“Just 10 percent of House races were competitive in last year’s midterms, according to a new report from the advocacy group Fix Our House.”
“[Proportional representation] would create larger districts that would elect multiple members of Congress based on the share of the vote they receive — giving deep-red states like Arkansas at least one Democratic representative and vice versa in blue states such as Massachusetts.”
WASHINGTON, DC – In case you missed it, Fix Our House released a new report on the 2022 redistricting cycle yesterday that was covered in the Washington Post Early 202 newsletter and The Hill.
The report, Single-Winner Districts and the Failures of Redistricting, found that only about 1 in 10 districts was competitive in last year’s midterms and that about 1 in 10 races had only one major party candidate on the ballot – meaning that only a small number of voters were able to make meaningful choices in who represents them.
And as reported in the Early 202, “the Fix Our House report found that another much discussed change for making House races fairer — independent redistricting commissions — didn’t make for more competitive races last year than states in which maps were gerrymandered.”
The new report finds that single-winner districts are the reason that independent commissions can only do so much – it’s not possible to draw truly fair and representative districts when they only elect one member each. Multi-winner districts with proportional representation are a pragmatic and Constitutional alternative to this broken system.
From the Early 202: “[Proportional representation] would create larger districts that would elect multiple members of Congress based on the share of the vote they receive — giving deep-red states like Arkansas at least one Democratic representative and vice versa in blue states such as Massachusetts.”
The Hill added that "proportional representation. . . would let a political party’s share of votes in an election determine how many seats it holds in the legislature. 'Proportional representation truly puts the power back in the hands of voters,' the report states. 'Every election is competitive, every result fairly tracks with the votes cast, and every political party wins seats not by manipulating district lines, but by earning votes.'"
The full report from Fix Our House is available here, and excerpts are included below. Read the coverage in the Early 202 here and The Hill here.
“To understand the new Congress and the current dysfunction on Capitol Hill, we need to look beyond the individual personalities in play and beyond the 2022 midterms that elected them. At the heart of the dysfunction in Congress is America's redistricting process and the fundamentally broken way we elect representatives. . .
“90% of districts were uncompetitive in 2022. This lack of competitiveness within those districts marginalized minority party voices within those districts and gave each major party an enormous number of “safe” districts where voters could be taken for granted and largely ignored. . .
“About 1 in 10 races were uncontested. 16 districts had only one candidate and 19 others had only one major party candidate on the ballot. While this number is fairly typical when compared to previous years, it is still unacceptable for such a sizable chunk of voters to have virtually no change in who represents them. . .
“Independent commissions can only do so much. States that used independent redistricting commissions saw only modest improvements in competitiveness and partisan fairness compared to those with maps drawn by state legislatures. While independent commissions are well-intentioned and one of the best approaches to fair districting within the single-winner district system, they are insufficient to fix the uncompetitive, unrepresentative nature of most congressional districts. . .
“It may be what we are used to, but the zero sum, all-or-nothing nature of winner-take-all contests is a formula for distorted and divisive politics. In today’s nationalized and polarized politics, it makes gerrymandering easy and effective, drives us toward a rigid two-party system, makes competition scarce, and creates a toxic doom loop of escalating us-versus-them partisanship. . .
“Proportional representation is an electoral system where a political party’s share of votes in an election determines how many seats it holds in the legislature. Instead of each district electing one representative, a state divides into larger regions that each elect several winners. If a district has three representatives and the vote is 65% for Republicans and 35% for Democrats, it would elect two Republicans and one Democrat. . .
“Proportional representation truly puts the power back in the hands of voters. Every election is competitive, every result fairly tracks with the votes cast, and every political party wins seats not by manipulating district lines, but by earning votes.”
###
