keep his job. He can also thank the conservatives on the Supreme Court. Partisan gerrymandering exists for one purpose: to cut off the ability of people who disagree with a state's ruling party to influence future elections. It is a a clear violation of the First Amendment, which absolutely prohibits viewpoint discrimination. Yet the Supreme Court abdicated its responsibility to end this discrimination in its 5-4 decision in Vieth v. Jubelirer, where the conservative justices tossed out a lawsuit alleging that Pennsylvania's congressional districts were unconstitutionally drawn to maximize Republican representation in Congress. So defending republicans who, district by district, are 'doing what they were elected to do'.. House Republicans ran on NOT raising taxes on anyone.  And they were re-elected based on that platform as well.as a majority in the House. ..isn't a fair reading of what actually happened imo. And back to the gerrymandering: when a majority of people were grouped together in such a way as to marginalize their voting power, it can't be called a majority or a mandate for republicans. And the both sides do it equally egregiously, is also not a fair reading of what goes on imo. would reflect upon that reality as well and ponder what it means that they won. Does it mean that their constituents want to go towards austerity?  I don't think so. I don't see, if they were be honest with themselves, how they could think so. The ONLY thing that will stop the Bush tax cuts from