Congress as a whole these days seems to be getting a bad reputation. Media outlets and political pundits all complain and cry out how congress doesn’t get anything done and how things are so polarized. How did it get this bad? What if the source to this dead heat and polarization in congress is because of not just bad politics but that it stems from a practice that’s been going on for centuries? And it’s completely constitutional.

Every 10-years, a census is taken of the population of the United States to record increases, decreases and changes in demographic data. The census goes back as far as 1790 when the census began. The practice of redistricting congressional districts is invested with the state legislatures, which draw the boundary lines for the new congressional seats, pending if a state gained or lost a seat. But what if you add the practice with political motivation?

Gerrymandering is the process of state legislatures redistricting voting districts for the United States House of Representatives following each census for political advantage, making it virtually impossible for a member of a minority party to have a realistic chance of winning a congressional seat in a partisan district. The practice of Gerrymandering goes back to the pre-revolutionary war era, but the term itself was coined in the early 1800s when a Massachusetts governor, Elbridge Gerry, began redistricting based on demographic changes according to census data. The local newspapers saw this occurring and coined the term based on Governor Gerry’s actions of making a district that resembled the look of “a serpentine salamander.”

But today it’s gotten way out of hand. Since the 1960s, less and less bills are produced in Congress that are signed by the president. It’s become such an issue that the 113^th congress was known as a “do nothing” congress. And the American people are furious. According to CBS, only 11-percent of American approve of the job that Congress is doing. While people dislike congress as a whole, they tend to reelect their representatives and senators often. Nearly 80-percent of the members of the house that seek reelection typically win and 90-percent of senators that run typically with their re-election.

The practice of gerrymandering isn’t just bad for government; it's bad for democracy. It is because the same members of Congress are reelected constantly and with more money being spent in congressional and senatorial campaigns, the stakes for those who in to maintain ties with their partisan supporters is all the more detrimental to democracy, only heightening the gridlock. In addition, it was visible that gerrymandering doesn’t just target the political party affiliation of a population, thereby excluding others; it also targets racial and socio-economic groups as well. Certain districts will be drawn around wealthy communities and suburbs whereas lower economic communities are excluded and otherwise drawn around.

I propose that, in order to change the polarized nature of congress, a constitutional amendment to change the way redistricting is done. The system that exists must be changed completely. What needs to happen to end political partisanship in congress is to redistrict congressional districts that reflect geographic fair districts. That means that districts are drawn to resemble an equal distribution. Instead of state legislatures bias drawing districts, it should be left to a non-biased, nonpartisan committee that draws the boundaries of the districts, thereby removing any political manipulation. But how best to get congress to agree to this? The only way to convince them is to use the power of press and organizations to push this legislation through and eventually amend the Constitution. By placing pressure on congress and state legislatures to do the right thing will end the deadlock.