Trump, GOP Look to Redraw Texas Congressional Map Ahead of Midterms

Bloomberg

21-07-2025

Live on Bloomberg TV
CC-Transcript
00:00Yeah. Look, I mean, this happened 20 years ago in Texas. The circumstances are a little bit different, but there's no prohibition on mid-decade redistricting in Texas. And so back in 2003, after Republicans took control of state government, they redrew the previous map, which was sort of a version of a it was a court drawn map, and it was kind of really a Democratic gerrymander. This time, Republicans in Texas would be modifying their own gerrymander from earlier this decade that produced a 25 to 13 Republican advantage in the congressional delegation. But following the 2024 election and with the White House leaning on them, it seems possible they can draw additional seats. And I think it looks like they're going to try. And then it's a question of what what does the map look like and what's the environment next year? And do they actually realize the gains that they'd be drawing for themselves on paper? Well, Texas is our big example here. But when you add a couple of other states, is this actually a strategy to to maintain control of the House? Yeah, it looks like it. I mean, Ohio, we already knew, was going to have to draw new maps. Ohio is a very convoluted redistricting system, and the map that's currently in place was only designed or was only allowed to be in, in effect for two two election cycles, 20, 22 and 2024. Republicans are basically going to have more power over the process than they did back in 2021. In 2022, Ohio has a 10 to 5 Republican House delegation right now. It's possible that maybe the Republicans could get that up to 12 or even or even 13 to 2. And so that's another state to watch. You know, it's possible that other states could try to reopen redistricting. Some Democrats are thinking about trying to do that, although it's harder in those states because a lot of the states where Democrats have control of state government also has some sort of, you know, restrictions on draw on gerrymandering or an independent commission that draws the lines. You know, Texas doesn't have that. And so it's just easy for Republicans, just reopen it in Texas. It's a lot harder in a state like California, for instance. Let's talk about California, because Governor Gavin Newsom is always waiting in the wings here. Kyle, at a moment like this, he says California, in fact, should try to counter states like Texas by redrawing its own congressional districts. Listen to what the governor said. When Donald Trump calls in to the Texas legislature along the lines of the phone calls he made saying, find me some votes in Georgia and says, find me more. Five more seats in Texas. They're playing by a different set of rules. They can't win by the traditional game, so they want to change the game. We can act holier than thou. We can sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be. Or we can recognize the existential nature that is this moment. Let's not talk about the way the world should be. Let's talk about the way it is. In 2010, voters in California approved a measure that put the job to your point of drawing California's congressional map into the hands of an independent commission. So what's Gavin Newsom talking about? Well, look, I mean, it looks like California is thinking about trying to maybe go back to the voters to ask them to grant an exception. You also could maybe make a reading of California law and say that, you know, the start of the decade, the maps are drawn by commission, but doesn't necessarily say anything about the middle of the decade again. All this stuff would end up and would end up in court if attempted. Republicans assert that even though Democrats have, you know, that it's there's an independent commission in California that is still a Democratic leaning map. And there may be some truth to that. But I think it's also true that California could have an even more lopsided delegation than it already is. It's 43 to 9 Democratic right now. But you could you could potentially draw a map where the Democrats could get an extra, you know, several number of of seats out of California. But the thing is, is there are many more hoops to jump through for Gavin Newsom and Democrats in California than there are for Governor Greg Abbott and Republicans in Texas. Mm hmm. You just said something important, Kyle. And that's court. That's where all this is going, right? Oh, yeah, I would assume, you know, I mean, there's already an active lawsuit by Democrats and their allies over the Texas map, and there surely will be again. But, you know, these these cases take forever to get to get sorted out. So even if there was some sort of, you know, legal, strong legal argument to be made against the maps, maybe that isn't determined until 2028. And, you know, the White House pretty clearly is looking at this and saying, hey, how can we maximize as Republicans, our chance of keeping the House in 2026, which is Trump's last midterm, because he's constitutionally forbidden from running for office again in 2028. And all these moves are designed toward that goal. Remember that vote in California 15 years ago as Arnold Schwarzenegger urged voters to terminate gerrymandering? The New York Times reminds us of this in the story that they wrote up on it. Gerrymandering has been blamed for the partisan political world that we now live in. Kyle Not to get too big picture, but this is the root of our partisan evil, is it not? Well, I don't know if I if I'd go that far. I mean, I do think that I mean, you know, in an ideal world, I think that, you know, Congress would create rules for redistricting that was sort of fair between the states. But the thing is, is that what your definition of fair might be and what my definition, the definition of fair might be could potentially differ. I will say that that, you know, you do have a situation where a lot of members are in safe seats, even in, you know, one of the things in gerrymandering is you and this is what the current Texas map really is, is that you have a bunch of safe Republican seats and then you have a smaller number of safe Democratic seats to the point where very few of the actual districts are competitive in general elections. And that does maybe make members a little bit more, you know, reliant on primary voters and appealing to them as opposed to as opposed to, you know, general election swing voters. But even if you had the, you know, criteria for non-partisan redistricting, you'd still have a bunch of safe seats. So, you know, I think there's a lot of other things at play behind beyond gerrymandering, even though I think we could sort of agree that, you know, drawing partisan lines for your own party's benefit, you know, that that's not something that's particularly appealing. Kyle Conner. If we just spent the better part of three months talking about cuts to Medicaid, cuts to SNAP, cuts to food stamps, and we've seen some pretty chippy town halls leading to the conventional wisdom that in an off year, it might be even more difficult for the party in power to maintain control of Capitol Hill, the House, and maybe even in this case, the Senate. What are you seeing as the ground shifts beneath our feet here in the impact of the president's big, beautiful bill will have on the midterm elections? Look, it's an unpopular piece of legislation, I think. At the very best, Republicans, you know, won't suffer because of it. And I think it's possible they will suffer because of it. It's hard to find examples from history of, you know, a party passing a big kind of one party piece of legislation and then, you know, benefiting from it in the you know, in the in the next election, in the next midterm. You know, I think we we've seen throughout 2025 that there been, you know, a handful of special elections here and there. And it kind of feels like 2017 did. And that, you know, the Democrats are sort of more engaged, that there were sort of the usual forces kind of working against the White House party. I think what's what's interesting about this, this potential gerrymander in Texas and some of the ripple effects of it is that it would open the possibility that there could be, in fact, be a big wave against the Republicans next year and that, you know, for the Democrats to win the House popular vote by several points. But Republicans might still be able to hold on the House because of because of new gerrymanders. So that's that throws the House, I think in house, I think into a little bit more uncertainty. This is why this can be fun stuff to talk about this far out. We've only got a minute left, Carl, but I'm curious if we should be reading into fundraising yet. The RCC outraising the D triple C in June and for all of the second quarter. Does the money matter in a world of politics like this? I do think it matters on the margins, although, you know, we've seen plenty of instances in recent years where, you know, one side has a big money advantage and doesn't necessarily you know, that doesn't necessarily produce a victory for them. I think that, you know, one of the things we've seen with Democrats, I think, is that, you know, some of their fundraising may tick off, particularly as they get nominees in some of these districts that they're trying to challenge. And I think Republicans can be can be perfectly happy with the start they're off to in terms of fundraising. But again, answering if it's predictive one way or the other.