# Why isn't gerrymandering unconstitutional? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 6, 2006, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-gerrymandering-unconstitutional/379238 "2006-11-06T01:59:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![tellyworth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@tellyworth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tellyworth)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2012, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-gerrymandering-unconstitutional/379238/41 "2012-10-28T20:56:12Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > For each map, the total length of the boundaries is measured, and the map with the shortest total boundary length wins. I wonder if the coastline paradox might be a factor. You’d get disagreements about the true length of certain boundaries. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 28, 2012, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-gerrymandering-unconstitutional/379238/42 "2012-10-28T21:31:45Z")
[Here’s a map](http://rangevoting.org/TexasRedist.jpg) which shows explicitly that Houston’s nine Congressional districts included _five_ with 2002 Democratic vote of at least 43%, but only _three_ after boundaries were redrawn. That map is from [an interesting article](http://rangevoting.org/GerryExamples.html) which gives further examples of egregious Texas gerrymandering, and proposes an automatic tamper-proof districting algorithm. (I’m not sure there is any simple antidote to the gerrymandering problem. After all, grouping similar people together has merit – at there other extreme, the districts in a state with 52-48 party split would _all_ have 52-48 split, and only one party would be elected.) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2012, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-gerrymandering-unconstitutional/379238/43 "2012-10-29T00:32:51Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > [Here’s a map](http://rangevoting.org/TexasRedist.jpg) which shows explicitly that Houston’s nine Congressional districts included _five_ with 2002 Democratic vote of at least 43%, but only _three_ after boundaries were redrawn. That map is from [an interesting article](http://rangevoting.org/GerryExamples.html) which gives further examples of egregious Texas gerrymandering, and proposes an automatic tamper-proof districting algorithm. > > (I’m not sure there is any simple antidote to the gerrymandering problem. After all, grouping similar people together has merit – at there other extreme, the districts in a state with 52-48 party split would _all_ have 52-48 split, and only one party would be elected.) It’s an interesting approach. But certainly not a perfect one. Look at this [map](http://rangevoting.org/TXtravis24.png) from their website and how they point out how Austin was divided up between three districts to put its citizens in a majority in each of those districts. Now look at their proposed [map](http://rangevoting.org/Splitline2009/ar.png) for Arkansas. Guess what’s located at the intersection of those four districts? The [Little Rock metropolitan area](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock-North_Little_Rock-Conway_metropolitan_area). Like Austin, Little Rock just had its voters split up among several different mostly rural districts. (And just so you don’t think this is a fluke, their plan would do the same thing with Albuquerque in [New Mexico](http://rangevoting.org/Splitline2009/nm.png).) ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2012, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-gerrymandering-unconstitutional/379238/44 "2012-10-29T00:50:06Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **tellyworth** : > > I wonder if the coastline paradox might be a factor. You’d get disagreements about the true length of certain boundaries. It shouldn’t be a problem. Boundaries established by humans aren’t generally exactly along natural features like rivers or coastlines: Usually, they’re straight lines or simple curves between benchmarks, so as to approximate the natural features. You _can_ specify boundaries that are arbitrarily or even infinitely long, but in this scenario the map-makers are trying to make boundaries that are as short as possible, so they naturally wouldn’t do that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-isnt-gerrymandering-unconstitutional/379238.md?page=2)