
Let voters, not politicians, decide elections in democracy
Tribune News Service
The effort in Texas to hastily redraw congressional maps for partisan advantage reveals vulnerabilities in our democratic system, subject to exploitation by bad actors. As this crisis escalates into multiple states, it threatens the notion that voters should determine who wins elections.
Driving the effort to rig these maps is President Donald Trump's anxiety over potentially losing control of the US House of Representatives in next year's midterm elections. To avoid that outcome, Trump asked Texas Republicans to redraw voter boundaries in order to add five more Republican seats.
US Attorney General Pam Bondi's Justice Department wrote to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, falsely asserting that the current maps violate federal law. The letter demanded that Texas further exacerbate its existing partisan gerrymander by adopting an even-more-audaciously partisan mid-decade redistricting plan. Abbott obeyed, calling the Texas legislature into special session to adopt new maps. In response, most members of the Democratic caucus in the Texas House fled the state to deprive the legislature of a quorum and forestall Trump's plan. Abbott declared this action unlawful, asserting the lawmakers can be removed and replaced, and ordering their arrest. (It appears Abbott will now call a second special session, and the Democratic House members will return.)
This has triggered another troubling development: Democrats have publicly proposed that 'blue' states respond in kind. They say California, New York, Illinois and possibly other Democrat-led states should immediately redistrict to create more Democratic-leaning congressional districts. And there is talk that Republicans in Ohio, Florida, Indiana and Missouri may re-tinker with their maps as well.
As an advocate for redistricting reform in Wisconsin, I believe nothing good can come from Trump's redistricting arms race. This is happening solely due to his unwillingness to abide by democratic norms, which is nothing to emulate (as some are beginning to recognise). Rather, this should be an opportunity to think anew about the process and standards used to draw the representative districts that underlie our democracy.
The constitutional guarantee of 'one person, one vote' means each of us should have an equal say in who represents us in government and makes the laws by which we all live. We uphold this principle by redistricting at the beginning of each decade, using new census data to divide our population into electoral districts, for everything from city councils to state legislatures to the US House of Representatives.
Drawing district lines has always been entwined with efforts to game the system for advantage. These efforts, called gerrymandering, can take many forms. But all wrest power away from voters by fixing electoral outcomes, transforming campaigns that should be contests of ideas into preordained charades. Voters have little say because the district lines are drawn, using incredibly precise partisan data, in ways that preclude actual competition.
Yet the harm from allowing Texas to ram through Trump's plan will be compounded if blue states retaliate with new maps to balance the net partisan impact. This, too, would threaten the foundational concept — the credo of our nation — that we, the people, choose our leaders.
There is a better way. Districts can and should be drawn both to avoid significantly advantaging one political party over another and to increase electoral competition. Whenever it is otherwise, elected officials have less incentive to be responsive to voters.
Law Forward, the pro-democracy law firm I head, is currently urging the Wisconsin courts to evaluate the state's congressional map, which was purposely drawn to give Republicans an advantage. We believe the state's courts should recognise competition as a relevant criterion in evaluating maps. And courts across the country should follow suit.
Court intervention is not the ultimate solution. Every state should adopt independent, nonpartisan redistricting models. The Wisconsin Fair Maps Coalition is holding hearings around the state, engaging voters in discussion about how maps should be drawn and what factors should be considered.
Several other states have adopted nonpartisan redistricting models that are working. We should demand this approach be expanded, not restricted or scrapped. What's happening in Texas is a travesty for democracy. The consequences affect every American. We, as voters, must demand better.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
US-Palestinian advocacy group condemns Trump administration's sanctions on ICC officials
A US-Palestinian advoacy group has condemned the Trump administration's decision to sanction ICC judges and prosecutors as a "disgrace." "When the US punishes judges for daring to pursue justice for Palestinian victims, it confirms what so many of us already fear — that international law doesn't apply to the powerful, regardless of the gravity of their crimes," Sandra Tamari, Executive Director of Adalah Justice Project, told Middle East Eye. 'Palestinians turned to the ICC because every other door was slammed in our faces. And now, even that door is being torched. These sanctions are not just political; they are moral failure. If genocide and apartheid can't even be investigated without retaliation, then what justice is left for our people?' she added.


Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Majority of Americans believe US should act to help starving Palestinians in Gaza
Nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the US should take action to help Palestinians facing starvation in Gaza, according to the results of a new poll released on Wednesday. The vast majority of respondents, 65 percent, believed that the US should help Palestinians, in contrast to 28 percent who disagreed in the Reuters/Ipsos poll. Republican voters made up almost half (41 percent) of the 28 percent polled who did not think the US should help people in Gaza. Palestinians are currently facing a famine due to Israel's blockade which only allows limited quantities of food, water and fuel into the Strip, in what has been widely condemned as a genocide by human rights organisations, including the United Nations. An Amnesty International report released on Monday said that Israel is carrying out a deliberate campaign of starvation in Gaza, systematically destroying the health, well-being and social fabric of Palestinian life. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The poll was conducted within a few weeks of France, Malta, Australia, Canada and the UK announcing that they planned to recognise a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. When asked about the recognition of a Palestinian state, more than half of Americans, 58 percent, believe that every country in the United Nations should recognise Palestine as a nation. A third of respondents, 33 percent, did not believe that UN members should recognise a Palestinian state. Nine percent opted not to respond to the question. Israel deliberately starving Gaza, Amnesty International says Read More » The UK's recognition of a Palestinian state has been made contingent on whether a ceasefire is achieved in Gaza. Hamas has accepted the latest proposal set out by mediators, but Israel has not yet submitted an official response. The proposal is essentially the same as the one Hamas accepted on 1 June before US negotiators pulled out. Israel is said to be reviewing Hamas's response to the deal, which would include a 60-day truce and the release of half of the Israeli captives still alive in Gaza. A majority of Americans, 59 percent, also believe that Israel's military response in Gaza has been excessive, while 33 percent of respondents disagreed with this assessment. The numbers show a steady increase in the number of people who believe that Israel's military response has been disproportionately violent in response to the October 7 attacks since the beginning of the year. In a similar Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted in February 2024, 53 percent of respondents believed that Israel's response had been excessive, compared to 42 percent who disagreed. Israel's war on Gaza has killed well over 62,000 Palestinians, while just under 270 have died from starvation. The Reuters/Ipsos survey gathered responses from 4,446 US adults online across the country over six days. Reuters/ Ipsos said the poll had a margin of error of around two percentage points.


Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Lawsuit demands Trump administration reveal Gaza Humanitarian Foundation funding
The New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) said on Wednesday that it filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration for its failure to comply with a Freedom of Information Act (Foia) request demanding the financial records of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). " Today's lawsuit seeks records that could shed light on not only the decision-making process... but also on the creation of GHF, its funding and how it plans to use" a US government grant, CCR said. "The Center for Constitutional Rights is particularly interested in information that could reveal whether the administration's distribution of funds has any link to President Trump's 'Gaza Riviera' plan, which would cleanse the area of Palestinians and redevelop it for investors," the statement said. Since GHF began its food parcel distribution operations in southern Gaza in May, its funding sources have been shrouded in mystery. The scandal-plagued aid scheme saw its first CEO resign because of human rights concerns, before over 1,000 Palestinians were killed by Israeli soldiers at its now four locations in the enclave. US military contractors who staff the GHF have also been seen in videos shooting at aid seekers - something former US special forces soldier Anthony Aguilar confirmed after leaving the organisation. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "Operating in close coordination with the Israeli government and US for-profit private military contractors, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) sites have become synonymous with scenes of chaos and carnage," CCR said in a statement announcing its lawsuit. "GHF, far from alleviating suffering in Gaza, is contributing to the forced displacement, killing and furtherance of genocide of Palestinians." War on Gaza: GHF aid scheme is 'orchestrated killing,' says MSF Read More » The US State Department had earlier this summer approved $30m in funding for the GHF, despite insisting for weeks that it was an independent entity. The agency exempted it from the audit usually required for new aid grantees, and also overrode vetting mechanisms, including 58 internal objections to GHF's funding application. Reporters were told at a briefing last week that "roughly half" of the $30m amount had already been delivered. But where GHF drew its initial tens of millions of dollars, to pay the salaries and the travel expenses of what critics have described as "mercenaries", remains unknown. Chapin Fay, a new GHF spokesperson, told the UK's Channel 4 last week that western European nations have invested in GHF, but that he would not reveal which ones. CCR said it was also demanding an investigation into the legality of GHF's charter in the US state of Delaware, where the organisation is registered as a charitable nonprofit. CCR called on Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings to "investigate GHF and sue to revoke its charter on grounds that it is illegally abusing its privileges with its complicity in war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide".