, as time drifts, the world around us changes. What was once deemed acceptable can now seem outdated in today’s society.
In everyday conversations a subject that frequently tends to arise is American politics. During these conversations a variation of sub topics often occur usually pertaining to the Army’s funding, elections, and the different political parties. One of these topics that tends to cause a lot of feuding is the different political parties. In my family alone, we partake in disputes based on our different political parties, I am a Democrat while my parents are Republican. Often, we participate in quarrels over different events that occur in society.
We see multiple successes of voting equality attempted through amendments, however, the Supreme Court’s decision on Shelby County v. Holder has pushed back years and years of effort for voting rights. Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling was in Shelby County’s favor, stating that the Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional along with Section 5. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr, who wrote the majority’s opinion, said that the power to regulate election was reserved to the states, not the federal government. As a result to the court’s decision, the federal government can no longer determine which voting law discriminates and can be passed. After the case, many states had freely passed new voting laws; the most common voting law states passed
For many years, America’s voting system has been criticized, with the main point of interest being the Electoral College. Some say that the Electoral College is necessary to streamline and simplify the voting process, while others say that it is outdated and takes away power from American citizens. After investigating the subject, it is clear that the Electoral College should be abolished due to the three major defects its critics find in the system; its undemocratic nature, its tendency to give small states’ votes too much power, and its disastrous effects on third-party candidates. The first, and possibly largest, defect in the Electoral College is its undemocratic nature. A professor of political science once said that “the Electoral College violates political equality” (Edwards 453).
The Government is the ultimate ruler of the people, sets the ultimate laws of the land and says what goes and when not pleased uses all the means in their power to influence. The basic functions of the United States government are listed in the Constitution. Due to the immense power of our federal government, people often argue that it is too powerful and should be lessened. Sub further the state governments use a sum of power to do the same. There has been an effort to shift power from the federal government to the states.
The main advantage is that it removes the concentration of power from one individual. This ensures that abuse of power is limited. Giving different individuals from varying parties will also result in the creation of checks and balances in the executive. A lieutenant governor from the Democratic Party will be able to check the activities and the undertakings of a Republican governor thus ensuring that they operate within the confines of the law and the powers of their office. Also, the system allows for the introduction or the enforcement of the manifestos held by both parties, thereby resulting in greater benefits to the population.
It also makes political parties favored over larger areas because the candidates must get the votes of less populated states, which tend to have much more area in
Campaign finance reform has been a hot button issue these past few decades in the United States. What makes it different from other issues? James L. Buckley says that “What distinguishes the campaign finance issue from just about every other one being debated these days is that the two sides do not divide along conventional liberal/ conservative lines.” In the Supreme Court case, Citizens United v. FEC, campaign finance reform lessened slightly.
As citizens, the only thing that we can do to help fight against gerrymandering would be to use our legislative powers and fight for more transparent and public system within their states to hold elected officials accountable. Even if we were able to fix gerrymandering, it still would not be enough to fix gridlock. If we were able to fix gridlock, it still would not solve close to any of the problems rooted in Washington. It seems as though we are waiting for the problems to fix themselves, but we need to realize it isn't a problem that can fix itself. Each state needs to work within itself every ten