>> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back. for our spotlight on magazine segments, we will be talking to a contributor to in these times magazine, and she will discuss her article looking at gerrymandering and how activists in wisconsin are trying to change the process. good morning. guest: good morning. thanks for having me. host: for our audience, tell us what the publication for in these times is about.

guest: in these times is based in chicago, around for 40 years, and focuses on investigative journalism, government oversight and accountability, corporate accountability, and also labor. there is a lot of labor coverage as well. host: what point of view does the magazine take? does it can several -- considers up to be liberal, independent, conservative, in the middle? guest: i would say tends to be more progressive. host: tell us exactly what gerrymandering is. we have heard a lot of talk about gerrymandering, especially now that the census numbers are out and we are redrawing congressional districts. what is gerrymandering? host: it's all over the news -- guest: it is all over the news. to understand, we had to understand what deed it -- what redistricting is. redistricting happens every 10 years across the country in

everything was state. it is based on the latest census data which came out on thursday, and basically it is a way to keep electoral districts even and representative of people who live there. people are born, people die, population shifts, so they want to make sure districts are representative of the voters who live there or residents that live there i should say. in most states in the country, this process is done by a partisan body, legislators draw the map. in a handful of states, maybe 10 to 12, there is a separate kind of process for doing that, whether it be some kind of commission or a nonpartisan body of civil servants. in wisconsin, redistricting is

done by the state legislature -- state legislation -- legislators, sorry. the last time in 2010, we saw a really extreme example of gerrymandering happening in wisconsin. basically, gerrymandering is rigging electoral maps to benefit a partisan body, one side or the other, or some other special interest group. they do this through words that are commonly used, cracking or packing voters. packing would be, and this happens a lot in rule districts, packing -- rural districts, packing voters who have a record of voting a certain way and a small area so their votes don't

count as much and cracking would be in milwaukee where we have seen voters in the city kind of divided up and put into suburban districts so their votes don't count as much. it is basically a way to weaken the votes of the opposing party. there are different types of gerrymandering. the one we are focused on the most is partisan gerrymandering. but there is also racial gerrymandering where you try to weaken the votes of a certain racial group. there is prison gerrymandering which involves for example in prison, people in prison should not vote in most states, but they are counted in the community where the prison is located. so when they get out of prison and go back to their home community, they are not counted as part of that district where they live.

so that's another way to weaken voters power. host: out of all of the states and the union, you decided to focus on wisconsin. why wisconsin? guest: wisconsin has one of the most extreme gerrymandering in the country. back in 2010, the republican leadership basically drew the maps in secret in a locked room in a private law office across from the state capital. it was not a transparent process , and everything we know about the process now has only come out through litigation and discovery in court because our current maps has been challenged so much in court. and federal judges decided the state is gerrymandering. host: before we go any further, our viewers can take part in

this conversation. we will open our regular lines. republicans can call (202) 748-8001. democrats you can call (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will open up a special line since we are talking about wisconsin. we will open up a line for wisconsin residents. your number will be (202) 748-8003. you can also text (202) 748-8003 . you can talk to us on social media, on twitter, @cspanwj and on facebook, facebook.com/cspan. you just talked about the wisconsin legislature redrawing their maps in secret. is that a common practice across the united states or is this something that only happens in wisconsin? guest: i would say it is common that the process is not

transparent. and i also would like to make the point, i thing my article gets into this, that gerrymandering has been happening since the early 1800s. politicians have always gerrymandered. democrats, republicans, you know, one of the experts i quote in my speech said gerrymandering is an equal opportunity activity. but what is most concerning i think is in the past decade, we have seen republican leadership use gerrymandering as a nationwide strategy to stay in power and wind districts. so it is not something that is just scattered here and there but it is something -- and they openly talked about this too. this is not secret at all. in 2010, there was a program called red map that specifically

they bragged about switching districts to republican districts, republican-majority districts. the outcome of this is that even in wisconsin, which used to be a purple state, it is now more of a red state, yet the majority of voters support democratic candidates but our state legislation is majority republican. so it creates this imbalance in government. host: is there a push going on in wisconsin and other states to get rid of gerrymandering? guest: absolutely. that is something i focused on, the activists that have been working for -- before 2017 but starting say 2017 it has been ramping up and it is a grassroots upper. they are starting from the smallest government bodies up. for example, one of their big

strategies has been to put this issue to voters, and there has been an 32 out of 72 counties, wisconsin counties, have had referendums on should wisconsin switch to a nonpartisan commission or system of drawing maps. while over 70% in these referendums have supported nonpartisan redistricting versus the current system. i think it is 55 out of 72 wisconsin counties have also passed resolutions in favor of nonpartisan gerrymandering. so it is a popular -- nonpartisan redistricting is popular with voters and gerrymandering is something that is for politicians, by politicians. it is not something that i don't

even think in recent years that republican voters have been asking for. this is something that is happening at the height of republican leadership to hold on to a shrinking voting block. they are trying to make their voting block bigger as that shrinks due to democratic factors. host: you brought this up and i want to ask specifically about this. is this a republican issue, i democratic issue, or does this cross political lines? guest:guest: it is a nonpartisan issue. certainly the activists working for nonpartisan redistricting and what they call fair maps see this as a nonpartisan issue because they feel gerrymandering hurts everyone, republicans and democrats and all voters, because what happens when electric representatives are insured staying in power is that

they don't really have an incentive to be accountable to the people in their district. so they are more apt to have influence from lobbying groups or dark money coming in from the outside versus people who actually live in their district. it creates hyper partisanship, and pushing people further to the left and to the right. i just want to note for your viewers also that even the republicans have done this extreme gerrymandering across the country where they have been able to, there is in maryland, a state that has democratic gerrymandering. it is something both parties have done, but it does not benefit the average voter at all. host: you were talking earlier about the local groundswell in wisconsin against gerrymandering.

are these resolutions having any effect on the state legislature which actually has to redraw the map? guest: i'm not seeing evidence of that. the purpose of these referendum -- the referenda and resolutions at the county level is basically to build a body of evidence when wisconsin maps inevitably go to the court. the system right now, we have legislators draw the maps but it has to be approved by the governor. and we have a democratic governor. it is almost inevitable that that map will be made up by the governor and lawsuits will start happening. the census data came out thursday and with them, less than 24 hours, we have a lawsuit filed trying to get the courts to go ahead and draw maps because there is so little confidence in a map not going to

the courts. host: let's let some of our viewers join this conversation. let's start with randy calling from madison, wisconsin on the democratic line. randy, good morning. caller: good morning. i want to guess to comment on the fact that how upside down wisconsin is. i believe the partisan numbers are 60% of wisconsin once a democratic government, yet we only received 40% of the representative of the state. 40% of the republicans yet 60% of representatives were totally upside down. republican -- republicans in the legislature have been messing with the governor along with making people vote during a pandemic, messing with the election in every way possible. host: go ahead and respond. guest: that is correct. i don't have the exact numbers

in front of me, but for sure we have a lopsided legislative body, and that is because of gerrymandering. host: let's go to sean calling from florida on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, everyone. i want to say to the host, a previous caller -- previous colors were slandering president trump, he never said those words. i think you should clarify that. gerrymandering, as a former democrat, i agree. everything should be fair. we should not try to scam people and move both around that should be -- votes around that should be counted. i believe if you have done your time, you should be able to come out and vote. until we fix the regular election, nothing really matters because no sitting president has ever won florida, ohio, and iowa and lost the election.

this election was rigged. host: go ahead and respond to the gerrymandering comments. guest: all i would say is evidence for voter fraud or a rigged election have not -- the evidence is not there. i think that there has been a lot of talk in the past year about voter fraud and suppression and arguments about that. but i would argue partisan redistricting and the effects of it and gerrymandering have a much greater influence on our electoral system than voter fraud or voter suppression. though i consider gerrymandering a form of voter suppression. host: let's talk to ron calling from cottage grove, oregon on the democratic lines. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to know why the

federal government allows the states to do this. and why can't they stop it? host: go ahead and respond. guest: that's a great question. so there is -- there are rules against racial gerrymandering as part of the voting race act of 1965, but -- voting rights act of 1965, but there is no specific law against partisan gerrymandering. in fact, when cases alleging partisan gerrymandering reach the federal level, and when it got to the supreme court, this cream court said this is a political issue that needs to be decided by states. so it is really kind of solved in the courts, even when judges have said there is a gerrymandering happening here, but they do not feel they can do anything about it.

then they punt it back to lower courts. caller: one of the groups -- host: one of the groups you reference in your article is the people's maps commission. what is that? guest: thank you for bringing that up. the people's maps commission was started by governor e vers of wisconsin and it is a group of people from across the state, not politicians, not government officials, i believe there is a librarian, a teacher, you know a couple doctors, and the commission's role is to draw a map or several maps to basically go and counter what the state legislatures are going to draw. it is essentially a symbolic body, because there maps will be my -- will be nonbinding.

it has basically shown what a nonpartisan redistricting process could look like. the commission heard public testimony starting back last fall and going through i believe it was april. because of the pandemic, it was all virtual. it was all on the department of administration -- wisconsin of department of administration youtube page and i recommend those public hearing videos. they are helpful for understanding redistricting in general because for the first hour of each public hearing, the commission invited in experts, lawyers, government officials, election officials, mathematicians to help explain redistricting because it is quite complex. much more complex than i think i portrayed in a few words here.

that was helpful to me to help understand what redistricting is and what a fair district looks like. host: one of our colleagues -- one of our callers asked earlier what the federal government can do fighting gerrymandering. one of our social media followers one stick no, is a u.s. -- followers wants to know, is a u.s. constitutional amendment needed to address gerrymandering echo guest: that is something for the people would address. there are things in the bill that would address gerrymandering and nonpartisan redistricting, but it does not look like that would pass. host: let's talk to chris calling from hampton, arkansas on the republican line. chris, good morning. caller: good morning. i've only got a comment. sounds like gerrymandering is

not a good thing, but i wonder as a private citizen, am i being gerrymandered over here in hampton? i don't understand. it's not a great city or big community, but i wonder if redistricting -- i wonder if it has an effect on me. host: that's a good question. how does someone find out if they are in a gerrymandering district or not? guest: so there are maps of this, if you google it, you can find maps that show what the likelihood of a gerrymander is across the country. it is hard to understand. there has been attempts to create an app where you would put in your zip code and find out where you stand, but i think this really addresses one of the

issues with the current system, that it is not transparent. so there is no way to find out why a district was drawn the way it was, because there's a lot of factors that can go into how i district is drawn. it is not just population. you also have to consider issues like communities of interest, that is something that comes up a lot. if you have a greater metro area, you might have people commuting in from another county, for example. it makes sense for them to be in that district along with the urban residents that are spending most of their working hours in the city. there are all kinds of ways to look at a community of interest, whether it be a religious community, racial community -- racial identifying community,

and you know, rivers, tourism. communities can interpret this in a variety of ways. so drawing maps is very complex and it would be great if we knew exactly what the reasons behind these maps -- and that is not typically part of the process when it is drawn bipartisan body. as we saw in 2010 in wisconsin, it was completely secret. host: you can always go on your state's website and look at the maps for the political lines in your state, the congressional district, the state legislative districts, even city, town, and schoolboard lines should be available to you on your state or local website. you can go on those and look. for example, we are looking at arkansas here. i will take -- take the time and look at the political lines in your neighborhood and maybe you can see whether you are being gerrymandered or not.

let's go back to our phone lines and talk to doug calling from wisconsin on the republican line. doug, good morning. caller: hello. when we are talking about gerrymandering, are we talking about wisconsin specific, or does it retain to say voting percent are -- voting for senators, the president. isn't that a popular vote? i guess i'm a little confused about why we are talking about the federal government getting involved in this. host: we have had a similar question from someone on social media who wants to know the difference, how does gerrymandering affect the whole one person, one vote situation in the united states? guest: that is a great question. thank you. so yes, it affects our votes for

senate and congress. it does affect the votes for federal representatives as well as local representatives. it is not just wisconsin. i want to make that clear. it is across much of the country. texas for example has a lot of gerrymandering going on. i think i mentioned maryland before, so it is pretty widespread. guest: speaking of -- host: speaking of texas, our next caller is ted from -- ed from houston, texas on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am interested in knowing if it is a fact that politicians, generally, pick their constituents instead of the constituents picking a politician. because what they are doing, they are drawing districts, democrat and republican, to

maintain power, so the democrats do not have any challenges in november, let's say, and republicans don't have any challenges in november either. what happens is the real battle is in the primary. does that sound right? host: go ahead and respond. guest: i think that is right. you put it var -- very distinctly that this is politicians choosing voters and out the other way around. your point brings up an issue i want to address as well, which is that one effect of gerrymandering is that elections become a lot less competitive, and when elections are less competitive, you don't get the best ideas out there, you are not having -- politicians are not having to defend their positions as much as they would have if they had a strong,

viable candidates running against them. host: in your article, you talked about red map and we talked a little bit about red map today. right lines 2020, is that a successor to red map? guest: it is. it is basically this round of redistricting attempt to focus republican advantage in the redistricting process. host: i want to read a little from your article where you talk about the success republicans have had using red map. according to the university of southern california, the 2018 state legislative election established gop minority rule in virginia, north carolina, pennsylvania, ohio, and wisconsin. meaning that despite winning a minority of voters, the gop still controlled the

legislature. wisconsin was ranked second for virginia for the worse gerrymandering in the country. virginia voters recently approved redistricting reform, effectively bumping wisconsin to the top battleground for reform. so this actually was successful in keeping republicans in charge at the state level in several states. guest: it was very successful. it was very successful. [laughter] host: is there a democrat equivalent group to red map and right lines 2020. guest: not that i'm aware of. there are democrat-backed groups focusing on redistricting, but those groups are pushing for nonpartisan redistricting to my knowledge, not specifically on trying to gain party advantage in elections via electoral maps. host: one of the things we talked about earlier was that a

lot of these maps end up going to court where someone sues over gerrymandering or just because they do not like the maps. one of our social media followers has a question and wants to know, how much do these lawsuits cost and who pays for them? guest: taxpayers. [laughter] it is -- at least two defend them in court is paid for by taxpayers. this lawsuit filed yesterday in wisconsin federal court is filed by prominent democratic lawyer in washington dc who specializes in election reform. so don't believe that would be paid for by taxpayers, but a lot of it is paid for by taxpayers. host: let's go back to our phone

lines and talk to steve calling from rockville, center -- rockville center, new york on the independence line. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. cat, my question, if you have a non- -- kat, my question is, if you have a nonpartisan group deciding district lines, what are the best ways to do it? is it to create competitive corrections, to make the districts less convoluted geographically, is it at the county line, the city line? how should it be done if it is done in a nonpartisan way? guest: that is the million-dollar question. i think that -- i have heard the comment when i was listening to the public hearings and people say why cannot -- why can't we just divide the map and be equal blocks of land.

that would be nice if it were that easy. to your question, it is different depending on the district. the rules about redistricting are that the district the as compact as possible and that it be all together in one area. you can't have part of district one over here and another part up here in district five. and then you get into more qualitative factors like communities of interest and county lines, school district lines, city limits, all of these , there are a lot of factors to consider. there is a long running joke about gerrymandering, that gerrymandered districts look like -- i should go back to where the term gerrymandering comes from is from this

politician in massachusetts in 1812 who gerrymandered a district and his name was jerry eldridge. a cartoonist drew the district and it looks like this mythological salamander because it was so misshapen and that was called the gerrymander after jerry eldridge. that is where this comes from. there's this idea that gerrymandered districts always have to be looking nuts and have various parts. that is sometimes true, but you could also have a district that does looked compact. it's a complex issue, and i think one reason we have seen such extreme gerrymandering in the last round is the level of text we have for mapping. mapping has become very high-tech. you can put terabytes of data

into an algorithm and get very refined mapping data. i heard one expert describe it as a used to be a dark arts, gerrymandering used to be a dark arts and now it is a dark science. it is a double edge sword because the flip is that mathematicians are also now developing ways to test, actually mathematically test if a district is gerrymandered. they use a model called computational mathematics, very specific. my math is not good enough to really fully explain it, but basically, they are comparing the current map to every map that could be possible statistically and they have an equation that comes out of that that can give them an objective answer about whether one party or another or one group or

another has an electoral advantage. host: just to emphasize the point you made about it coming a dark science, i want to read this paragraph from your story. a voter suppression tactic such as pole literally see -- pole literacy tests gerrymandering is a slick assess. as our matted -- editing are to put it, today it is a multi--- with armies of lawyers, terabytes of voting data, and advanced software. is that what we are seeing when we see these new maps being drawn. is that what we see over the next year or so? guest: it's going to be a mathematical site over these maps for -- mathematical fight over these maps for sure. host: let's go ahead and talk to

mary calling from las vegas, nevada on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i feel what is going on throughout the state's akin to being in like a banana republic. hundreds of thousands of people have been thrown off the voting rolls. greg pallas talks about the people that have been thrown off of the voting rolls. what is the danger if the gop takes control of all of these legislators, that they throw off people that do not define their interests, that they can overturn your vote. so we need federal legislation. host: can congress do anything about this? guest: they could through the for the people act would be one way to do it. i'm not familiar with what mary

was talking about, throwing voters off of the voter rolls. that is not something i know anything about. that is not how gerrymandering works. it is -- you vote in gerrymandered district but your vote is weakened in the context of your district and district surrounding. host: if you are in a gerrymandered districts, you are still voting, it is just that your vote does not have the influence it would have if you are in correctly districted district. my understanding that correctly? guest: that's correct. it is not one person, one vote. host: let's talk to joann calling from nevada on the republican line. good morning. caller: i would really appreciate it, the lady from vegas that called, but i was redistrict and now i am represented from two senators from vegas.

the north isn't even represented in the senate. so where is my voice? where's my representation? it took my map from northern california and put a little tip into vegas where we got the population. took my representation away to these southern people. you people just piss me off. host: go ahead and respond there, kat. guest: i listened to hours of public testimony before the commission in wisconsin, and they were similar to what she was saying, people do not feel heard, they feel their elected representatives take them for granted. there was one mayor of a fairly big city in wisconsin who said her elected representative, i'm not sure the senator in congress, but this person never visited her. there is a big disconnect

between voters and their elected representatives as a result of this system. host: we talk about earlier that a lot of these new maps coming out of the census will end up in court. of course the highest court in the land is the supreme court here in washington, d.c.. -- washington, d.c. how has the court dealt with gerrymandering issues in the past? guest: the president now is that they are not going to address claims of partisan gerrymandering because they say that is a topic for lower courts to pick up. i don't want that to be misconstrued that federal courts have certainly said there has been gerrymandering happening. it is just as a preen court has been hesitant to take that up and they hunted it back to lower courts.

-- punted it back to lower court. host: we talked to bob on the independent line. good morning. caller: michigan and wisconsin are somewhat similar in their makeup, national elections have a fairly democratic and statewide an extremely conservative, almost run -- almost reactionary republican state and senate. what we found, in 2018, the people voted overwhelmingly to redistrict, and that was three years ago. they just made the panel this week to start the process if that gives you any idea. what i have seen myself is that the democrats, even though they are the vast majority -- minority of the state legislature, don't seem to be too concerned with that situation. neither party seems to be concerned with the heavily

gerrymandered situation of the state. both parties do not talk much about it. host: so how do you get people interested in the issue of gerrymandering like what is going on in wisconsin? guest: i think one of the activists i spoke with said she talked to people about issues that they care about. her example was public education. that is something that has pretty broad support across party lines, but it is not something we are getting a lot of support from our elected representatives four. so when people see how it affects actual issues and how it affects what is happening in their communities, i think they are more able to understand it. but that is exactly -- the politicians in michigan don't seem to be interested in

gerrymandering, and that is the issue, that politicians are not incentivized necessarily to care about this. right now, we have a strong push from democrats for nonpartisan redistricting because they have a personal stake in it. over 10 years ago, i think in 2009, democrats were in control in wisconsin and they could have switched to a nonpartisan system or created a law, changed the constitution so we had a nonpartisan redistricting commission and they did not because they were hoping to gerrymandered. it is really sucked -- gerrymander. it is really something that i think needs to come up on the grassroots from voters. host: real quickly, where should we be watching to see issues talking about gerrymandering

from this point in wisconsin and around the united states? where should we keep our eyes? guest: definitely on the lawsuits coming up that are being filed. this is going to be a court battle. then i would say on, you know, voting rights legislation. this is in the end, gerrymandering is a threat to democracy. i think all voters should care about wanting their vote to count. so any legislation that is related to voting rights i think needs to be carefully considered and looked at. host: we would like to thank kat cisar, a contributor to the in these times magazine, for coming on this morning and talking about gerrymandering and how activists in wisconsin are trying to change the process. thank you so much for being with us this morning. host: thank you so much.

we would like to thank all of our callers and guests and viewers. join us tomorrow for another edition of washington journal. have a great saturday. wash your hands and stay safe. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2021] ♪ >> make your voices be heard with the c-span studentcam. create a document terry that enters how can the federal government impact your life. your video can be on policies or

programs that affect you and your communities. the studentcam competition has $1000 in total cash prizes and you have a shot at the grand prize of $5,000. entries will begin to be received wednesday, september eighth for competition rules, tips, and more information on how to get started, go to c-span at student.org. >> sunday night on q&a, journalist elizabeth becker, tells the story of vietnam war correspondents when a time was covering -- when covering war was male-dominated. >> there is no military censorship. so it was probably the first and last uncensored american wars. the vietnamese had their censorship so it was for women a

gift, because it was only because of this lack of codification, this openness that women could get through what had been the biggest barrier that you are not allowed on the field. >> journalist elizabeth becker sunday night on c-span's q&a. you can find all q&a interviews where you get your podcasts. >> sunday, c-span's series january 6: views from the house continues. three more members of congress share stories of what they saw, heard, and experienced, including dean phillips of minnesota. >> at that moment, when the capitol police officer announced that we should to cover, i stood up at the back of the gallery, a representative from arizona was objecting to the arizona slate of electors, and i shouted out

at the top of my lungs, this is because of you. i screamed it. this is because of you! and i think i was representing four years of angst and anxiety and anger, many of us saw this coming from a mile away. i think i represented millions of americans who felt the same way. the entire country, including myself, recognized the fragility of our democracy. i have great appreciation for their traditions in the congress and decorum. i do not like to violate it. but i do not regret it, because it is what i was feeling and it was four years of pent up anxiety of what was transpiring right in front of our eyes. >> this week, you will also hear from jamie raskin of maryland

and brian fitzpatrick of pennsylvania. january 6: views from the house, sunday night at 10:00 eastern on c-span, c-span.org, or listen on the c-span radio app. ♪ >> next, new york lieutenant governor holds a press conference a day after governor andrew cuomo announce he will resign from office amid allegations of sexual harassment. this is about 20 minutes. lt. gov. hochul: it sounds like there is an audio problem. what a great start. can you hear me now? sounds like a commercial. can you hear me now? good afternoon and thank you for being here. i