Elbridge Gerry, a name most Americans could not place, has achieved a kind of linguistic immortality. The fifth vice president of the United States lent his surname to "gerrymandering" after signing a controversial redistricting plan in 1812 that carved out a Massachusetts electoral district shaped like a salamander—or, as critics charged, a monster.
As governor of Massachusetts during the War of 1812, Gerry approved new state Senate district boundaries drawn by his party to consolidate Democratic-Republican power. The resulting map included one winding district in Essex County that painter and diarist John Quincy Adams—then a US representative—described as resembling a "gerrymander." Within months, newspapers nationwide had adopted the portmanteau. Gerry himself went on to become James Madison's vice president, dying in office in 1814.
The practice of manipulating electoral boundaries for partisan advantage is older than the Republic itself. But gerrymandering remains one of the most contested tools in American politics, with both major parties deploying it when in power and condemning it when out of it.
What the Right Is Saying
Conservatives argue that gerrymandering is simply a natural consequence of political geography and incumbent protection—a practice both parties engage in when given the chance. The Republican National Committee has noted that Democrats controlled redistricting processes in states like Maryland and Illinois, where maps also heavily favored their party.
"Democrats are only upset about gerrymandering now because they lost the last round," said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich in a 2023 interview. "They did it enthusiastically when they had the power."
Some Republican-aligned scholars contend that partisan redistricting can actually increase competition in certain districts by forcing incumbents to appeal to swing voters, rather than catering only to primary-election partisans. Others note that Democrats' concentration in urban areas creates geographically inefficient voting patterns regardless of any deliberate line-drawing.
What the Left Is Saying
Progressive groups and Democratic lawmakers have long argued that gerrymandering suppresses voter representation by allowing elected officials to choose their voters rather than the reverse. Organizations like the Brennan Center for Justice have documented how partisan redistricting can lock in minority-rule majorities for decades.
Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, whose state has its own history with the practice, has called for federal standards on redistricting. "When politicians draw district lines to protect themselves from accountability, they are fundamentally breaking the social contract between government and the governed," she wrote in a 2023 op-ed.
Voting rights advocates point to the 2022 midterm elections as evidence of gerrymandering's impact: despite Democrats winning the national popular House vote by roughly 3 points, Republicans secured a majority due partly to district maps many analysts called skewed. The progressive group RepresentUs estimates that approximately 40% of House seats are effectively "uncompetitive" because of how districts have been drawn.
What the Numbers Show
According to the Brennan Center's 2023 analysis, Republicans held a structural advantage in House redistricting following the 2020 census cycle, with maps drawn by GOP legislatures producing an estimated 10 to 15 additional Republican seats compared to neutral or court-drawn maps. However, courts struck down several of the most aggressive partisan maps in states including North Carolina and Pennsylvania.
The average "efficiency gap"—a statistical measure of how equally votes translate into seats—has widened over recent cycles. In 2022, researchers at Princeton and Cornell estimated that House results would have been roughly 16 to 20 seats closer to the national popular vote if all districts had been drawn by independent commissions.
Currently, 11 states use fully independent redistricting commissions for congressional maps: Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Michigan, Montana, New Jersey, Oregon, Washington, and Virginia. Another five states have advisory commissions or require legislative approval with limited judicial review.
The Supreme Court's 2023 ruling in Moore v. Harper rejected the "independent state legislature" theory but left open lower court challenges to specific maps as violations of constitutional protections.
The Bottom Line
Elbridge Gerry's legacy endures not because of his vice presidency or diplomatic work, but because a salamander-shaped district map became an enduring symbol of political self-dealing. Two centuries later, the debate over who draws electoral boundaries—and under what rules—remains unresolved.
With the 2030 census approaching, both parties are already preparing for the next round of redistricting litigation and legislation. Watch for court challenges to maps in states where one party controls the process outright, as well as renewed calls for federal redistricting standards that have stalled repeatedly in Congress.