Packing, Cracking, and Power (Part 6)
A 7-Part Series on The Tactics of Gerrymandering
In Part 5, we examined the legal conflicts and differences between the U.S. Constitution and those of individual states. In Part 6, we will be leaving the national boundaries of the United States and gathering some international perspectives. Strap in, folks, we will be covering some very real, cautionary tales of electoral manipulation and their national impacts. But first…
Defining Electoral Manipulation Beyond Gerrymandering
While "gerrymandering" specifically refers to the manipulation of electoral district boundaries, we must understand that it is part of a much broader problem known as "electoral manipulation." International examples show us that this includes many different tactics designed to control election outcomes, not just through drawing maps. The deliberate manipulation of election outcomes, no matter the method, is universally considered a violation of democratic principles.
Here’s the brass tax: electoral manipulation of any kind is a grave threat to our way of life. It discredits the democratic process and undermines trust in elections and our key democratic institutions. As we have previously discussed, this practice directly contributes to increased polarization and has the potential to exacerbate violence and conflicts. Such manipulation allows for unchecked power and the negation of even the most basic freedoms. The result is a decline in our political rights and civil liberties.
Cautionary Tales and Their Consequences
Overturning Election Outcomes: In countries such as Guatemala, Thailand, and Zimbabwe, we have seen recent attempts by those in power to "overturn the outcome of an election after the fact" or stop winning candidates from taking office. This is described as an "especially dangerous form of electoral manipulation." This shows us how a deliberate attack on the will of the people, no matter the method, poses a grave threat to a nation's democratic health.
Creating an Uneven Playing Field: In countries like Cambodia, Poland, and Turkey, those in power have attempted to control electoral competition and hinder their political opponents. This has led to a serious threat to democracy. This tactic is a clear warning that those in power will seek to manipulate the system to maintain their grip, and we must remain watchful for any signs of this here at home.
Electoral Violence and Disruption: In Ecuador, for instance, elections were disrupted by violent criminal organizations, which led to the killing of officials and candidates. Nigeria and Taiwan have also experienced elections diminished by violence or foreign interference. These examples serve as a stark reminder that the integrity of an election can be threatened not only by manipulation from within but also by forces of violence and interference from outside.
Coups and Military Intervention: We must also be aware of the more extreme consequences of political instability, as we've seen with coups and military intervention in other countries. In Niger, its elected government was ousted by military forces in 2023, as part of a broader wave of coups in Africa's Sahel region. In Thailand, a military-drafted constitution has distorted the political process. These examples serve as a grave warning about the fragility of democracy and the need to protect our electoral integrity.
Conflict and Human Suffering (Indirect Links to Electoral Integrity): While gerrymandering is a specific form of electoral manipulation, we must also recognize the indirect link between a lack of electoral integrity and profound human suffering. The denial of political rights and civil liberties, which often stems from flawed electoral processes, is connected to severe conflict. We see this in places like Nagorno-Karabakh, where a military offensive and blockade led to a significant decline in freedom. The civil war in Myanmar stemmed from a 2021 military coup, and brutal fighting in Sudan has also occurred. These examples highlight how the absence of democratic rights and fair electoral processes can be a root cause or a factor that worsens large-scale violence and humanitarian crises.
Specific Manipulation Tactics Beyond Boundary Drawing:
Artificial Migration/Voter Relocation: There are even more subtle ways to manipulate an electorate. Some tactics, like artificial migration and voter relocation, involve changing the composition of the electorate itself. For instance, in England, the "Homes for Voters" scandal from 1986 to 1990 involved using public housing to move voters into key electoral districts to secure a win. Similarly, in Malaysia, "Project IC" granted citizenship and the right to vote to immigrants from neighboring countries to "dominate" the state of Sabah. These examples show how the very makeup of the people who vote can be manipulated for political advantage.
Foreign Intervention: We must also be aware of the threat of foreign intervention in our elections. Between 1946 and 2000, the U.S. and USSR/Russia intervened in a significant number of national-level executive elections, 117 times in total. The methods used ranged from funding campaigns to public threats to cut off foreign aid. These kinds of interventions have been shown to polarize electorates.
While our conversation focuses on gerrymandering, the international examples consistently frame it within the broader context of "electoral manipulation." This tells us that gerrymandering is not an isolated technical issue, but a specific manifestation of a more fundamental erosion of democratic principles. Its unchecked proliferation in the United States could contribute to the same decline in trust and legitimacy that has led to more severe political crises in other nations, even if it does not directly cause an outright "revolt." These cautionary tales suggest that a nation's democratic health is a spectrum. While gerrymandering may seem like a less extreme form of manipulation compared to outright coups, its persistence and escalation weaken democratic institutions and public faith. This can create conditions ripe for more severe political instability, even if a direct link to "revolt" isn't immediately apparent. The aggressive partisan gerrymandering we see in our country today should be viewed as a warning sign within this broader international trend.
Electoral IntegrityInternational Norms & Best Practices
Public international law offers us valuable guidance on the need for inclusiveness, transparency, and the upholding of fundamental human rights and freedoms in our electoral systems. It recognizes that boundary delimitation, or redistricting, is an important way to ensure equality in the weight of votes and representation. Recommendations for strong legal frameworks include:
Independent, impartial boundary authorities.
Mechanisms for public input.
Clear, objective criteria, such as contiguity, compactness, and respect for communities of interest.
A timely review of boundaries well in advance of elections to prevent instability.
Furthermore, international norms suggest that ideal population variances should rarely be more than 10%.
In short, we must look to these international norms and best practices as a clear path forward for securing the integrity of our own electoral system. The aggressive partisan gerrymandering we see in the United States today must be viewed within the broader international trend of democratic decline. Just so we are clear, folks, this is not a distant threat, but a present danger that demands our immediate attention and resolve.
