Gerrymandering and House Districts

What does it take to pass Federal policy/legislation to slow global warming?

     If the President vetoes legislation passed by the Senate and the House, then the legislation requires two thirds majorities in the Senate and the House for passage. 
     If the President will sign the proposed legislation, it requires passage by a House majority and a filibuster proof Senate majority of 60 or more, if a filibuster is indicated – otherwise a simple majority. 

Gerrymandering is on trial.

     During 6 years of the Clinton administration and 6 years of the Obama administration, passage of policy to slow global warming was blocked by the Republican majority in the House. After the census of 2010, the House was redistricted and heavily gerrymandered (see The Great Gerrymander of 2012 and also The House isn't competitive in 2016 but Gerrymandering is on trial).

     Gerrymandering is the practice of redrawing the boundaries of House districts based on the new census data, with some states losing House seats and some states gaining House seats. State political parties have always tried to redraw House districts to give their party more House seats and these attempts have frequently given rise to many irregularly shaped as opposed to compact districts. It is in the current heavily gerrymandered House that it is most difficult for the Democrats to gain a majority necessary to pass policy to slow global warming. 

     Hence, the unusually few House races which could plausibly give the Democrats additional House seats will attract special interest from both parties – and, in all likelihood, will cost much more than in the past. In particular, after the “Citizen’s United” decision by the Supreme Court that permitted corporations to give unlimited amounts of money towards the electoral process (“uncoordinated” with campaign committees) and subsequent Federal Court decisions effectively also permitting unlimited individual contributions, the Democrats will likely be substantially outspent in supporting their candidates. This is the concrete meaning of the “post-Citizen’s United era” in American elections.

             
     Furthermore, much current electoral spending is “dark money” where donors are not known. However, it has now been made clear (see Dark Money by Jane Mayer) that a well organized, extensive network of electorally active “free market” conservative billionaires like the Koch Brothers have switched their focus from Federal to state races – funneling huge sums to elect very conservative governors and state legislatures. Given this new “arch” conservative focus, it is to be expected that extraordinary amounts of “dark money” will go into closely contested House elections.