Gerrymandering Lets Politicians Pick Voters, Not the Reverse

Gerrymandering is one of those words people skim past. It sounds technical. Distant. Like something for political insiders to argue about.

But it means someone else may decide how much your voice counts in elections.

Every 10 years, after the census, states redraw voting district lines to reflect population changes. What matters is who draws those lines. When politicians control the map, they shape voters rather than reflect them.

They pack opposing voters into a few districts to contain their influence. They split the rest so those voters spread too thin to win anywhere. Same voters and opinions produce different results.

The term dates to 1812, when Massachusetts Gov. Elbridge Gerry approved a distorted district map that critics mocked as a "Gerry-mander."

Today, mapmakers use precise data to predict behavior down to neighborhoods or blocks. They design districts that look competitive but are not.

Former President Barack Obama warned in 2016 that politicians should not pick voters through district drawing. "We have to end the practice of drawing our congressional districts so that politicians can pick their voters, and not the other way around," he said.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis criticized Virginia's map as "grotesque."

In Wisconsin, Democrats won a popular majority in 2012 but secured only 39 of 99 Assembly seats. In 2018, they took 52 percent of the total vote but only 35 percent of the seats.

Safe districts make elections less competitive. Fewer voices matter. Politicians do not need to persuade across differences.

Former Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse discussed this on "60 Minutes," warning how tribalism erodes engagement across divides. Gerrymandering fuels that trend.

The process helps one side win but costs voices overall. It concentrates power with mapmakers and weakens representation. Not every vote carries equal weight.