What becomes painfully obvious as I continue my research on the topic of gerrymandering is that it sewed into the fabric of American politics. As such, changing any part of the laws or regulations that make up gerrymandering will cause unintended consequences. To add to this, even if it was eliminated, it is unlikely to have a favorable effect for the African-American community. Eliminating gerrymandering completely will likely result in minorities once again getting little to no representation at all because white Democrats, according to Galen Druke’s podcast The Gerrymandering Project, choose the white democratic candidate over the black counterpart; this works because the number of white Democrats outnumbers their black counterparts. It all harkens back to the fact that black folks as a population simply don’t have the numbers to have their cake and eat it too the same way that majority whites do. This is important because “minority members of Congress are more likely to advocate for their communities’ priorities than white members of the same party.” This makes sense as white Democrats often do not have the same connection to the needs of the black community but it does not lessen the importance of advocacy for those who are most vulnerable.

Populations are fluid, they move around and change, the maps need to change often to reflect these changes. So ironically, the solution to gerrymandering may be more gerrymandering. It is dependant on the people who draw the maps and I’m increasingly thinking it should not be a partisan task but rather a qualified third party. This would minimalize bias towards either party without taking away all the power of majority-minority districts.