Democrats probably can't win the redistricting wars
With the return of most Texas Democrats, Republicans in the state are on the verge of delivering a new House map that would give their party another five seats that President Donald Trump would have comfortably carried in the 2024 election, and which Republicans are likely to win in the 2026 midterm elections.
The move is part of a larger Republican plot to rewrite the rules concerning House apportionment and district drawing that's aimed at isolating the GOP's governing majority from the will of the voters.
In the realm of redistricting, however, Democrats can potentially use the power they wield in states that they govern to give themselves more seats that they're likely to win in the 2026 midterm elections. These could serve to offset some of the gains Republicans are set to make through redistricting. The problem for Democrats is that, compared to the GOP, there are fewer opportunities to game the system.
Miles Coleman, associate editor of Sabato's Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia Center for Politics, told Salon, 'Republicans are likely going to come out ahead if the re-redistricting wars escalate, but the question is how much.'
Coleman said that, for simplicity's sake, he's assuming that California will be able to redistrict five Republicans out of office in the midterms, effectively canceling out the gain Republicans are set to make in Texas.
However, he explained, Republicans are also looking to redraw their maps in Ohio, Florida, Indiana and Missouri, which could collectively give Republicans six or seven more seats in Congress.
Republicans in Nebraska have also considered redistricting, potentially preventing Democrats from flipping an Omaha-area seat held by Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb.. Republicans could also potentially pick up a seat in New Hampshire, though they would have to overcome the opposition of Gov. Kelly Ayotte, a Republican who has voiced opposition.
'The Democrats' path to making up that possible six-to-seven-seat gap isn't very straightforward. Maryland Democrats could draw out Rep. Andy Harris (R), although they would probably need to clear their map with the state's highest court, which is full of Hogan appointees. Democrats could also try to squeeze another seat out of [Illinois], although that would take some creative line-drawing,' Coleman said in an email. Larry Hogan was the state's relatively moderate Republican governor from 2015 to 2023.
The main problem for Democrats is that, in the states that provide them the best opportunity to gain seats through redistricting, they are constrained by state law. In New York, redistricting rules are set by a constitutional amendment that disallows mid-decade redistricting and partisan gerrymandering. While Democrats could re-amend the state constitution, they don't have time to do this before the midterms.
In Colorado and Virginia, two states where Democrats could potentially gain seats through redistricting before the midterms, the process is also controlled by an independent commission. The same is true of New Jersey, Michigan and Washington.
In Minnesota, a state with a Democratic majority in terms of popular vote, with an evenly divided House delegation, the political assassination of state Rep. Melissa Hortman earlier this year gave Republicans control of the state House.In short, Republicans have a clear path to pick up between 11 or 12 seats, while Democrats don't have an obvious way to make up for those losses in states that they govern.
In the context of the 2026 midterms, a dozen or so new Republican seats could be enough to insulate them from backlash to Trump and the Republican agenda. In some recent elections, swings in the House have been relatively small. In 2022, Republicans only netted nine seats in the midterms and in 2024, Democrats netted two seats.
The gerrymandering likely wouldn't be able to save Republicans from a midterm election more akin to 2018, however, when Democrats stormed back into the House majority, netting 41 seats. Whether the 2026 midterms look more like 2022 or 2018, however, depends on how sentiments, redistricting and the rules around voting shift between now and November of next year.
The post Democrats probably can't win the redistricting wars appeared first on Salon.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas lawmakers approve redistricting map favouring Republicans
Texas legislators have approved new congressional maps designed to give Republicans an edge in next year's elections for the US House of Representatives. After a two-week standoff, where Democrats fled the state to stall the vote and rally supporters against the redistricting plans, Republicans in the Texas House of Representatives passed the new voting lines in an 88-52 vote. The maps will now go to the Texas Senate, where they are expected to be swiftly approved. They create five new Republican-leaning seats that would shore up the party's US House majority in Washington DC. Democratic-led states are pushing to redraw their own maps to offset the Texas ones. President Donald Trump backed redrawing the maps to safeguard a Republican majority in the US House. Republicans hold a slim majority in the upper chamber of Congress, which Democrats aim to win back in the 2026 midterm elections. Wednesday's vote in Texas followed a dramatic showdown as Democrats fled across state lines to deny Republicans the quorum necessary in the state legislative body to take a vote. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, ordered their absent Democrats' arrest, and some of them said law enforcement had monitored their homes while they were gone. The lawmakers returned this week, saying they had achieved their objective of drawing national attention to the matter. In an effort to ensure Democrats would not attempt to halt the vote again, Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows ordered the statehouse chamber doors to be locked on Monday. He also said Democrats would be "released into the custody" of a designated police officer to ensure they returned to the statehouse on Wednesday for the redistricting vote. Several Democrats instead ripped up the written agreements that they were required to sign for the police escort. One lawmaker, Nicole Collier, decided to sleep in the chamber rather than be escorted by an officer. In the time since Texas started planning these new voting maps, other states controlled by both political parties - including Florida, New York, Ohio and Missouri - have been weighing similar changes. California lawmakers are currently debating new maps that would give new advantages to Democrats in five districts, which would cancel out changes made in Texas. A key provision in California says the maps would only go into effect if Texas or other states went ahead with changes favouring Republicans. After the vote on Wednesday, California Governor Gavin Newsom wrote on X: "It's on, Texas." The new maps in Texas sparked uproar over gerrymandering - the redrawing of electoral boundaries to favour a political party - which is practised by both main parties and is legal unless ruled to be racially motivated. Like other states, Texas typically redraws congressional districts once a decade when new population data is released by the US Census. Texas Democrats claimed that redrawing the maps before the next population count in 2030 was being done along racial lines - an argument that has been rejected by Republicans. Voting maps that were approved in 2021 after the last population count are still being litigated over claims of racial discrimination. During one of the many heated exchanges during debate in the Texas statehouse, Republican legislator Todd Hunter, who introduced the redistricting bill, was applauded as he scolded Democrats. "Don't come into this body and say we didn't include you," he said. "You left us for 18 days, and that's wrong." Democrats in the chamber questioned the legality of the maps and accused Republicans of trying to "steal" an election. "Let's talk about cowardice and cheats," Democratic legislator Ann Johnson said. "The root of all of this is around racism and power," she added. "A pure power grab." Democrats and civil rights groups have said the new maps will dilute voting power from minorities, which would violate federal law, and have threatened to sue. Texas Democrats return home after redistricting row California governor unveils voting lines plan to counter Texas Republicans Texas redistricting feud escalates as Democrats face bomb and FBI threats
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Protesters heckle Vance, Hegseth at photo op to thank National Guard troops in DC
As President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops in Washington continued Wednesday, protesters booed Vice President JD Vance during a photo op with the guardsmen stationed in the city. The protesters jeered Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller as they visited Union Station, blocks from the U.S. Capitol, to thank the troops at a Shake Shack where they bought lunch for the guard members. "Well, a lot has changed in the past seven days," Vance told the troops, referring to when the federal surge against D.C. crime began. "You guys are doing a hell of a job. I'm proud of you and we're grateful," he told the troops. "So, we'll say hello for a bit -- just want to shake some hands and say hey to you guys." "Free D.C.," the protesters shouted as the three officials arrived and then later inside the Shake Shack. The chants drowned out much of what Vance, Hegseth and Miller said as they tried to speak to reporters. MORE: 6th Republican-led state sends National Guard troops to DC as Trump continues law enforcement takeover Vance and Miller dismissed the jeers, calling the protesters "crazy" and "communists." "They appear to hate the idea that Americans can enjoy their communities," Vance said. Vance was asked why troops were stationed at Union Station instead of parts of the city with higher crime rates. The vice president said the station was being overrun with homeless people and visitors didn't feel safe. "This should be a monument to American greatness," he said. Vance added that he believed that crime statistics do not report the full scope of crime on the streets of the nation's capital. After being met with boos at Union Station, Vance sat down with Fox News Wednesday evening to recap his visit, and criticized those who called the surprise visit a PR stunt. "You've got a lot of national guardsmen over there, some D.C. cops who have been heckled by some of the protesters. So I thought, what a good show of moral support to have the vice president, some of the senior team at the White House show up." At a back-to-school event Wednesday morning, Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser said the city doesn't need federal agents to ensure safety in D.C. "Crime has gone down in our city and it has gone down precipitously over the last two years because of a lot of hard work, changes to our public safety ecosystem, including changes to the law," Bowser said. "And we know that those facts don't comport to what some people are saying, but those are the facts." Bowser also said she doesn't believe the National Guard should be used for "law enforcement." "They have to be used on mission specific items that benefit the nation," she said of the guardsmen. However, when asked about how her relationship with President Trump has changed since the start of the year, Bowser said her plan is to "represent the district." Flanked by Metropolitan Police Department Chief Pamela Smith, Bowser repeatedly deferred to Smith when asked about the city's crime data. The MPD has been collaborative with the federal agencies and so far has developed a congenial relationship with its federal partners, according to Smith. Smith also acknowledged having federal agents spread throughout the city has been helpful to the city's police force. "Hearing from the officers on the street, some of them have found it to be very helpful, some people in the community have found it to be very helpful," she said. ABC News' Arthur Jones II contributed to this report.
CNBC
19 minutes ago
- CNBC
Elon Musk must face lawsuit claiming he ran illegal $1 million election lottery
Elon Musk was ordered on Wednesday by a federal judge to face a lawsuit by voters accusing the world's richest person of defrauding them into signing a petition to support the U.S. Constitution for a chance to win his $1 million-a-day giveaway. U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman in Austin, Texas said Jacqueline McAferty plausibly alleged in her proposed class action that Musk and his political action committee America PAC wrongly induced her to provide personal identifying information as part of the giveaway, late in the 2024 election campaign. Lawyers for Musk and America PAC did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Musk founded America PAC to support Republican Donald Trump's successful 2024 presidential run. McAferty, an Arizona resident, said Musk and America PAC induced voters in seven battleground states to sign his petition by promising that $1 million recipients would be chosen randomly, as in a lottery, though the voters had no real chance to collect. She said voters who signed were also required to provide names, addresses, email addresses and phone numbers. In seeking a dismissal, Musk listed several "red flags" as proof he had not run an illegal lottery. He said these included statements that the $1 million recipients were "selected to earn" the money and expected to become America PAC spokespeople, defeating the idea that the payment was a "prize." But the judge cited other statements suggesting the defendants were "awarding" the $1 million, and the money could be "won." "It is plausible that plaintiff justifiably relied on those statements to believe that defendants were objectively offering her the chance to enter a random lottery--even if that is not what they subjectively intended to do," Pitman wrote. The judge was appointed to the bench by President Barack Obama in 2014. Musk had also rejected the suggestion that petition signers suffered harm by providing contact information. Pitman said an expert in political data brokerage could testify what that information was worth for voters in battleground states. The lawsuit was filed on Election Day, Nov. 5, 2024. A day earlier, a Philadelphia judge refused to end Musk's giveaway, saying that city's top prosecutor failed to show it was an illegal lottery. Musk is a Texas resident, and his electric car company Tesla TSLA.O is based in Austin. The case is McAferty v Musk et al, U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas, No. 24-01346.
