Two wrongs don’t make a right

The argument that Maryland should continue to gerrymander districts because other states will continue to do so is fraught with problems (“Democrats should absolutely end gerrymandering — the day the Republicans do the same,” Nov. 16).

First and foremost is the flawed concept that gerrymandering in perpetual blue Maryland is a sound and proper policy. It only makes sense if you put party first and the people of Maryland second. It’s merely a rationalization for knowingly doing the wrong thing. Why should Marylanders live with districts that only Elbridge Gerry could love because another state won’t adopt an independent commission? That’s North Carolina’s problem, not ours.

Nothing would make me happier than to see Andy Harris lose his seat in Congress. But to premeditatedly gerrymander him out of his seat is wrong and smacks of cronyism. Just last week former Republican congressman Wayne Gilcrest announced publicly he thought it was a good idea to redistrict Andy Harris out of his seat. It’s not. It’s gaming the system. It’s cheating.

The people of Maryland will remain mired in this political standoff where the Democrats just continue to gerrymander regardless of the negative effects. Eight states, including very blue California, have independent commissions. It hasn’t affected the balance of power. But it does afford those states’ citizens fair, balanced, and independently drawn district maps.

Independent commissions insure the basic tenets of our constitution that everyone is treated equally before the law, which includes voting rights. People get upset if voting rights are restricted yet gerrymandering in any state undermines the value of each and every vote cast. Restricting voting access and gerrymandering are both unethical. Let’s not do either.

We need an independent redistricting commission.

— Dudley Thompson, Girdletree