Gerrymandering: North Carolina’s Greatest Sin
Gerrymandering is one of the most persistent and corrosive practices in politics today. Its exploitation by political parties — especially here in North Carolina — stands as a profound moral failure. At its core, gerrymandering undermines the principles of representative democracy, subordinating the will of the people to the interests of partisan actors.
How it all started
The term “gerrymander” dates to 1812, when Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry approved a state senate district resembling a salamander to benefit his own party. The practice of drawing political boundaries to favor one group over another soon became widespread, influencing local, state, and national elections. Over time, advances in analytics and mapping technology have made gerrymanders even more precise and effective, allowing parties to manipulate district lines with astonishing sophistication.
Initially, gerrymandering was a tool incumbents used to shore up electoral strength. But by the early twenty-first century, the rise of computer modeling turned this practice into a science. Legislators could use demographic data to “pack” opposition voters into as few districts as possible or “crack” them across many districts to dilute their voting power. This has led to “predetermined elections” where competition is scarce and outcomes don’t reflect actual voter preferences.
The North Carolina Case Study
Our state is a well-documented case study in extreme partisan gerrymandering. Both major parties have engaged in the practice, though more recently, Republicans have taken gerrymandering to a hellish artform. In 2016, a federal court found that North Carolina’s congressional districts were unconstitutionally gerrymandered to favor Republicans, describing some districts as “among the most extreme partisan gerrymanders in American history.” Similar challenges and court-ordered redrawings have proliferated in the state, with several North Carolina maps overturned for excessive partisan bias or racial discrimination.
Despite public outrage and repeated court interventions, partisanship has routinely trumped democratic fairness. Both the state legislature and national parties have prioritized short-term electoral gains over long-term legitimacy. Even after court-imposed redistricting, efforts to circumvent fair representation continue, with lawmakers searching for new ways to entrench their own power.
Gerrymandered maps often split communities that tend to vote together. A stark example was seen in Greensboro, where the city was divided between districts to dilute its influence. The North Carolina A&T State University’s campus was split specifically to reduce the impact of students and Black residents. As a result, residents weren’t able to elect representatives reflecting their interests.
Recent maps continue to favor Republicans. Analyses about the upcoming cycle project an 11-3 Republican majority in Congress, even though the state’s electorate is nearly evenly split.
A Devastating Moral Cost
The moral failure of gerrymandering lies in its undermining democratic ideals and in its corrosive social effects. By manipulating boundaries to nullify one party’s votes, the legislature is effectively telling entire communities that their voices don’t matter.
Even worse, gerrymandering incentivizes hyper-partisan candidates in so-called “safe” districts, since the true contest happens in party primaries instead of general elections. This discourages consensus-seeking and elevates extreme positions, contributing to a climate of polarization that hinders effective governance.
Perhaps the gravest moral cost is to the ideal of political equality. Gerrymandering hijacks the concept of “one person, one vote,” rendering the phrase hollow for millions whose districts are contorted for partisan gain. Legislative maps that are drawn to predetermine results make a mockery of the very notion of democratic self-governance.
A Call for Moral Accountability
Political parties in North Carolina and across the nation have a choice: perpetuate the use of undemocratic maneuvering or embrace reforms that restore faith in democracy. Independent redistricting commissions, transparent processes, and judicial oversight are critical steps, but true reform requires a reckoning with the moral implications of gerrymandering. Until parties prioritize the democratic good over political self-interest, American democracy will remain stained by this moral failure.