Congressional Redistricting, Delayed by Pandemic, Now Approaches Completion

By: Vincent Behnke (2/14/22)

            The completion of the 2020 Census kicked off the decennial process during which every jurisdiction in the United States redraws its representatives’ districts, from town councils to the U.S. Congress. The COVID-19 pandemic slowed the process by several months because the Census Bureau experienced delays in collecting and releasing its data. Districts must be finalized by candidate filing deadlines this spring. Thus, the states have little time to determine new districts, and delays could postpone legal actions against gerrymanders until after the 2022 midterm elections[1].

In each state, congressional districts are drawn by either the state legislature, an appointed commission, or the courts. State legislatures conduct most redistricting operations, and independent commissions largely operate in the western United States. Courts solely act when the primary redistricting authority fails to enact a map by its given deadline. Thus far, 35 states have enacted maps (7 of them by commission), and of the 15 outstanding, 9 are in the hands of their respective state legislatures, and 6 are subject to the jurisdiction of the courts. The remaining maps should all be completed by March 2022.[2]

Beyond a mandate to ensure roughly equal populations and not dilute the voting power of racial minorities, the federal government imposes no requirements upon the formation of districts. Thus, numerous states create maps that fail to represent their partisanship or communities, commonly referred to as gerrymanders. Gerrymanders typically derive from efforts to disproportionately benefit one party or protect existing incumbents. However, no precise definition exists for a gerrymander, which in part justified the Supreme Court’s refusal to outlaw the practice in 2019. Two common measurements of gerrymandering include the “median seat” and “efficiency gap” models. The former method compares the partisanship of the median seat versus the state as a whole, and the latter measures the percentage of each party’s votes that do not contribute to a winning candidate (“wasted” votes). However, both models suffer from a lack of precision and fail to form a uniform legal standard.

One key state to watch is California, which claims 12% of House seats and employs an independent Citizens’ Redistricting Commission. Enacted by ballot measure in 2008, the Commission consists of roughly equal numbers of registered Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. These members must have a professional credential or community connection relevant to the redistricting process. The Commission cannot consider partisan data or take incumbents into account. Its sole mandate concerns the protection of “communities of interest”, which California defines as “a contiguous population which shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation.”[3] The Commission received public testimony for several months beforedrafting its maps, which it approved unanimously in December. If the Commission’s new maps continue to produce competitive elections and fair community representation

[1] Kennedy, Lesley. “2020 Census Delays and the Impact on Redistricting.” National Conference of State Legislatures, www.ncsl.org/research/redistricting/2020-census-delays-and-the-impact-on-redistricting-637261879.aspx.

[2] Best, Ryan, and Aaron Bycoffe. “What Redistricting Looks like in Every State.” FiveThirtyEight, 2 Feb. 2022, projects.fivethirtyeight.com/redistricting-2022-maps/?cid=rrpromo.

[3] “FAQ.” California Citizens Redistricting Commission, State of California, wedrawthelines.ca.gov/faq/.