2020 hopefuls should work with Devin Nunes to end gerrymandering

Recently, the Supreme Court closed the door on the idea that the federal courts would stop state legislators from gerrymandering districts. Many citizens hate the idea that their own legislators get to draw lines that protect incumbents and advantage one party over the other — indeed, even the conservative majority of the Supreme Court admitted that partisan gerrymandering is “incompatible with democratic principles.” But,by a 5-4 vote, the court decided that the courts are powerless to solve the problem. In other words, the court said, it’s up to Congress to solve this problem.

And on the question of whether that’s possible, Chief Justice Roberts — who wrote the opinion for the court’s conservative majority — did a fascinating bit of trolling of the liberals. To support his idea that Congress, not the courts, should end gerrymandering, he cited a never-passed 2010 bill called H.R. 6250. That bill, if adopted, would have prevented any state from establishing congressional districts “with the major purpose of diluting the voting strength of any person, or group, including any political party.” A great idea.

Republicans once wanted to fix gerrymandering

Chief Justice Roberts doesn’t mention who wrote that 2010 bill, and I was curious. Turns out the author was Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., who now is among President Donald Trump’s strongest allies. With that citation, Chief Justice Roberts seemed to be saying: Hey look, there was a time when even staunch Republicans wanted to fix this problem. But what happened?

Supreme Court ditches fairness:Voter rights and the Constitution in gerrymandering ruling

What happened was that there is only so much bandwidth for Congress to solve problems, and, regrettably, no recent administration has made it a priority to end gerrymandering and fix our broken democracy. 

President Barack Obama came into office with huge majorities in both houses of Congress and managed to pass Obamacare, a large emergency bailout package to get the country out of the recession ... and not too much else of lasting consequence. 

President Trump similarly came to power with his party in control of both houses of Congress, and he got a big tax cut, two Supreme Court justices confirmed ... and not too much else of lasting consequence. Different party, same old story of congressional dysfunction and inattention. You get one or two big things. Max.

To be sure, more important laws are possible in this administration if only President Trump would follow through on his promise to combat corruption in Washington and drain the swamp. 

Nunes can reintroduce his anti-gerrymandering bill, and I’ll bet every Democrat would vote for it — and hopefully some Republicans would, too. Or Trump can ask Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to get the Senate to take up H.R. 1, a bill that passed the House a few months ago that Chief Justice Roberts also cited with approval as a possible way to end gerrymandering.

Sadly, that’s not gonna happen. 

Bipartisan support unlikely

Republicans in Congress and across the country, at least right now, have abandoned the idea that they ought to do something about gerrymandering. This inaction means the move for Democrats running for president should be blazingly clear: They must make fixing our democracy a top priority, or the fix will never get done — and our problems will only get worse, not better. 

Blew a precendent:How gerrymandering decision wiped out a 1962 ruling

As Justice Elena Kagan said in her powerful dissent in the gerrymandering case, refusing to fix gerrymandering leads to a “cascade of negative results.” Among them: Unfair districts “shift influence from swing voters to party-base voters who participate in primaries,” they “make bipartisanship and pragmatic compromise politically difficult” and, perhaps worst of all, they “drive voters away from an ever more dysfunctional political process.” 

Given these distressing consequences of gerrymandering, it’s becoming ever clearer that presidential hopefuls must stress democracy reform as their first priority. They cannot expect to make any headway on all the substantive issues that get people excited if bipartisanship is impossible and if citizens are repelled by the political process itself. 

So here’s my advice to the candidates on the trial in the coming months. Take Rep. Devin Nunes up on his offer to end gerrymandering. And promise to do it first.

Jason Harrow is executive director and chief counsel at EqualCitizens.US.