Why Permanent Redistricting Reform is Essential

11 Views
admin
June 11, 2026
Election Coverage Politics

The ongoing redistricting challenges in the United States underscore the urgent need for lasting reform. Nonpartisan redistricting commissions are a step in the right direction, yet they cannot solve the entire problem alone. The decrease in competitive U.S. House districts, expected to drop to just 22 or less than 5% of total districts, intensifies political polarization. This pattern restricts true competition to party primaries, which tend to favor extreme candidates and undermine compromise.

The Supreme Court’s changes to the Voting Rights Act have limited legal constraints on partisan and racial gerrymandering, unless outright racist intent can be proven. This complicates the restoration of fair elections and minority representation. One common suggestion is utilizing nonpartisan commissions for all congressional districting. Although effective in some cases, they have not consistently prevented partisan bias or procedural issues.

The inherent problem remains demographic sorting. Democrats and minorities tend to cluster in cities, while Republicans dominate other areas. This clustering leads to ‘unintentional gerrymandering’ even when districts are drawn fairly. It’s challenging to create equal-population districts that support competitive elections and minority representation simultaneously.

“The solution is to abandon traditional districting and adopt proportional representation.”

In a winner-takes-all system, 51% of the vote translates to total control, leaving the rest without representation. By contrast, proportional representation allows a political group with a certain percentage of the vote to gain a corresponding share of representation. Numerous industrialized democracies and some U.S. cities already embrace this model, which can incorporate ranked choice voting. This method lets voters rank candidates, ensuring votes are not wasted even if initial candidates do not win.

Single transferable vote (STV), a system allowing multiple candidates to compete for multiple seats in one election, aids in achieving proportional representation. This has been successfully implemented in cities like Minneapolis and Portland, improving outcomes for racial and ethnic minorities. A longstanding congressional bill, the Fair Representation Act, proposes extending STV to the U.S. House. It suggests at-large STV elections in states with up to five seats and multimember districts where each elects multiple representatives in states with more.

Adopting multimember districts and minimizing districting limits gerrymandering opportunities. Proportional representation can benefit various political factions across different states by reducing the spoiler dilemma and bolstering competition with increased voter turnout.

For Democrats, prioritizing redistricting reform if they regain Congress aligns with their long-term interests. The demographic sorting currently benefits Republicans, pressuring Democrats to choose between maximizing their gains and ensuring minority representation. Ultimately, moving beyond single-member districts may serve a greater interest for all.

Steven Mulroy is an experienced author of ‘Rethinking U.S. Election Law: Unskewing The System.’ He has experience as a voting section litigator for the U.S. Justice Department, a former law professor, and serves as a district attorney for Memphis and Shelby County, Tenn.