Spoils of gerrymandering

Regarding the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on gerrymandering, here’s an example simple enough even for a Supreme Court justice to understand.

My wife and I have objected repeatedly to the pending “tax rebate” of $100 per school-age child to be paid just as the fall elections begin. Like many others, we get left out, except to pay our taxes and foot the bill. We’ve objected to the governor, our lawmakers, newspaper readers and anyone who would listen about what we consider to be vote-buying. But because of partisan gerrymandering, our Democratic state representative and senator are powerless to have any impact (“Court leaves redistricting in place,” June 19).

In a state that splits very evenly in presidential elections, Republicans have used high-tech analysis of voter data to draw district boundaries that greatly diminish my ability to participate in democracy. If that’s not unconstitutional, I don’t know what is.

There are lots of other examples where our district lawmakers agree with us on issues but have no chance of getting a fair hearing from those in the oversized majority.

It’s time we go to a nonpartisan system of drawing district boundaries. Oh, I forgot. No chance of the gerrymandered majority going for that idea.

Jim Carlson

Milwaukee