Gerrymandering History and Definition:
In looking at the theory of gerrymandering in general it is evident that the practice has been a major part of modern politics for centuries. While the term had been previously used, it was given its name in the early 19th century in the United States. “Elbridge Gerry, who as governor of Massachusetts in 1812 signed into law a redistricting plan designed to benefit his political party” (Barasch, 2012). Although its history goes back centuries, its use in contemporary elections is still a major challenge to attaining an equality based and democratically representative process. Taking advantage of this process, those who have established power to control various factors associated with elections are able to make changes that challenge any opposition to their own dominance.
The general practice of gerrymandering is the result of the need for states to have their districts drawn accurately according to their populations. This is essential for the democratic functioning of the electoral system. For this reason, the constitution conveys the need for states to redraw or reassess these lines every ten years as needed. However, the issue is that during periods of redistricting those who hold control are able to take advantage of this process. The need for redistricting is conveyed by the constitution, however, “this leaves the process of redistricting to state legislatures and governments” (Friedman & Holden, 2005, p. 2). Due to the fact that political parties tend to act in their own interests, rather than in the interest of the government as a whole, they use the process of redistricting in order to gain an advantage in elections. This is done by redistricting in such a way that their own parties are given an advantage within specific areas over their competitors. This can involve spreading large numbers of voters of a specific party across multiple districts in order to weaken their impact on a single district, packing them into a single area in order to lower their influence on other districts, forcing those of the same party to run against one another, and redistricting areas that have a large amount of support for a single candidate to other areas.
These functions demonstrate the primary processes by which political gerrymandering occurs. In establishing the underlying intentions that politicians have in promoting these methods it is also important to understand the historic context in which the term arose. The concept of political gerrymandering, although it had been used in centuries prior, was first established in the United States during the nineteenth century. During the eighteenth century, gerrymandering was employed by Anti-Federalists in an attempt to keep James Madison from being elected to the House of Representatives. The idea was given its name decades later in 1812 in the form of a cartoon satirizing the actions of Elbridge Gerry, who had begun to redistrict Massachusetts for his own parties benefit and, although the original author is not known, its creation is generally prescribed to Nathan Hale and Benjamin and John Russell (Friedman & Holden, 2005). The cartoon itself is credited to a painter named Elkanah Tisdale, and contains a monstrous creature shredding a map of the districts. This indicates their general idea about the practice of gerrymandering. It further shows the complex context in which the term gerrymandering emerged. The desire to redraw district lines in order to shut out specific candidates and favor others is the primary purpose of gerrymandering, and has been since its inception.
Gerrymandering in Malaysia:
Next, through the application of the theory of gerrymandering in relation to the recent political development of the delineation of electoral boundaries in East Malaysia, a better idea of how this process has an effect on contemporary politics can be achieved. Through analysis of the recent elections in Malaysia, it is evident that various processes are at work that have made it possible for the reapportionment of various seats in parliament possible (Ansolabehere & Palmer, 2015). Through the application of methods such as redistricting and reapportionment the party that has dominated Malaysian politics for half a century has been able to maintain control.
In looking at the theory of Gerrymandering in relation to Malaysia in particular it is evident that their complex and diverse society presents major obstacles to overcoming the established powers in the parliament. The ethnic populations in the country are said to have been redistricted in such a way that the majority has established the direct application of gerrymandering to ensure the continuation of their office. “In Malaysia, political mobilization follows ethnic divisions and the struggle for power is among political parties representing particular ethnic groups” (Hai, 2005, p. 102). The effect of this is that the smaller ethnic-Chinese population, densely packed into larger urban areas, are able to establish political control over the larger, less densely populated, more rural areas inhabited by most of the ethnic Malays. The challenge is in establishing a political system that is able to account for this diversity in an equal way. “Delineating constituencies with unequal electorates favours parties with more supporters in the smaller constituencies” (Hai, 2005, p. 103). This becomes even more of an issue when accounting for the critiques that have been levied against the Malaysian electoral commission itself, which has been seen to have legitimized the gerrymandering of the established political party. “The Election Commission has also been accused of complicity with the government in gerrymandering electoral constituencies” (Hai, 2005, p. 124). This demonstrates the major challenge in establishing an opposition to the redistricting that has been taking place in Malaysia over the past half-century. These processes have worked to establish the power of the ruling party and marginalize those attempting to gain recognition on the national stage. In looking at more recent developments, it is evident that this process is still in effect and, in fact, seems to be becoming more of an issue for the nation.
Malaysia's Recent Elections:
In the recent Malaysian general election, it is evident that, despite the ruling party not receiving the popular vote, they were able to win a majority of parliamentary seats, while the opposition party, which received a majority of the popular vote, was unable to attain a majority of seats in parliament. This demonstrates a profound disconnect from the outcomes of elections and the popularity that is ascribed to those running. For many voters, this was a “glaring example of the systematic rigging” that they believe has been “designed to keep the ruling coalition in power” (Lumpur, 2014). This is further demonstrated by the notion that the ruling party, known as the United Malays National Organisation has held office in Malaysia since it gained its independence in 1957. This issue has been widely ascribed to the fact that large, dense populations have been apportioned to specific seats in parliament, which make it nearly impossible for other candidates to gain and edge in these areas. The complex and diverse nature of Malaysian society therefore presents a major challenge for the establishment of equal democratic power. This has essentially given the ruling party “free rein to draw the electoral boundaries in the government’s favour” (Lumpur, 2014). This, in turn, has made it more difficult for other legitimate candidates to gain any power in the Malaysian government. In looking at the case of Sarawak in particular, it is evident that the malapportionment that is going on demonstrates the existence of gerrymandering.
In looking at the particular changes that occurred in Sarawak regarding the increasing of parliamentary seats from 71 82 seats. This has been viewed as evidence of real-world practice of the malapportionment or gerrymandering. These changes can be seen to weaken the opposition party in Malaysia while simultaneously strengthening the dominant party. This redistricting was done through the vote of the parliament, which has a majority in favor of the opposition party, making it difficult for any questioning of the policies in practice. It is furthermore, evident that this is primarily due to the fact that “the bill to increase the number of seats in the state legislative assembly from 71 to 82 was passed in November” (Davidson, 2015). This occurrence presents a profound issue for the capabilities of the opposition party to gain any traction against the majority party. The gerrymandering goes beyond simply readjusting the district lines, however. In order to gain an advantage the ruling party established new seats. “To negate the opposition's strength, a new seat – Samalaju – was carved out of Kidurong and to a lesser extent part of the adjacent Barisan Nasional-held seat of Kemena” (Davidson, 2015). These changes are obvious examples of the party's intentions to overpower any opposition to their own established priorities.
The practice of gerrymandering has been around for hundreds of years and has had a profound effect on the development of modern politics. These developments occur in the form of centralized and less representative power structures that are able to maintain control of specific areas despite the majority of the populations' desires or concerns. This presents a major challenge to the establishment of the democratic process and true representation for citizens of democracies (Bernama, 2015). Through the reapportionment of seats and redistricting of election lines, parties that hold power have the capacity to restructure these important boundaries at will. In looking at how these methods have been employed within Malaysia it is evident that there is a long history of gerrymandering on the part of the ruling party. This has made it fundamentally challenging for any opposition party to gain a foothold against them in the political arena. In looking at the most recent election, the blatant reapportionment of specific seats in order to gain an edge against the opposition, despite losing the popular election, has called into question the legitimacy of the electoral process in the country (Prasad, 2016). This demonstrates how gerrymandering can have a profound effect on the political process of a country.
References
Ansolabehere, S. & Palmer, M. (2015). A Two Hundred-Year Statistical History of the Gerrymanderer. Congress & History Conference, Vanderbilt University.
Barasch, E. (2012). The Twisted History of Gerrymandering in American Politics. The Atlantic.
Bernama, A. (2015). Appeals Court Says Notice Re-Delineating Sarawak Electoral Boundaries Valid. Astro Awani.
Davidson, D. (2015). Gerrymandering at Its Best in Redelineation of Sarawak Seats, Says Political Analyst. The Malaysian Insider.
Friedman, J.N. & Holden, R.T. (2005). Towards a Theory of Optimal Partisan Gerrymandering. Harvard University Press.
Hai, L.H. (2005). Electoral Politics in Malaysia: ‘Managing’ Elections in a Plural Society. Electoral Politics in Southeast and East Asia. 101-148.
Hazis, F.S. (2015). Patronage, Power, and Prowess: Barsian Nasionale's Equilibrium Dominance in East Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia, Vol. 33, No. 2, 1–24.
Lumpur, K. (2014). Malaysian politics: What’s Malay for gerrymandering?. The Economist.
Prasad, K. (2016). Identity Politics and Elections in Malaysia and Indonesia: Ethnic Engineering In Borneo. Routledge.
