To rig a voting district in such a way as to
1) Make sure a particular party gets the most votes
2) A particular populations vote is deluded.
See the Texas redistricting fight of 2003 on.
2007-01-08 12:21:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by amatukaze 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are usually three kinds of gerrymandering.
One is "racial," which the Supreme Court said is unconstitutional in a string of cases starting with Shaw v. Reno, 1993. In that kind, the goal is to draw the district in such a way that the population will be black majority or hispanic majority. And in this form of gerrymandering, the district encompasses only select parts of cities which are far apart from one another.
The other two kinds of gerrymandering are partisan rather than racial. The Supreme Court has been quite schizophrenic about these. The Court has talked about this, but has not given a clear indication as to whether these kinds are acceptable or unacceptable. And I use my own terminology to describe these two types -- terminology that I've never seen anyone else use.
Bipartisan gerrymandering means that the goal is to protect all of the incumbents of that state -- both the Democrat and Republican incumbents. Imagine a state with only 2 seats in the House. Imagine that Al Gore carried that state by a narrow margin of 51% to 49% for Bush. Now imagine that, of the 2 districts in that state, district 1 voted for Bush by 51% and it has been electing a Republican to the House, while district 2 vote for Gore by 53% and it has been electing a Democrat. If the state legislature's goal is to ensure protection for both of those incumbents (bipartisan gerrymandering), then they will redesign district 1 so that it has a greater number of Bush voters in it (pulled in from district 2). When they've done with the districts, the new version of district 1 will have voted 53% for Bush while the new version of district 2 will have voted 55% for Gore.
Unipartisan gerrymandering means that the dominant political party of the state -- the one which controls both chambers of the state legislature -- purposely tries to design the districts in such a way as to increase the number of members of their party getting elected and to decrease the numbers of the other party. To me, the best example of this in the recent past was in Maryland. During the 1990s, the voters of that state elected 4 Democrats and 4 Republicans to the U.S. House of Representatives. But Maryland is, in fact, a heavily Democratic state, with Democrats having an overwhelming majority in the state legislature. So in 2001, the Democrats in the state legislature purposely designed the districts in such a way as to doom the chances of re-election of 2 of the Republicans. Sure enough, in 2002, 2004, and 2006 the voters of that state have elected 6 Democrats and 2 Republicans to the House.
2007-01-08 12:52:18
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
To increase the overall representation of a particular political party, racial or other group. And conversely to deny representation to an opposing group.
So if a region elects 10 representatives (10 districts), and Statewide the voters- 60 % of whom are BLUE PARTY, 40 % are RED PARTY, vote for their party...you would expect 6 BLUES and 4 REDS to be elected.
Drawing the election districts however I could make sure that all the districts had 60% BLUES, so the REDS could never elect someone, majority gets all 10 representatives. Even if the REDS were all living close to each other. I would just carve off portions of RED to add to majority BLUE areas.
2007-01-08 12:33:23
·
answer #3
·
answered by t S 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
To disenfranchise voters. However, with the new paperless electronic voting machines, Gerrymandering is an antiquated way of destroying American democracy. America’s enemies now have gone high tech.
2007-01-08 12:24:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
to get elected. they change the boundaries of voting district to include likely supporters and exclude the opposition. it is the american tradition. more bs and more reason to turn out all the bs politicians. reform should become the no. 1 issue for the next several elections or we all slide down the slippery slope of economic disaster.
2007-01-08 12:24:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The altering of congressional district boundaries so one party has an advantage in an election.
2007-01-08 12:22:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by jack w 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you can change the political demographics of a Congressional district, you may get your party's candidate elected.
2007-01-08 12:26:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Yo it's Me 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
to get the most congressman possible from the party in power in any given state.
2007-01-08 12:23:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by notmyrealname 3
·
0⤊
0⤋