The Power of the Line

Every ten years, after the census, electoral district boundaries are usually redrawn. The process is supposed to reflect population changes. But when maps are drawn for partisan advantage, the result is gerrymandering.

Crack and Pack

“Cracking” spreads opposing voters across many districts so they never form a majority. “Packing” concentrates them into a small number of districts, where they may win overwhelmingly but have little influence elsewhere.

Both tactics create wasted votes—votes that do not help win an additional seat. A party can therefore receive a substantial share of the statewide vote while winning far fewer districts than its support might suggest.

Precision Politics

Gerrymandering has existed since the early republic; the term emerged after an 1812 Massachusetts map associated with Governor Elbridge Gerry was said to resemble a salamander. In the twenty-first century, detailed data and high-speed computing have made map manipulation far more precise.

Since 2010, partisan campaigns to control state legislatures have helped determine who draws congressional maps. The resulting boundaries can lock in political advantages for years, even as public opinion changes.

The Supreme Court Question

Challenges to partisan gerrymandering have repeatedly reached the Supreme Court. The Court’s refusal to settle a clear constitutional standard has, critics argue, encouraged increasingly aggressive mapmaking.

Gerrymandering can also affect minority representation. Concentrating minority voters may help elect representatives from the same communities, but it can also limit their influence to only a few districts.

A map looks neutral on paper. Yet its curves and corridors can decide whose votes matter, which races are competitive, and what kind of government emerges.