In today’s politically polarized world, there is little common ground that voters on both sides of the aisle can agree on. However, one issue that seems to be a unifying complaint by all voters is, ironically, the issue of dividing. Manipulating an electoral boundary, better known as gerrymandering, is one of a politician’s greatest guiles. Whether it is at the federal, state, or local level, “independent” commissions have been tilting the odds towards favored political parties since our country was founded. By either strategically spreading voter groups out to create safe districts, or by giving up certain districts and making other districts winnable, politicians can create a more predictable outcome while the voice of the voter is lost in a sea of collusion. In Maryland, widely recognized as one of the most gerrymandered states in the country, our politicians have chosen the latter. Remember, the goal of gerrymandering is not ensure total victory, but rather to minimize overall loss.
In 2011 Maryland’s congressional districts were redrawn, and the next election dropped the number of Republican representatives from two to one. But republicans shouldn’t be the only ones upset over the district rigging. Democrats on the eastern shore should be equally upset that they have been abandoned by their party, now have no voice, and are being represented by Andy Harris who votes with the republican party 96% of the time. In an unquestionably republican district where it is virtually impossible to lose to a democrat our representative has political carte blanche.
This has translated to Harris taking intrusive actions that have made him enemies with those both in and outside of the First District, leading residents of D.C. to call for a boycott of Eastern Shore businesses. But there is no incentive for republican voters who are upset with Harris’ actions in congress to vote him out, because although he may be further right than they might prefer, they at least share fundamental beliefs.
The only way to oust an incumbent in a district that was drawn for him, whether it is a democrat or republican, is to change the way political power brokers view the game. Gerrymandering only works as long as politicians can separate voters into groups by two major parties, then divide us ideologically so that we never consider voting for the other candidate. In a predictable system such as this, the only losers are the American people. But we don’t have to fight to reform the system, or even for fairer districts.
All voters have to do is show up on Election Day and vote for a libertarian. Libertarians have the social outlook liberals love, and the fiscal discipline that conservatives crave. A democratic voter in a gerrymandered republican district will get much more representation from a libertarian who will fight to end the drug war, and our interventionist foreign policy. Conversely a republican voter in a heavily democratic district will have someone who will fight to balance the budget, and reform the tax code by voting libertarian. And because libertarians have such cross party appeal they have the best chance of winning in a gerrymandered district.
If we want to truly take back our government we must send a loud and clear message to Washington that we will not let our system be taken hostage by a two party duopoly, instead we the people will decide the future of this country.
Matt Beers
Candidate, House of Representatives (District 1-MD)
Libertarian Party
Write a Letter to the Editor on this Article
We encourage readers to offer their point of view on this article by submitting the following form. Editing is sometimes necessary and is done at the discretion of the editorial staff.