There is some talk of democrats doing mid decade redistricting to overturn some of the gerrymandering. Cue Fox news calling it undemocratic...
And for the benefit of the rest of us, for the record it ain't. I think there was a Supreme Court decision a few decades ago where they decided that the state legislature can redistrict twice a week if it feels like it.
Now, what we need is a constitutional amendment that narrows redistricting so that it's fair. But since both parties benefit from it, and even if it did make its way through Congress it would have to be ratified by three quarters of the same state legislatures who caused the problem in the first place, it may never go through.
The 'how' part is the problem, because in the eyes of Congressional law, my example of a 2.3M to 2.1M vote creating a 9 to 4 representation of the minority party is essentially meaningless. Parties are not a recognized function of the political system the way parliamentary democracies work - the state government apportions the districts, and whoever gets the most votes in that district wins. I honestly don't have the first clue how to legally challenge a bogus districting map, and given the state of affairs I highly doubt there even is one, at least under federal law. A good first step would be making such a thing.
The only way I could think to do it would be to empower the FEC to just not recognize a state's federal voting results as long as it doesn't produce proportions to within a one-seat margin of rounding. And even I think that would be ludicrously infeasible.
The real thing to fear is that after the last election, all those Republican state governments clinging to a disproportionate amount of power in those states are saying they want to change how their Electoral College votes are distributed. Currently every state is winner-take-all by popular vote, except for Maine and Kansas. The way they work is, each presidential candidate gets one Electoral vote for every Congressional district they win, and the majority taker gets the extra two (reminder: every state has as many Electoral votes as Congressmen, so that's one for each district and two for the Senate).
Nobody ever pays much attention to this, because both Maine and Kansas only have like five votes each and they're so homogenous they almost never split anyway. But imagine if say Pennsylvania, or Ohio, or Florida worked that way. Or the example of Michigan up there. Because Obama won the popular vote there 2.3M to 2.1M he won the state's 16 electoral votes. under this proposed system, we can guess by the Representative results that a 2.3M Democrat to 2.1M Republican vote would have translated to Obama getting five Electoral votes to Romney's eleven.
That ought to put some starch in your shorts. Of course, if that level of blatant vote stealing actually occurred at such a high-profile level, you can bet that there'd be some serious movement on it in about one election cycle. Except if those Republican state governments get their way, that election would be 2016 and the beneficiary would be a Republican candidate, and you can basically bid farewell to ever having any other government for the rest of time.