There is a great deal of public distrust in U.S. elections right now, and unfortunately, the usual process for how congressional and state legislative districts are drawn is unlikely to bolster voters’ confidence that elections are free and fair. Every ten years, state legislatures redraw their district boundaries to account for the shifting population, usually enacting maps as they do any other legislation. If one party controls the process, they can draw district lines to maximize their party’s share of seats (i.e., partisan gerrymandering). Or, both parties can collaborate to ensure safe districts for incumbents, who can cruise towards an easy re-election (i.e., bipartisan gerrymandering). All forms of gerrymandering undermine the idea that voters should choose their representatives, rather than the other way around—and therefore undermine trust in democracy.
To build trust by making the redistricting process more transparent and involving the public in the process, it’s important to have the right tools. Since the last redistricting cycle, new software has created avenues for the public to engage in the process, including submitting maps, evaluating maps, and giving public input to redistricters like indicating their communities of interest (COIs)—geographically contiguous groups with shared cultural or economic characteristics that create common representational interests.
And once the public has given input (as is standard in a majority of states), it’s important to determine the extent to which groups of voters are kept whole within a district. A large group of voters may have their electoral power needlessly diminished if they are concentrated within a single district.
Keeping localities whole, such as counties or COIs, has several benefits to democracy