The History of Gerrymandering

The practice of gerrymandering is as old as the United States itself, but the term itself was born in 1812. That’s when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a bill that redrew state senate districts to favor his own political party. One of the newly created districts had a bizarre, twisted shape that was said to resemble a salamander. A cartoonist then combined “Gerry” and “salamander” to coin the term “gerrymander.”

Historically, this has been a bipartisan tool, used by whichever party holds power in a state legislature to consolidate its control. For much of the 20th century, the practice was largely unchecked. However, with the advent of powerful computers and sophisticated mapping software, politicians can now draw district lines with surgical precision, using voter data to engineer outcomes with near-certainty. This allows them to effectively choose their voters, rather than voters choosing their representatives.

The January 6th Insurrection and its Goal

On January 6, 2021, a mob of people stormed the United States Capitol. This event was not a random act of violence. It was a direct, physical attempt to stop the constitutional process of certifying the 2020 presidential election results. The mob was spurred on by false claims that the election had been stolen, and their goal was to disrupt Congress and prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

The insurrection represented a public, brazen, and violent attack on a specific, singular moment in the democratic process. It was a visible and physical assault on a government building and the people inside it, with the clear and stated purpose of overturning an election outcome.

Gerrymandering’s Systemic Impact on Democracy

While January 6th was a flashpoint of political violence, gerrymandering represents a far more pervasive, long-term threat. Rather than a singular act, it is an ongoing, systematic erosion of the democratic foundation.

The claim that gerrymandering, in its current form, is a continuation of the same effort to undermine election results is a powerful argument. Both J6 and gerrymandering attempt to subvert the will of the people and secure power. However, gerrymandering does so not through physical force, but through a calculated, legalistic process that guarantees victory for one party regardless of the popular vote. This makes it more insidious—it’s not an emergency to be responded to, but a built-in corruption of the system itself.

Furthermore, the argument that one political side is doing it to “counter” what the other side has done is an unfortunate truth of modern politics. Both Republican and Democratic parties have engaged in this practice. The focus of the fight shifts from winning over voters to out-drawing the other side’s maps. This partisan entrenchment leads to the creation of “safe seats,” where the outcome is predetermined. With no fear of losing a general election, representatives become more beholden to their party’s extreme base in primary elections, which further deepens the political divide. This self-perpetuating cycle ensures that the will of the majority of voters can be rendered irrelevant by the way district lines are drawn.

The result is a democracy where the outcome of the next election is not determined by the people, but by a game of strategic cartography, rendering it a form of Fool’s Gold—it has the appearance of a functioning democracy, but lacks its true value. This systematic disempowerment of voters is a truly heartbreaking development for the democratic process.