To End Gerrymandering: The Canadian Model for Reforming the Congressional Redistricting Process in the United States

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

In the 2012 Congressional elections, Democratic candidates for the House of Representatives carried 1.3 million more votes nationwide than Republican candidates did. Nevertheless, Republicans captured control of the House by a margin of 234 seats to 201. The undemocratic outcome of the House elections resulted directly from America’s system of redistricting and reapportionment. Partisan politics, not principles of good government, dictate the congressional redistricting process in the vast majority of states.Congressional apportionment law exacerbates the problem. In particular, the statutory limit on the size of the House of Representatives magnifies gerrymandering’s effects more than ever before. As the population gap between large and small states and urban and rural areas continues to increase, redistricting disparities will only worsen in the years ahead. Accordingly, this article proposes that Congress look to Canada as a model for making U.S. House elections more reflective of the electorate’s will. A nation strikingly similar to the United States in many important respects, Canada rejected partisan gerrymandering half a century ago. Adopting the Canadian approach would involve two significant reforms: first, the nationwide establishment of non-partisan independent redistricting commissions, and, second, the restoration of decennial increases in the total number of seats in the House of Representatives to reflect the growing population of the United States. This article explains the current law of Congressional redistricting and reapportionment, assesses the main critiques of the American system, analyzes the Parliamentary redistribution process in Canada, and proposes how the United States can apply the best features of the Canadian system to Congressional redistricting and reapportionment.