1. Read the article and write 5 key takeaways

2. Complete questions 1-43. Write a 1-2 paragraph (detailed)

summary

Changing the face of America: How it would look without gerrymanderingBy Washington Post, adapted by Newsela staff on 02.03.16 Word Count 898

In his State of the Union speech, President Barack Obama called on lawmakers to reform the political system. To begin with, he urged politicians to stop gerrymandering.Gerrymandering is the process of changing district boundaries in order to change election outcomes. Political parties are sometimes able to redraw district maps to improve the number of congressional races their candidates are likely to win. Many people view gerrymandering as unfair and undemocratic."We have to end the practice of drawing our congressional districts so that politicians can pick their voters and not the other way around," Obama said.In most states, state lawmakers are responsible for drawing the district boundaries. Not only do those boundaries determine how many representatives the state sends to Congress, but they can also strongly influence which candidates get elected. For example,

a party could redraw the boundaries of a district to exclude neighborhoods where it is unpopular, helping the party to win future elections. When one party is in control, it can gerrymander the districts to help ensure it stays in control.

A Small Example Of A Bigger Problem

Take a look at the grids above, and imagine they represent a very tiny state of 50 people. Thirty of them belong to the Blue Party, and 20 belong to the Red Party, with all of the Blues on one side of the state and the Reds on the other. The state has to be divided into five districts. Each district will send one representative to the House to represent the people.There are three Blues for every two Reds in the state, so you would think that three of the districts would be Blue and the other two would be Red. That’s what you get when you divide the districts vertically (see Grid 1). Suppose, though, that the Blue Party controls the state government, and it gets to decide how the lines are drawn.Rather than draw districts vertically the party draws them horizontally, so that in each district there are six Blues and four Reds. That’s what you see in Grid 2. Notice that with these boundaries, the Blues win all five districts, even though there are just as many Reds in the state as there were before. With the redistricts redrawn in Grid 3, the Reds win a majority of the districts even though they make up a minority of the state’spopulation. Redrawing the districts can dramatically change the outcomes of elections. That's gerrymandering.

Flaunting Their Manipulations

Some lawmakers gerrymander more blatantly than others. Maryland's districts, drawn by Democrats, are one particularly bad example, and North Carolina's, drawn by Republicans, are another. Advocates of reform have proposed various solutions to the problem over the years. In some states, redistricting is put in the hands of an independent commission. In others, lengthy court battles are playing out to draw the districts more fairly.

A

fundamental problem with district-drawing still remains, though. As long as humans are drawing the lines, there is a danger that bias and self-interest will creep into the process. The alternative could be to simply let computers draw districts for us.

From a technological standpoint, computer-generated districts could be drawn without much difficulty. In his spare time, a software engineer in Massachusetts named Brian Olson wrote a program to draw district lines. The program creates "optimally compact" equal-population congressional districts in each state. In other words, it divides districts based on the number and arrangement of people and ignores their political leanings.

Politicians Vs. Computer

To see what this looks like in practice, compare the map above of our current congressional districts (top) with one we stitched together from Olson's program (bottom).There is a big difference, isn't there? Rather than a confusing snarl of interlocked districts, Olson's program created neat, trim boundaries that make sense. Below is how politicians in North Carolina and Pennsylvania drew their states' districts, compared to how Olson's program drew them.

Programs like Olson's prioritize

compactness, ensuring that people in the same district are geographically close together. One of the telltale signs of gerrymandering is non-compact districts that squiggle and

squirm out in all different directions, evidence of lawmakers trying to bring distant voters into a single district in order to achieve the political mix that best favors their party. Or, as Obama said, districts that let politicians pick their voters, rather than the other way around.

Legal Restrictions Remain

The main obstacles to computer-generated redistricting are legal. Currently, the law does not allow states to simply hand over the redistricting process to computers. For starters, the Voting Rights Act mandates that in some states, race needs to be a factor in redistricting to ensure that minority voters are represented in Congress. While this law was passed in order to empower minority voters, it can have the opposite effect as well, as maps that pack all minority voters into one district diminish their clout everywhere else.In the end, the prospect of an algorithm drawing districts based on population and compactness may be an improvement over our current system, where politicians draw the boundaries that best serve their interests. The chances of this ever becoming reality are slim: It would require state legislators to voluntarily give up their redistricting powers to a computer program. And if there's anything lawmakers dislike, it's giving up power.

(D)

The size of a district can play a crucial role in the outcome of an election.

Quiz

1 Read the sentences from the section "Flaunting Their Manipulations."

Some lawmakers gerrymander more blatantly than others. Maryland's districts, drawn by Democrats, are one particularly bad example, and North Carolina's, drawn by Republicans, are another.

Which word would CHANGE the meaning of the first sentence if it replaced "blatantly"?(A) obviously(B) boldly(C) openly(D) carefully

2 Read the sentence from the section "Legal Restrictions Remain."

While this law was passed in order to empower minority voters, it can have the opposite effect as well, as maps that pack all minority voters into one district diminish their clout everywhere else.

Which answer choice has the CLOSEST meaning to "clout" in the selection above?(A) empower(B) minority(C) opposite(D) diminish

3 Which of the following ideas is emphasized in the graphic "Gerrymandering, explained"?(A) Election outcomes often depend on the number of people in

each party, regardless of districting.(B) In the hypothetical scenario, blue wins more often than

red due to gerrymandering.(C) Even if a party has a minority of voters, gerrymandering can cause

that party to win an election.

(D)

The size of a district can play a crucial role in the outcome of an election.

(B) One of the telltale signs of gerrymandering is non-compact districts that squiggle and squirm out in all different directions...

(C) For starters, the Voting Rights Act mandates that in some states, race needs to be a factor in redistricting to ensure that minority voters are represented in Congress.

(D) In the end, the prospect of an algorithm drawing districts based on population and compactness may be an improvement over our current system...

4 Including the maps of North Carolina and Pennsylvania most effectively illustrates whichselection from the article?(A)

From a technological standpoint, computer-generated districts could bedrawn without much difficulty.