In my most recent column, I explained why I believe Republicans are not a force for positive change in our country and how Democrats need to take a more active role in trying to stop them. In doing so, I advocated for the use of gerrymandering so that Democrats could retake control of the House of Representatives. Using the redistricting process to create deliberate electoral advantages can, along with other strategies, allow Democrats to regain their legislative control.
While undemocratic in nature, gerrymandering can be used as a radical process for progressive policy. With narrow margins in the house, it could very well decide who ends up with an advantage. In addition to an advantage, a larger Democratic majority would also be possible through gerrymandering, which would be advantageous for controlling what bills pass through the House. While redistricting is typically only done every 10 years following the U.S. Census, it can become a long, drawn out process. Even if historically Democratic states cannot be gerrymandered this election cycle, maps will be redrawn eventually, giving Democrats more opportunities to control the House.
A Democratic advantage would not only be convenient for passing strong Democratic legislation, but also justified, considering the increasingly radical nature of the Republican party. In a potential second Donald Trump presidency, a Democratic house will provide a safeguard against any potential far-right legislation that could be passed with a Republican majority.
The Republican Party prioritizes their loyalty to Trump, even if it means subverting democracy. This commitment is worrisome, and with a possible movement to repeal the 22nd Amendment, Republicans may have plans to keep Trump around longer than we think. As such, using gerrymandering to ensure a Democratic majority would become even more necessary.
Another way that strategic gerrymandering could help Democrats give themselves an advantage is by creating more competitive districts for Republicans. An example of this isMichigan’s 9th district, where, during the most recent Congressional elections, Democrats intentionally donated money and resources to a far-right wing Republican candidate during the Republican primary. As a result, the Republican candidate won his primary and went on to lose the general election. The candidate he beat in the primary was an incumbent — one of the more moderate Republicans in the House of Representatives and generally considered to be a better candidate in the general election.
This strategy, if applied in other congressional districts, can be very effective at generating a Democratic advantage in the House of Representatives from states that are not as solidly Democratic.
It’s important to clarify that gerrymandering is a transitory and temporary strategy. Democrats should use their eventual majority to get rid of gerrymandering for good. They have already proposed this bill in Congress to do this; they just need a majority to pass it. Gerrymandering itself could help them get there.
While it may seem counterintuitive to get rid of a strategy that helped Democrats obtain control in the first place, gerrymandering does not provide any merit to our democracy. The benefit to gerrymandering is not itself, but the fact that it can give Democrats an advantage in Congress.
Opponents of this strategy would point out the fact that in order to supposedly save our country’s democratic process, you are sacrificing it. If the Democrats, in any way, manufacture a house majority in their favor, many people may not see it as legitimate or democratic. Democrats have recently negated Republican gains by using gerrymandering, and further efforts to ensure a majority for their party could be seen as undemocratic. It is written in the Declaration of Independence that a government’s power is derived from the consent of the governed, and using this strategy definitely corrupts this principle.
These claims do hold legitimacy, but the threat that Republicans pose goes beyond traditional principle. Employing the use of election manipulation strategies may certainly delegitimize and harm our democratic processes in the short term. However, staving off the current Republican party and thus necessitating its reform will secure our democracy in the much longer term.
While using gerrymandering for political gain seems at odds to our democratic ideals, the current threat of an increasingly radical Republican party demands radical measures. Democratic control of the House, even if achieved through such means, would act as a barrier against potential far-right actions. Moreover, forcing the Republican party to reconsider its extreme elements will allow for a more stable and accountable political outlook in the future, ultimately strengthening rather than undermining democratic principles.
Gabe Efros is an Opinion Columnist who writes about American culture and politics. He can be reached at gefros@umich.edu.