Home Opinion OPINION: Products of gerrymandering

OPINION: Products of gerrymandering

The Supreme Court of North Carolina struck down the state’s heavily gerrymandered districts that would have given Republicans at least 10, and possibly 11, of 14 Congressional seats. The legislative redistricting might have given the GOP veto proof majorities in both houses. In a state that has statewide races routinely decided by less five points, and often less than two, that’s clearly extreme gerrymandering. 

Republicans are screaming that they’ve been wronged. They contend that redistricting is an inherently political process and that the General Assembly is in its right to do whatever it wants. Democrats argue that maps the Republicans drew violate free and fair elections. A majority of the court agreed with them. 

A lot of Democrats want the legislature to draw maps that reflect the partisan divide in the state. I don’t agree with that, though. I agree that redistricting is a political process, but I also believe that maps can be drawn that reflect the competitive nature of the state. In fact, I believe we should be competing heavily. The exchange of ideas is what should be driving our political campaigns, not appeals to the base in districts safe for one party or the other. 

The New York Times reports that fewer than 40 of 435 Congressional seats will be competitive next year. Both parties are locking in as many seats as they can across the country. As former Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds said, “The parties are contributing to more and more single-party districts and taking the voters out of the equation.” That’s not the sign of a very democratic nation. 

Advertisements

The gerrymandering contributes to the extreme polarization we’ve seen. Candidates in both parties worry more about primary opponents than general election opponents. They are more concerned about their base voters, many of whom are out of step with the majority of the country, than swing voters who tend to be more moderate. On both the left and right flanks, compromise is a bad word, but our system of government depends on it. Gerrymandered districts produce extremists like Madison Cawthorn and Marjorie Taylor Green on the right and Ilhan Omar on the left. These people thrive on keeping the country divided by insisting some of their fellow Americans are enemies.

Personally, I don’t like the courts getting involved in redistricting. I want the legislature to act responsibly, but that’s not going to happen. I want to believe that people in government would prefer compromise to division, but that’s not happening today, either. Both sides believe in ramming as much stuff through legislatures or Congress with little regard for the will of the people or good government. Maybe if there were political consequences for such behavior, it would be a little less common.

There’s clearly no perfect way to draw districts. Redistricting commissions have done a far better job than legislatures, but they have also been far from perfect and certainly no less controversial. With the marriage of GIS and database technology in the early part of this century, redistricting became increasing extreme, allowing map-drawers to pick and choose voters down to the household. It would be nice if we could expect elected officials to act more responsibly, but that’s probably asking a little too much.

Thomas Mills is the founder and publisher of PoliticsNC.com. Before beginning PoliticsNC, Mills spent 20 years as a political and public affairs consultant. Republished from PoliticsNC.com.

 



Previous articleNCDOT: 2021 was the deadliest year in two decades on N.C. roads
Next articleLinda Parker Mullis