When the United States was founded, political representation was one vote for one white male property owner, while enslaved persons were counted as three-fifths of a person for purposes of apportionment. This early compromise gave slaveholding states disproportionate power without granting rights to those being counted. Over time, through constitutional amendments and federal laws, the principle of “one person, one vote” was reinforced. In many other Southern states, the struggle to translate demographic reality into political representation has been contentious.
As of 2025, Alabama’s population is predominantly white (65.4%), with the black population making up 26.1%. Smaller racial groups, including those of two or more races (4.5%) and Asians (1.4%), represent a growing, but still small, portion of the population according to World Population Review.
Some argue that because black Alabamians make up over one-quarter of the state’s population, two of the seven congressional seats should automatically be majority-minority districts. That assumption is too simplistic. Today, people choose where to live and work, and those patterns don’t always produce neat racial majorities across congressional boundaries. Every citizen, regardless of race or gender, has the right to vote, run for office, and live wherever they choose.
During the most recent reapportionment, I encouraged members of the legislature to review a map of all House and Senate districts, coloring each district red for Republican or blue for Democrat, to visualize the landscape and determine whether two congressional majority-minority districts could be drawn without resorting to gerrymandering. That would be impossible since citizens of Alabama, at least outside of the Black Belt, do not live in areas focused on race.
Over the years, Alabama has added many majority-minority districts. In 2011, while I was in the legislature, we created several majority-minority districts during the reapportionment process. We also shifted one seat away from Birmingham and allocated it to Huntsville. Today, Huntsville has two majority-minority districts as a result.
In recent years, Alabama’s population has grown approximately 0.5% annually. Florida, Georgia and Tennessee have surpassed Alabama in population growth percentages and people. Across the South, only Mississippi has failed to keep pace. Two of the largest states in the union are located in the South: Texas, now the second largest, and Florida, the third. California, of course, still holds the top spot.
But the numbers alone aren’t what matters, especially when it comes to reapportionment. It is not how many people live in a state, but how many legal citizens are eligible to vote. That principle is often ignored. California, for example, counts every resident – citizen or not – when apportioning seats in Congress. By adding non-citizens to its count, California ends up with more representatives in Washington than it truly should have.
While the Voting Rights Act rightly forbids the denial or abridgement of the voting right of any citizen of the United States on account of race or color or to give members of any racial group less opportunity than other members of the electorate, it does not guarantee outcomes. A majority-minority district does not automatically elect a minority candidate. Alabama has seen this firsthand. In 2006, Patricia Todd, a white woman, won House District 54 in Birmingham, a majority-minority district. Her successor, Neil Rafferty, is also white. Similarly, Billy Beasley, a white Democrat, represents State Senate District 28, another majority-minority district. Today in Alabama, we have more majority-minority districts than at any time in the history of our state.
I do not believe that political boundary orientation should determine representation in a state senate or legislative districts. This trend began in the late 1980s and intensified in the 1990s. Professor Glen Browder of Jacksonville State University, a former legislator, secretary of state, and member of Congress, warned of this outcome three decades ago in one of his books. He cautioned that if these trends continued, there would be a time, especially in Southern politics, when we would devolve into a system where the only real contest was the primary election, with general elections rendered meaningless. He predicted that campaigns would become a racial and partisan divide: a white Republican Party and a black Democratic Party. Basically, we find ourselves in this position now.
That means you don’t have to try to build coalitions to get elected because once you secure the nomination in your district, you can hold that and win your seat. From the 1950s to the 1990s, you had to build coalitions between Republicans and Democrats, which created swing districts. Browder warned that this trend was not good because legislators who never had to form coalitions during a campaign will struggle to do so once they are in office. Building coalitions is an important part of lawmaking because laws affect not only Republicans or Democrats; they apply to everyone. Without the skill of building coalitions, our lawmakers find themselves unable to understand or respond to the reactions and needs of people outside their partisan base.
Redistricting is not about ensuring one party wins or another loses. It is about whether the lines on our maps reflect the people who live here, ensuring one person one vote and fair and equal representation for all.
John Merrill served as Alabama’s 53rd Secretary of State from 2015 to 2023. He is also a former member of the Alabama House of Representatives. A Cleburne County native, Merrill was raised in Heflin and worked in economic development and banking prior to his public office roles.
The views and opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of 1819 News. To comment, please send an email with your name and contact information to [email protected].
Don’t miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.
