These are the consequences of gerrymandering -- hyper-majorities where one side rarely (if ever) cooperates with the other. Hell, cooperation is internally translated as capitulation.
Our congressional representatives don't have to care about their constituents because they are guaranteed re-election due to electoral districts being meticulously reorganized in their party's favour.
We need a third party that one of the two has to appease in order to get any work done, and if that third party is ignored by one then the other gains favour. Until then, we will live in tyranny of "The Other Side" holding us hostage.
Gerrymandering is not about creating hyper-majorities. That would be counterproductive - votes above 50% are wasted. It is about maximizing number of likely seats. Also the country has sorted itself geographically (e.g. cities vs. rural) along ideological lines, so non-gerrymandered districts might as much if not more one-sided.
[Edit]
Hyper-majority may be a result, but not on the side controlling redistricting: the opposite side may be gerrymandered into few concentrated districts.
Stop spreading FUD -- they're definitely not "consequences of gerrymandering". The political science literature is pretty clear that gerrymandering doesn't have near the impact that many attribute to it.
I think you are confused.
Our congressional representatives, by and large, are doing exactly what their constituents want. While congress as a whole has a dismal approval rating, individual congressmen do not. That is, in fact, the real problem.
There are many causes for this. Gerrymandering is not really one of them.
Actually, gerrymandering does the opposite. The goal of gerrymandering for your party is as many seats as possible where you have a large but not super-massive advantage. You'd rather have three 55-45 seats than a 65-35 and two 50-50s, whereas you try to stick your opponent with as many 70-30s as possible.
Our congressional representatives don't have to care about their constituents because they are guaranteed re-election due to electoral districts being meticulously reorganized in their party's favour.
We need a third party that one of the two has to appease in order to get any work done, and if that third party is ignored by one then the other gains favour. Until then, we will live in tyranny of "The Other Side" holding us hostage.