The bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus in Congress has embarked on a project well suited to its mission: devising a set of principles meant to bring peace to the gerrymandering wars that have been raging for so long. I’m among many people the caucus staff consulted in advancing this effort and went down to Capitol Hill in that capacity this summer to speak with participating caucus members at a productive meeting.
Since then, on July 1, the caucus released a framework for gerrymander reform that would be practicable, national in scope, and not tilted toward either party. It’s built around four core reform themes:
- Redistrict once a decade. Congress can and should confine redistricting to once every ten years following the decennial Census, with narrowly defined exceptions for things like court-ordered remapping. It’s a good candidate for an early fix because the norm collapsed only recently, having been widely, though not perfectly, observed for decades before that.
- Enact nationwide uniform standards: Require congressional districts to be drawn using clear, objective criteria while rejecting partisan advantage and incumbent protection as legitimate goals. As I never tire of pointing out, the Constitution’s Elections Clause, by its terms, authorizes Congress to set uniform standards for districting, and the legislature has in the past prescribed standards covering key elements of good districting, such as compactness.
- Support approaches that reduce partisan influence. That might include independent commissions, algorithmic mapping, and other mechanisms that promote public confidence. There is an appropriately humble tone to this plank, one involving support but not command, because it is not clear that the Elections Clause power necessarily empowers Congress to make these demands of states and because we are far from any settled state of the art on many of these approaches.
- Prescribe methods to resolve disputes promptly at the federal level. Disputes over congressional redistricting already tend to get resolved in federal court, where there are already special rules for selecting panels and avoiding delay. Further attention could help further advance goals of speed and predictability and resolve uncertainties about issues such as the role state law plays.
In a separate release, the caucus quotes me:
“Gerrymandering is one of the problems best suited to bringing lawmakers together to put the national good over party interest. Problem Solvers Caucus has come up with one of the best and most promising reform frameworks yet. It respects the Constitution, concentrates on areas where law can make a difference, and—importantly—doesn’t get caught up in the bad or unworkable ideas that often circulate on this subject,” says Walter Olson, Cato Institute
All of this assumes, of course, that future voters will return a Congress sincerely interested in reform that is both comprehensive and nonpartisan. I think it’s worth being prepared in case they do.
