Ends Versus Means: Public Opinion on Congressional Redistricting

State-level redistricting processes shape congressional elections and representation, and recent reform efforts have propelled congressional redistricting procedures into mainstream political discussion. We ask whether citizens’ satisfaction with redistricting in their state is shaped by ends (election results) or by means (type of redistricting process). Leveraging questions on the 2022 Cooperative Election Study, state-level variation in redistricting processes, and 2022 election outcomes, we find that both ends and means shape the public’s satisfaction with redistricting in their state. Among respondents who correctly identified their state’s redistricting process for the 2022 midterm elections, those living in a state with a redistricting commission reported greater support for redistricting than those living in a state with legislature-controlled redistricting. We also find that respondents who are represented by a copartisan in the U.S. House are more supportive of their state’s congressional redistricting process than both respondents who identify as independent and respondents who are represented by an opposing party legislator. Successful electoral reforms require public buy-in, and our results suggest that partisan power considerations and a lack of public knowledge about congressional redistricting present barriers to reforming state-level redistricting processes.