
Newsletter Subscribe
Enter your email address below and subscribe to our newsletter
Enter your email address below and subscribe to our newsletter
How well can you map the competing perspectives on one of America’s most contentious political practices? In these passages, let’s navigate the complex battlefield of electoral boundary drawing, where democracy’s very foundation is at stake.
Read these medium difficulty passage(s) and answer the question(s) that follows. You can choose the GMAT style Reading Passage and the question or the GRE RC variant and answer the GRE-style question. Even better, you could solve both.
The decennial process of redistricting—redrawing electoral boundaries following census results—has increasingly become a contentious battleground in American democratic governance. Proponents of the current system assert that redistricting fundamentally upholds democratic representation by ensuring districts reflect population shifts. According to these advocates, the process maintains the constitutional principle of “one person, one vote” by adapting electoral maps to demographic changes, thereby preventing the dilution of voting power in growing communities.
Critics, however, argue that partisan gerrymandering—the strategic manipulation of district boundaries to favor a particular political party—undermines the very democratic principles redistricting purportedly protects. They contend that when the majority party controls the redistricting process, they typically create “packed” districts, where opposition voters are concentrated into few districts, and “cracked” districts, where opposition voters are dispersed among multiple districts to minimize their electoral impact. These critics maintain that such practices effectively predetermine election outcomes, rendering many general elections merely ceremonial.
Proponents believe redistricting “fundamentally upholds democratic representation” and maintains “one person, one vote,” while critics argue that partisan gerrymandering “undermines the very democratic principles redistricting purportedly protects”. This represents a clear disagreement about whether the current process preserves equal representation.
Correct Answer: Choice (B)
Gerrymandering, deriving its name from an 1812 political cartoon depicting a salamander-shaped district created under Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry, has evolved from crude boundary manipulation to sophisticated electoral engineering. Political scientists identify two primary tactics employed in contemporary redistricting: “packing,” which concentrates opposition voters into minimal districts to waste their numerical advantage, and “cracking,” which disperses opposition voters across multiple districts to dilute their influence. Defenders of current redistricting practices maintain that geographic clustering of like-minded voters naturally produces partisan imbalances regardless of map-drawers’ intentions. They argue that attempts to create artificially competitive districts often violate traditional redistricting principles such as preserving communities of interest. Conversely, reform advocates contend that modern computational tools and partisan intent transform natural demographic patterns into engineered disadvantages for opposition parties, creating legislatures whose partisan composition poorly reflects overall voter preferences, ultimately undermining democratic accountability and responsive governance.
The correct answer, (D), best captures the passage’s central focus on the ongoing debate between different perspectives on redistricting. The passage presents multiple competing viewpoints on gerrymandering practices and their impact on democratic representation, making this title most reflective of the content’s emphasis on contested perspectives rather than just historical development or technical details.
Correct Answer: Choice (D)