All District Map Drawing is Political, but at its most Extreme, it strikes at the heart of Representative Democracy. By letting Politicians pick their Voters rather than the other way around, this practice, known as Partisan Gerrymandering, corrodes the relationship between Lawmakers and their Constituents. it also discourages Bipartisanship and undermines the Public's Trust in Government.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly steered clear of solving this age-old problem. but on Tuesday, in a Case that could transform the American Political Landscape, the Justices will hear arguments over whether, and how, Partisan Gerrymandering can be reined in.

If any case could convince the Court that it's time to step in and find a solution fast, it's the one they're hearing on Tuesday. Gill v. Whitford, a Lawsuit out of Wisconsin that offers a stark lesson in just how Distorted the Map Drawing Process has become in an era of sophisticated Mapping Technology and intense Political Polarization.

In 2010, Republicans won Unified Control of Wisconsin's Government for the first time in years. To keep it, they turned the Decennial Redistricting Process, which began in 2011, into a clandestine Partisan Operation. They set up a Map Room at a Republican-allied Law Firm, used refined Data Analysis to draw new Republican friendly District Lines, then invited only Republican Lawmakers to come in and see their New Districts, after they signed Nondisclosure Agreements.

In 2012 it worked. Republican Candidates won 48% of the vote, but 60 of the State's 99 Legislative Seats. In 2014, Republicans again won 48% of the vote, but 63 of the State's 90 Legislative Seats. In other words, Republicans had figured out how to Draw Maps to lock in their Legislative Majority no matter how many, or few, votes they received. In 2016, a Federal Court in Wisconsin struck down the Maps under both the First and 14th Amendments.

There are several straightforward ways to measure the degree of Partisanship. The Plaintiffs have pointed to one in particular, called the Efficiency Gap, which looks at the difference between each Party's Wasted votes. That means every vote cast for its Losing Candidates, and all the votes for its Winning Candidates above the bare Majority needed to Win. The Greater the difference, the Higher the Partisan Bias in the Maps. The current Break Point is 8%.

Measures like this could appeal to Justice Anthony Kennedy, who said in a 2004 Case, that he was open to the possibility of a Standard that would allow the Court to Rule on Partisan Gerrymanders. Justice Kennedy, as usual, hold the Key vote on the issue, since the Four more Liberal Justices are probably prepared to Strike Down Wisconsin's Maps, while the Four Conservative Justices are likely to say the Court shouldn't get involved in the Political Process.

Extreme Gerrymandering is a problem that by definition can't be fixed through the normal Political Process, since the whole point is to make it hard or I'm possible for certain Voters to make their Voices heard. That's not Government of the People, it's Government in Spite of the People.

The better, although not perfect, solution is to take Map Drawing away from self-interested Politicians and put it in the hands of an Independent or Bipartisan Commission, as more than a dozen States have done, helping to make Races both more competitive and Less Partisan.

Until that happens everywhere, the Court must step in and Stop the most Egregious Gerrymanders. If it refuses to, the problem will only get Worse.









NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker