by Professor » Thu Apr 24, 2014 7:50 am
Think about it for a second. Let's say that minorities make up 30% of the population. And, for a half-sec, let's assume a homogeneous distribution across a state (no real concentration in any one area). In other words, if you go down a street, the houses are majority-majority-minority-majority-majority-minority-majority-majority-minority-etc. If that's true across the state, and the minorities typically vote for one party of candidate (who supports minority issues) while the majorities vote for another, then how many minority votes will the average minority-supporting candidate get in a district? 30%. While the majority candidate will get 70%. In other words, although 30% of the population is a minority, there will not be a single candidate who is supporting the minority issues.
That's exceedingly unfair and undemocratic. Legal gerrymandering prevents this, and helps ensure that, if there is a 30% population of minorities, then roughly 30% of the candidates who are elected will be elected to serve the interests of those minorities.