The Process of Redistricting in the US - Essay Example

? History and Political Science    Should legislatures be removed from the redistricting process for congress and their own seats and would doing so improve the public policy process (26.07.11) Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………….. 3 Main Body……………………………………………………………. 3 Conclusion……………………………………………………………. 6 Works Cited…………………………………………………………... 7 Abstract The process of redistricting in the US is different from redistricting in other parts of the world. In the US, redistricting is fundamentally political because legislators are responsible to draw electoral districts in many states. Courts have been intervening in the process to a great extent. These aspects of redistricting are inter-related and have made the process highly controversial because the outcomes are mostly prejudiced in favoring one political party over another. Redistricting matters a lot because people’s representatives in the state and federal governments frame regulations, which impact several issues such as taxes, security, prices and the environment in which people live. This paper will examine whether state legislatures should be removed from the redistricting process for Congress and whether doing so will improve the public policy process. Main Body Elections are held at regular intervals in ensuring that people’s representatives work towards welfare activities. All state legislators and many legislators in the Congress represent districts that partition states and voters into geographical regions. In majority districts, voters are eventually represented by legislators that win the maximum votes. The manner in which voters are assembled into districts has a strong bearing on the people that will represent them and the kind of policies they will follow. For instance, a district comprising mainly of farmers will, in all probability elect a legislator who will work towards their cause. But a district that comprises of mainly urban citizens would in all probability elect a person who has different concerns. In similar vein, regions characterized with groups of similar language, ethnicity, race and political lineage will probably elect a person with similar characteristics. Therefore, the manner in which the districts are created can impact the constitution of the legislature. It is thus apparent that there would be different legislators if the districts are drawn in different ways. The process of redistricting mostly draws a lot of attention and controversies are created because the process determines the communities that will be represented and the laws that will be made (Griffith, 2011). Redistricting is resorted to in the United States in reacting to change in populations that are determined by the outcomes of the census. The state legislature is vested with the authority to create redistricting plans that are in some cases subject to the governor’s approval. Every state in the US has its own law and constitutional requirements to redistrict. There are some aspects of the law concerning the federal government that have been introduced following decisions by the US Supreme Court. The Congress established the Voting Rights Act in 1965 that was amended in 1982. The Congress also exerts some control in the context of putting restrictions on the creation of electoral boundaries during the redistricting process. The courts in the US have played a major role in developing and interpreting redistricting laws. Essentially, a redistricting plan should create districts that have a balanced population and should not reduce the say of minority voters. In order to improve upon the public policy process, the redistricting plan should give credence to conventional redistricting issues such as contiguity, density and respect towards political subdivisions and communities (Canon, 1999). According to Halper and Simon (2011), removing state legislatures from the redistricting process would create better chances of equality of population and equality of opportunities for minorities. During the years following the First World War, populations in the US had started migrating from rural to urban areas because of which many legislatures reduced their interest in the decennial tasks pertaining to redistricting. They did not comply with their constitutional duties and gradually urban areas were found to become inadequately represented relative to the characteristics of the populations. Equal opportunities for minorities was a major issue taken up by US courts in terms of rejecting redistricting plans that referred to the consideration of the minority populations (Levitt, 2010). There is need to initiate changes in the redistricting process because of the need for reforms that can be brought about only with a changed approach. Mostly, citizens are left out of the redistricting process and most people hold that elected legislators enjoy a virtual insurance policy to be re-elected, thus allowing them to decide upon what kind of constituencies are to be drawn in terms of district boundaries (Raja, 2009). Citizens have repeatedly represented that voters should have the right to choose their elected representatives instead of allowing elected representatives to decide who their voters will be. It is mostly felt that if elected representatives are permitted to create district boundaries that favor their own political ambitions, the very purpose of a democracy is undermined. Such processes impose challenges to the core practices of healthy debates and vigorous competition (Bullock, 2010). Miller (2010) studies indicate that citizens have repeatedly held that the present redistricting process is not characterized with openness, transparency and easy understanding. In the current redistricting process, people find that they are entirely aloof from the process, which is obviously not justified. A number of issues make the present process complex, such as economic environment, size, history and social and political diversity relative to the Voting Rights Act. However, in spite of such complications, a transparent redistricting process will allow people to recognize and understand the possible alternatives. It has been observed that the present redistricting process violates the usual tenets of efficient and proper district compositions. This feeling arises because not much heed is paid to compactness of size, adjacent boundaries and communities of mutual interest. Many districts in several states have been found to be violating these basic and historically acceptable tenets. Mostly, people in a particular district are not aware of who represents them or how they can get in touch with him. Similarly, elected representatives are on record to have said that they face difficulties in effectively representing citizens in far flung areas that are not compact or have adjacent boundaries. Therefore, it is necessary that basic standards of fairness should be applied to the redistricting process to affect better public policy processes (Rodriguez, 1991). Conclusion Given that the US is amongst the few democratic countries where legislators continue to have authority to create electoral boundaries, and that most countries have already transformed the process and relocated the work to independent functionaries, it is imperative that steps be taken to improve upon the process for the better interests of all sections of the population. In view of the fact that elected representatives have a free hand to draw boundaries, the entire process proves to become opinionated whereby the outcomes are often politically prejudiced. Works Cited Bullock, Charles S. Redistricting: The Most Political Activity in America,  Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010. Canon, David. Race, Redistricting, and Representation: The Unintended Consequences of Black Majority Districts, University Of Chicago Press, 1999. Griffith, B. E. Redistricting in the Post-Shaw World, National Council of State Legislatures. 2011. Halper, Evan and Richard Simon. District Maps Draw a New Political Landscape, 11 June, 2011. Miller, J.C. Community as a Redistricting Principle, Indiana Law Journal Supplement, Vol. 5, 2010. Levitt, Justin, A Citizen’s Guide to Redistricting, UCSD Library, 2010. Raja, R. L. Redistricting: Reading Between the Lines, Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 12: 209-223., 2009. Rodriguez, L. Getting Point of Redistricting. Houston Chronicle, August 24, 1991. Read More