Evening star., 1955-03-15
The Political Min
Gerrymondering in "a
Charged by Democrats
But for 6. o. P. Redistrictine,
They Might Have Fored Better

But for 6. o. P. Redistrictine,
They Might Have Fored Better
By Gould Lincoln
Does the congressional election Of
1854 give the Democrats hope for VIC
tory in 1856? Or the Republicans?
Obviously the elections last year were q
Democratic victoTy-the Democrats
took control of Congress away from the
G. o. P. But the Republicans argue
that, while they lost the Congress. they
made better showing than usual in q
nonpreSidential election year, because
the Democrats failed to make as large
net gains as the party out of power in
the White House has made IN such elec-
tions. Also the Republicans point out
the Democrats failed to make the sweep
in the congressional elections Of 1854
the Democrats predicted.
The Democrats, however, have come
up with an analysis Of the 1854 elec-
tions which shows they piled up the
biggest percentage of the total con-
gressional vote In an off-year election
in score of years. 1t is set forth in
detail in the April issue Of the Demo-
cratic Digest. Further, the Democrats
claim the real reason they did not make
as great gains in the House as ex-
pected lies in the fact the Republicans,
in redistricting the States to conform to
the 1850 census Of populations, had
"gerrymandered" so as to make a con-
siderable number of districts safely
Republican
Plausible Argument
The Democratic argument is that
their percentage gains in the total vote
clearly indicate a trend to the Demo-
cratic Party. 1t is plausible argument.
The Democratic Digest analysis shows
above all else that the Democratic con-
gresssional candidates actually won 52.6
per cent of the popular vote in 1854
the largest off-year percentage since
the great Democratic landslide of 1884"
The one element, the Democratic
Digest maintains, which prevented the
Democrats from winning greater pro-
portion of the House seats-in con-
formity with their percentage Of the
total voe-Was the gerrymander. The
gerrymander, which dates back to 1912.
is political device by which the party
in power carves up State in such a
way as to concentrate its opponents
votes in as few districts as possible.
Since 1898, there have been two reap
portlonmentS of congressional districts
among the States. The Democrats in
sist that Republican Legislatures have
been successful in gerrymandering a
nJln1 her nf SfotnS 70 +Ioi,
point, they make a comparison of the
results of the 1888 and 1854 congress
sional elections. In 1888, the Democrats
polled 50.8 per cent of the popular vote
for Congress and won 262 House seats.
Last year, the Democrats did far bet
ter in the popular vote, polling 526 per
cent, but captured only 232 House seats.
Also, in 1850 the Democrats polled 5O.3
per cent of the popular congressional
vote and won 235 House seats. If the
same ratio had held true in 1854, they
should have won 246 House seats, in
stead Of 232. Somewhere, they point
out, IA House seats were lost to the
Democrats. This they charge to the
gerrymander.
Point Illustrated
To illustrate their point, the Demo-
Gratis cite the rediStricting of California
and New York by Republican State
Legislatures. Because of its tremendous
growth in population between 1910 and
1850, California gained seven additional
congressional districts New York, on the
other hand, lost two districts. Between
1948 and 1854, the Democratic popular
Untp fNT TnnprncS in To1if0ry,{n ,,ial
up from 40.6 to ST. per cent Despite
this gain in popular vote, the Demo-
cratic portion of the California con-
gressional delegation fell from 43.5 per
cent in 1949 to 367 per cent in 1855.
The Republicans have 19 members of
the California delegation, and Demo-
Gratis only II. With proper redistrict-
ing the Democrats argue, they should
have is or Is House seats
in New York, the redistricting in
1951-by Republican legislature-ad-
versely affected the Democrats, they in
sist. In 1854, after the redistricting. the
Democrats polled only about per cent
fewer votes than in 1948, yet they won
Is per cent fewer members of the New
York delegation in the House. As mat
ters stand In the present Congress, the
Democrats have II House seats and the
Republicans, 26. The Democrats say
they should have 20 or 21 of the New
York seats, Despite 1851 split In the
popular vote, the Democrats have only
1880 split in the congressional dele
cation.
So, the Democrats argue today that q
Democratic sweep did occur last year
although 1t was not evidenced in the
number of House seats they won. They
predict that this popular trend will be
reflected in next years national elec.
tion--both in the congressional and
presidential elections. In addition. they
point out the Democrats won outstand-
ing victories in the gubernatorial elec-
tions last year, particularly in New
York, Pennsylvania and Maine.