Democrats howling at Texas redistrict push should take a look in the mirror
It starts in East St. Louis and then moves steadily north.
By the time it gets to Springfield, home of Abraham Lincoln, about 90 miles away, it takes a sharp turn to the east, reaching Decatur and finally Champaign, itself about 80 miles away from Springfield.
Advertisement
It's a jagged, narrow strip of territory with no obvious rhyme or reason as it traverses six counties.
It's less a congressional district than a road trip, and bears a resemblance to the original gerrymander, a long, salamander-like state Senate district in Massachusetts in 1812.
The only point of the new 13th district lines, fashioned in the redistricting after the 2020 census, was to gather together far-flung Democrats to create another Democratic congressional district.
Advertisement
Mission accomplished: The 13th went from being a competitive district long held by a Republican to flipping to the Democrats in 2022.
Overall, Illinois lost one district after the 2020 census and managed to write lines that changed the congressional ratio from a 13-5 Democratic advantage to a 14-3 Democratic advantage.
The political analysis website 538 called the new map 'the worst gerrymander in the country drawn by Democrats.'
Advertisement
This makes it especially inapt that a contingent of Texas Democrats fleeing the Lone Star state to try to stop what they consider unfair new congressional boundaries found a safe harbor in Illinois.
Next time their travel agent should do a hypocrisy check before booking a destination.
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker welcomed the self-exiling Democrats and hailed their courage.
He told them that he and other top Democrats in the state were pleased 'to stand in solidarity with you and send a clear message to all Americans.'
Advertisement
His conscience showed no sign of being pricked by the fact that he signed into law the redistricting that saw Republicans in 2022 win nearly 44% of the popular vote in Illinois congressional races — and only 18% of the congressional seats.
A special session of the Texas Legislature is considering new lines that could net Republicans another five House seats.
Gov. Greg Abbott has cited a Department of Justice letter saying that some of the current districts need to be redrawn because they represent unconstitutional racial gerrymandering (the Biden Justice Department had been fighting Texas because, in its view, the current lines didn't reflect enough racial gerrymandering).
The Supreme Court is taking up a Louisiana case that should clarify the extent to which states can consider race in drawing so-called majority-minority districts.
In the meantime, the partisan effect of the new Texas lines before the 2026 mid-terms is unmistakable: If Republicans were likely to lose five seats from this redistricting, there's no doubt that the state's Republican governor and Republican legislature wouldn't be undertaking it.
Drawing district lines is an inherently political enterprise, and parties tend to give themselves the best of it.
When Democrats controlled the Texas Legislature, they maintained congressional lines in their favor.
Advertisement
It wasn't until 2002, when Republicans won the state house for the first time since Reconstruction, that the GOP could redraw the congressional map — and Republicans subsequently won a majority of Texas congressional seats in 2004, also for the first time since Reconstruction.
Since Democrats gerrymander too, they have limited options for retaliating against Texas.
Pritzker says he may re-draw his state's lines, but this would require gerrymandering on top of his current gerrymander.
Advertisement
Gavin Newsom is making similar noises, but the California map is already tilted toward Democrats: Republicans won nearly 40% of the congressional vote in the Golden State in 2024, but only about 17% of the seats.
If the Texas plan goes through and all else remains equal, the Lone Star state will have about the same partisan skew as California.
Less gerrymandering would be better than more, but Democrats like Pritzker, who blessed his state's meandering 13th district, have no standing to make the case.
Twitter: @RichLowry
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
27 minutes ago
- Axios
SEPTA faces final countdown to avoid service cuts
SEPTA has one week to fill its $213 million budget shortfall and avoid massive cutbacks — a reality the transit agency is facing without a once-reliable plan B. Why it matters: The impending service cuts will impact commuters and students returning to schools later this month, and they could interrupt the city's planning for big-ticket events in 2026. The big picture: Pennsylvania's divided government is weeks late in hammering out a budget deal. Amid the biggest sticking points: state transportation funding, including the money SEPTA needs to avert its doomsday service cuts. While Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro and the Democratic-controlled House have backed more SEPTA funding, the Republican–controlled Senate has balked at the proposal and called for more agency oversight. Threat level: SEPTA faces an Aug. 14 deadline to get state funding to shore up its budget gap, agency officials said Wednesday. Barring that, a 20% reduction in service across rail, buses and trolleys will begin Aug. 24. What they're saying: SEPTA general manager Scott Sauer said during a Wednesday news conference that the deadline is necessary to schedule service changes across the system, set staff assignments and prepare vehicles. "Time is of the essence," he said. Sauer warned that even if state funding arrives after Aug. 14, SEPTA will need at least 10 days to restore full service. Meanwhile, it appears unlikely that Shapiro can count on an alternate plan to fund SEPTA, as he did last year. Flashback: In 2024, after SEPTA failed to secure more funding in the state budget and faced service cuts, Shapiro directed the transfer of $153 million in federal highway funding to the agency in a maneuver known as " flexing." Shapiro didn't need state lawmakers to sign off on the transfer. But the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), then under former President Joe Biden, had to review and sign off on the transfer. The intrigue: Now without a fellow Democrat in the White House, Shapiro could face a chillier reception to such a request — especially considering Shapiro and President Trump have sparred in the past. SEPTA has not heard of flexing federal funding for the agency being an option so far, agency spokesperson Andrew Busch tells Axios. FHWA spokesperson Angela Gates declined to discuss hypothetical flexing requests. But Gates noted that the federal agency has approved four requests from the state this year for flexing federal funding, but declined to identify them. A spokesperson for Shapiro declined to comment. The spokesperson referred Axios to Shapiro's previous comments in which the governor said budget negotiations were making slow progress. The bottom line: It's likely state budget or bust for SEPTA.
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
Voting rights protected by the historic Voting Rights Act threatened as law has its 60th anniversary
WASHINGTON (AP) — Wednesday is the 60th anniversary of the day President Lyndon Johnson made his way to the U.S. Capitol and, with Martin Luther King Jr. standing behind him, signed the Voting Rights Act into law. The act protected the right to vote and ensured the government would fight efforts to suppress it, especially those aimed at Black voters. For many Americans, it was the day U.S. democracy fully began. That was then. 7 President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 60 years ago. AP The law has been slowly eroding for more than a decade, starting with the 2013 Supreme Court decision ending the requirement that all or parts of 15 states with a history of discrimination in voting get federal approval before changing the way they hold elections. Within hours of the ruling, some states that had been under the preclearance provision began announcing plans for stricter voting laws. Those changes have continued, especially since the 2020 presidential election and President Donald Trump's false claims that widespread fraud cost him reelection. The Supreme Court upheld a key part of the Voting Rights Act in 2023, but in its upcoming term it's scheduled to hear a case that could roll back that decision and another that would effectively neuter the law. Voting rights experts say those cases will largely determine whether a landmark law passed during a turbulent era decades ago will have future anniversaries to mark. 'We're at a critical juncture right now,' said Demetria McCain, director of policy at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. 'And, let's be clear, our democracy is only about to turn 60 when the Voting Rights Act anniversary gets here. I say that because there are so many attacks on voting rights, particularly as it relates to Black communities and communities of color.' Native Americans celebrate a win that could be temporary The reservation of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians is about 10 miles (16 kilometers) from the Canadian border, a region of forests, small lakes and vast prairie land. Its main highway is a mix of small houses, mobile homes and businesses. A gleaming casino and hotel stand out, not far from grazing bison. In 2024, the tribe and another in North Dakota, the Spirit Lake Tribe, formed a joint political district for the first time. They had filed a lawsuit arguing that the way lines were drawn for state legislative seats denied them the right to elect candidates of their choice. U.S. District Court Chief Judge Peter Welte agreed and put a new map in place. 7 The Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians and another tribe in North Dakota, the Spirit Lake Tribe, formed a joint political district for the first time in 2024. AP State Rep. Collette Brown ran for the legislature because she wanted to see more Native American representation, and she won under the new map. 'It felt surreal. I felt accomplished, I felt recognized,' said Brown, a plaintiff in the lawsuit and the Spirit Lake Tribe's Gaming Commission executive director. 'I felt, OK, it's time for us to really start making change and really start educating from within so that we're not silenced.' Brown, a Democrat, co-sponsored several bills on Native American issues that became law, including aid for repatriation of remains and artifacts and alerts for missing Indigenous people. 7 The future of the tribes' district is in the hands of the Supreme Court. AP This year's anniversary of the Voting Rights Act 'forces you to look at how far we've come,' from Native Americans to women, said Jamie Azure, chairman of the Turtle Mountain tribe. Now the future of their district is in the hands of the Supreme Court. Will individuals be allowed to file voting rights challenges? The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers North Dakota and six other states, overturned Welte's decision 2-1, saying the tribes and entities such as the NAACP Legal Defense Fund and the ACLU do not have a right to sue over potential violations of voters' constitutional rights. That ruling expanded on an earlier 8th Circuit opinion out of Arkansas that rejected a different challenge on the same grounds. Late last month, a 3rd Circuit court panel ruled in a separate case out of Arkansas that only the U.S. attorney general can file such cases — not private individuals or groups. 7 The University of Michigan Law School Voting Rights Initiative found that since 1982 nearly 87% of claims under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act were from private individuals and organizations. AP Those decisions upended decades of precedent. The Supreme Court has stayed the ruling for the tribes while it decides whether it will take the North Dakota case. The University of Michigan Law School Voting Rights Initiative found that since 1982 nearly 87% of claims under that part of the Voting Rights Act, known as Section 2, were from private individuals and organizations. Leaving individuals without the ability to file challenges is especially troublesome now because the Justice Department under Trump, a Republican, seems focused on other priorities, said Sophia Lin Lakin, who heads the ACLU's Voting Rights Project. Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! 7 Voters waiting in line to cast their ballots in Fort Defiance, Ariz., on Election Day in 2024. AP The government's voting rights unit has been dismantled and given new priorities that, she said, have turned enforcement 'against the very people it was created to protect.' The Justice Department declined to answer questions about its voting rights priorities, cases it is pursuing or whether it would be involved in the voting rights cases coming before the nation's highest court. Supreme Court weighs another case on race and congressional districts Two years ago, voting rights activists celebrated when the Supreme Court preserved Section 2 in a case out of Alabama that required the state to draw an addition congressional district to benefit Black voters. Now it's poised to rehear a similar case out of Louisiana that could modify or undo that decision. 7 The Justice Department declined to answer questions about its voting rights priorities, cases it is pursuing or whether it would be involved in the voting rights cases coming before the nation's highest court. AP The court heard the case in March but did not make a decision during the term. In an order on Friday, the court asked the lawyers to supply briefs explaining 'whether the State's intentional creation of a second majority-minority congressional district violates the Fourteenth or Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution.' Robert Weiner, the director of voting rights for the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, said while it is a 'matter of concern' that the court is asking the question, the fact the nine justices did not reach a decision during the last term suggests there weren't five votes already. 'They wouldn't need re-argument if the sides had already been chosen,' he said. Trump's Justice Department shifts focus on voting issues At a time when the remaining protections of the Voting Rights Act are under threat, the Justice Department has shifted its election-related priorities. Under Attorney General Pam Bondi, it has dropped or withdrawn from several election- and voting-related cases. The department instead has focused on concerns of voter fraud raised by conservative activists following years of false claims surrounding elections. 7 Under Attorney General Pam Bondi, the Justice Department has dropped or withdrawn from several election- and voting-related cases. AP The department also has sent requests for voter registration information as well as data on election fraud and warnings of election violations to at least 19 states. In addition to the shift in focus at the Justice Department, federal legislation to protect voting rights has gone nowhere. Democrats have reintroduced the John Lewis voting rights bill, but it's legislation they failed to pass in 2022 when they held both houses of Congress and the White House and needed some Republican support in the Senate. Earlier this year, Trump signed an executive order seeking to overhaul voting in the states, which includes a documentary proof-of-citizenship requirement on the federal voting form, though much of it has been blocked in the courts. The GOP-controlled House passed a bill that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote. And gerrymandering state legislative and congressional districts remains prevalent. The slow chipping away at the 60-year-old law has created a nation with an unequal distribution of voting rights, said Sean Morales-Doyle, director of the voting rights center at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. Some states have been active in expanding access to voting while others have been focused on restricting the vote. 'The last five to 10 years,' he said, 'the experiences of voters increasingly depend on where they live.'
Washington Post
28 minutes ago
- Washington Post
I'm a Republican who didn't vote for Trump. I was wrong.
I am a registered Republican. And like many others, I didn't vote for Donald Trump. His tone and rhetoric alarmed me. But in hindsight, much of what Trump has done, particularly in his foreign policy, has turned out to be effective. Realizing my mistake set me thinking about a question I've pondered my whole life: What does it mean to be smart?
