Congressional Redistricting Amendment
The United States Constitution calls for apportioning Congressional districts according to the population, as counted in the most recent census. In most cases, the Congressional districts within each state are drawn by the state legislatures.
In 1812, Elbridge Gerry was the Governor of Massachusetts, and his party created an oddly-shaped district in order to give them an advantage in the upcoming Senatorial election. The Boston Gazette combined the name "Gerry" with the word "salamander," and cartooned the district as a monster called a "Gerry-mander." Ever since then, the policy of creating tortuous electoral districts for political advantage has been called "gerrymandering."
In some states, gerrymandering is commonplace. State legislatures mold the districts for the advantage of their party, and incumbent Congressmen are almost always reelected. For example, if you examine a map of the Texas Congressional districts, you can almost see the gerrymanders wiggling all around the state!
In the past, the Texas legislature was controlled by the Democratic Party, so they gerrymandered the districts to favor the Democrats. Then--when control of the Texas legislature shifted to the Republican Party--they did not wait for a new census, but redistricted the state immediately, gerrymandering it into districts that favor the Republicans.
This is a proposal to improve the Congressional redistricting process:
1. Create the Congressional Districts after each census, by a majority vote in the House of Representatives.
2. The new districts shall be drawn to conform to the following rules, in descending order of priority:
a) Every district within a state must be contiguous.
b) Every district within a state must be equal in population.
c) The districts within each state must be drawn so that they minimize the number of counties that contain more than one Congressional district.
d) The districts within each state must be drawn so that they minimize the number of counties that contain more than two Congressional districts.
e) The districts within each state must be drawn so that they minimize the number of counties that contain more than three Congressional districts.
f) If a county contains more than one Congressional district, the districts must be drawn so that they minimize the number of cities that contain more than one Congressional district.
- After the House of Representatives decides on the new Congressional District map of each state, the new map is sent to the United States Supreme Court.
- If any member of the United States Senate objects to any state redistricting map, he has 30 days to submit a redistricting map that better conforms to the rules 2(a) through 2(f).
- After 30 days, the United States Supreme Court must decide which redistricting map for each state best conforms to the rules 2(a) through 2(f), and that redistricting map shall be adopted.
- The districting map that is decided by the Supreme Court will not be changed until the next decennial census is counted.
Advantages of this proposal:
1. The current redistricting standard of "compact" in the phrase "compact and contiguous" is too vague. This proposal provides clearly defined rules to be followed.
- This proposal forces Congressional districts to be drawn along preexisting county and city lines, rather than arbitrary lines drawn purely for political advantage.
- This proposal moves Congressional redistricting from the state legislatures to Congress.
- Since Congressional redistricting directly affects the House of Representatives, they are given the primary responsibility for drawing the new district boundaries.
- The individual members of the United States Senate are given the power to improve upon any state map that is created by the House of Representatives.
- The Supreme Court has the ultimate power to decide which redistricting map best fits the rules.
- Since the census is taken once every 10 years, the Congressional districts will not be changed more often than that.
The provision for appeal by the members of the Senate is unusual, but it has these benefits:
- Decisions made by the House of Representatives can be motivated by partisan politics. Giving every member of the United States Senate the power to appeal any state's redistricting opens up the process to objections by the minority party.
- Several alternative maps can be proposed for any given state. This answers the reply, "If you don't like it, then show me something better!"
- It is inspired by the classic problem of how to divide an irregularly-shaped piece of cake for two guests. The solution is to tell Guest A to cut the cake into two pieces, and then let Guest B choose which piece he wants. In the case of redistricting, if the House of Representatives does not follow the rules, all 100 members of the Senate have the opportunity to do a better job.
Disadvantages to this proposal:
1. The House of Representatives, rather than the 50 state legislatures, will forced to take time to draw the redistricting maps. Time spent by Congressmen is more valuable than time spent by state legislators.
2. The Supreme Court will be forced to take time every 10 years to decide which redistricting map best fits the rules.
| 
