As we had discussed in previous posts, redistricting is a consequence of the 2020 census results. Given the variation in population size, some states lose seats in the House of Representatives, and others win. The redistricting process should be technical, considering the population density of each district. However, depending on the majority party in each state, the new design ensures maximum results to the detriment of legitimacy. In this process, minorities (Latinos and Afro descendants) are diluted in new districts, nullifying the possibility of obtaining a representation consistent with their demographic weight. This problem is bipartisan, as both Democrats and Republicans adopt ad hoc practices known as "
gerrymandering." We have already mentioned the cases of Illinois and Texas in our website, but in other states, minorities complain about these moves.
In Nevada, the redistricting that would increase the Democrats' advantage in undecided districts is angering progressives who argue that, in the process, it dilutes minority voting power by dividing Latinos into three districts. A congressional map proposed by Democratic leaders in Nevada exemplifies the conflicting interests faced by lawmakers redrawing political maps during an ongoing
special redistricting session on Saturday, November 13, 2021.
The same occurred in Oklahoma, where the Latino population of southern Oklahoma City was separated from CD-5 and confined to CD-3, mostly Republican. The Hispanic community is the largest minority community in Oklahoma County, accounting for 19.3% of the total population according to
census data.
There are similar problems in other states. The party logic brings the Machiavellianism that strikes democratic principles and over time strikes the social disadvantages of the most vulnerable groups, such as the large mass of the Latino community in the United States.