The Long History of Gerrymandering in American Politics
Gerrymandering election districts is not new in American politics. Drawing election district lines and other manipulation of voting districts to gain a partisan political advantage has a long history, beginning with the earliest years of the American republic.
Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution left it to Congress and the states to determine how states would elect members of the House of Representatives. For the most part, Congress has taken no action, leaving it to the states to establish the rules.
In the first election under the new Constitution, the states used two basic methods for electing members to the House of Representatives. The first – called "general ticket" – elected representatives in a state-wide election, with each voter voting for the number of persons to be elected. To win, a political party had to ensure that the number of candidates on the ballot matched the number of representatives to be elected. Six states used this method, or a variation of this method. In the second method, the state was divided into the number of election districts matching the number of the representatives of the state’s entitlement, with each such district electing a single representative. Five states used this method. The remaining two states were entitled to one representative each.
In those states using the single district method, an early example of drawing district lines to achieve a partisan outcome occurred in Virigina. In this first election, 1788-1789, James Madison sought election to the House of Representatives. Patrick Henry, an Anti-Federalist who opposed the new Constitution, led the Virginia legislature to create an election district which Henry believed would achieve Madison's defeat by including in this district what Henry judged were mostly Anti-Federalists voters. Henry miscalculated, and Madison won anyway, defeating James Monroe in a close election.
In 1812 occurred the famous example of gerrymandering which gave us the name "gerrymandering" to describe drawing election district lines to achieve partisan political advantage. The election involved, not the U.S. House of Representatives, but the Massachusetts State Senate. At the time, the Massachusetts legislature was controlled by the Democratic-Republican Party. The Massachusetts legislature drew lines for election districts that favored election of Democratic-Republicans. Massachusetts’s Governor Elbridge Gerry, a Democratic-Republican, approved the legislation. One of the election districts was a district in Essex County in Boston that started at the southwestern corner, moved north to the northwestern corner, and then crossed to end at the county's northeastern corner. In the shape of a salamander, an editorial cartoon by Elkanah Tisdale was printed in the March 26, 1812 Boston Gazette with head, wings, and claws added. The editorial cartoon was labeled "Gerry-mander."
This gerrymandering effort achieved its purpose for the Massachusetts Senate. The popular vote state-wide was almost evenly divided with a slight edge for the Federalist Party. Nevertheless, the result was the election of 29 Democratic-Republicans and 11 Federalists. But the Federalists won a majority in the Massachusetts House of Representatives, and Governor Gerry lost his bid for reelection as Governor, although he later went on to win election as James Madison's Vice-President where he died in office. Gerry was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a participant in the Constitutional Convention, and member of the U.S. House of Representatives – but he is remembered for gerrymandering.
For those elections where we know the popular vote by party nationwide for the House of Representatives, we can compare this to the numbers of representatives elected by a party to draw a conclusion about gerrymandering in any given election. But the full extent of gerrymandering is masked, because when both parties have engaged in the practice, they offset each other to some extent. To better understand the full effect of gerrymandering in an election requires a state by state analysis. To complicate the matter more, factors other than gerrymandering may be present. Legislators may miscalculate in choosing between general ticket and single district or in where to draw district lines. Moreover, issues that matter to voters will impact any given election .
The elections of 1840-1841 and 1842-1843 provide further examples of gerrymandering. In 1842, Congress enacted legislation requiring single district elections and eliminating general ticket elections. This legislation was temporary and allowed exceptions. Before this change, in the 1840-1841 election for the House of Representatives, the Whig Party won 142 seats, the Democratic Party 99. The Whigs won 51% of the vote nationwide; the Democrats 48%. Thus, for the Whigs, 51% of the vote produced 59.5% of the seats. After the legislative change, in the 1842-1843 election, the Democrats won 148 seats; the Whigs 73. In the nationwide vote, the Democrats won 51% of the vote; the Whigs 44%. Thus, 51% of the vote produced 66% of seats. The change to single member districts didn't work out as the Whig Party intended.
At the individual state level, gerrymandering is apparent in examining outcomes where the result was zero seats for one party. In the 1840-1841 election, in all seven states that used the general ticket, the prevailing party elected 100% of its candidates (Democrats 4, Whigs 3). In three of the states using single districts, the results were 0-6, 8-1, and 1-11 (Democrats - Whigs). In 1842-1843 election, all four states that used the general ticket (as allowed under an exception) saw the Democrats win 100% of the elections. In the five states using the single district, the prevailing party won 100% (Democrats 4, Whigs 1).
In 1920, following the decennial census, Congress was unable to reach agreement and failed to enact a reapportionment act for the first time. The resolution finally came in 1929, with legislation that fixed the number of House seats at 435 and provided for a largely automatic reapportionment based on the decennial census.
After 1929, there were two major events which affected gerrymandering. The first was the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Wesberry v. Sanders (1964), which required that election districts be approximately equal in population (one-person, one vote). Before this decision, states were free to ignore significant population differences from one district to the next. In Wesberry, for example, Georgia's election districts were based on a districting map made in 1931. As a result of population changes, the district population that included Atlanta had grown to 823,680 by 1960. The average population of Georgia's 10 election districts was 394,312. One district's population was 272,154.
The second was the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which implemented the 15th Amendment. As most recently interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Louisiana v. Callais (2026), the Voting Rights Act is limited to prohibiting racial gerrymandering; partisan political gerrymandering is permitted. Congress also enacted legislation in 1967 that made permanent the rule requiring single member districts.
As history and the current round of gerrymandering suggests, the solution to partisan gerrymandering cannot be left to the states, but requires a federal law that applies nationwide and prohibits redistricting to achieve partisan political objectives.
