logo
Analysis: Why Trump's Texas battle over the House could end up affecting every American

Analysis: Why Trump's Texas battle over the House could end up affecting every American

CNN13 hours ago
Democrats might finally have learned something about Donald Trump — if they hope to beat him, they must get down in the gutter alongside him.
Party leaders in powerhouse blue states on Monday vowed to emulate the president's methods to create new Democratic-friendly seats in the House of Representatives in response to his bid to carve out five new GOP districts in Texas.
Their promises came as they celebrated Democratic Texas state lawmakers who suddenly became the fresh faces of the anti-Trump resistance after facing arrest warrants for fleeing the state in an exodus that ground a special legislative session called by the president's allies to a halt.
This all might look like yet another twist in a generationslong struggle by both parties to gerrymander districts to get a leg up in elections. And some voters' eyes might glaze over at what seems like an internal Texas tussle.
But the fight has profound national implications.
In the short term, the House of Representatives — which Democrats hope to win back in midterm elections next year to rein in Trump's presidency — could be at stake. Democrats currently need a net gain of three seats to take the majority. If the Texas plan passes without a response by another state, they will need eight. That could dash their goal of imposing a clamp on Trump's runaway presidency.
In the medium term, the Texas redistricting fight must be seen against the backdrop of a fraught political age.
There are growing signs American democracy is fraying. Republicans will argue, correctly, that Democrats have mounted their own egregious redistricting schemes in states such as Illinois and Maryland. But the instigator of the effort to make the Texas congressional delegation even redder was a president who already has a dark record of trying to subvert the verdict of voters.
Longer term, the national political fight that has erupted over Texas looks almost certain to further erode the checks and balances of democracy, however it ends. If both parties now simply go all-out in a national gerrymandering frenzy, they will produce a House of Representatives where it will be even more difficult for incumbents to lose their seats and that will make meaningful political change even harder.
If nothing else, the furor demonstrates the imperative of winning power and forging transformational change before the opportunity is lost.
Republicans over the last decade have built an unassailable conservative Supreme Court majority that enabled GOP redistricting efforts based on race, including in Texas. And they've elected and supported a president with an expansive and constitutionally questionable thirst for imposing his own personal power that has shattered most political norms. Most presidents would not be as blatant in Trump in trying to change the electoral battlefield.
Over the same period, Democrats failed to bolster ranks of liberals on the Supreme Court — for instance, by not persuading late Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire when a liberal replacement could be confirmed while the party controlled the presidency and the Senate. In 2024, Democrats initially backed an aging and unpopular President Joe Biden, despite warnings that his candidacy could open the door again to Trump and his anti-democratic project.
This loss of power has been disastrous to progressive aspirations and to protecting the liberal victories of the last 50 years, including the nationwide constitutional right to abortion.
Some top Democrats see the Texas redistricting showdown as a moment for their party to show more ruthlessness.
'We are at war,' New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said Monday, alongside several exiled Texas lawmakers, warning that Democrats should forget independent redistricting panels intended to draw fairer maps that represent a complex electorate. 'The playing field has changed dramatically, and shame on us if we ignore that fact and cling tight to the vestiges of the past,' Hochul said. 'That era is over. Donald Trump eliminated that forever,' she said.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a plan for a mid-decade redistricting in his state to match the one underway in deep-red Texas. His proposal would come before voters in November — the latest skirmish in a long-running ideological feud between the two states. But it will only be triggered if Texas moves ahead with its own plan. Newsom said he still favored a national independent districting body, but warned that Democrats needed to respond to the GOP's hardline tactics.
'Things have changed. Facts have changed. So we must change,' Newsom said. 'We have got to think anew. We have got to act anew. And we are reacting to the change — they have triggered this response, and we are not going to roll over.'
Potential 2028 Democratic primary candidates, including Newsom and Gov. JB Pritzker of Illinois — who has also rushed to back the Democratic Texas lawmakers — have compelling personal interests in joining the fight. In two years, candidates will be asked on a debate stage what they did in the battle over Texas.
But they're also seeking to revive a national party pummeled by Trump, which lacks leadership and has left its supporters listless. Grassroots progressives have been pining for someone, anyone, to show some stomach for the fight — even though Democrats lack any power in Washington to meaningfully hurt the president.
The Texas uproar also coincides with multiple examples of Trump's widening authoritarianism, following his cowing of Congress, crushing of constraints within the federal government, and co-option of the Justice Department and some intelligence services into instruments of his whims. On that score, a source told CNN on Monday that Attorney General Pam Bondi has ordered prosecutors to launch a grand jury investigation into Obama administration officials over the Russia investigation.
Given all this, if the Democrats don't fight back now, when will they ever fight?
As CNN's Eric Bradner reported Monday, the proposed new GOP maps could force two prominent Democratic lawmakers, Reps. Greg Casar and Lloyd Doggett, into a primary against one another. They'd also merge two other seats and make two south Texas seats held by Democrats more Republican-leaning.
While the Democrats made a statement by leaving Texas, their chances of ultimately prevailing seem thin, given the financial pressure of $500 daily fines for non-attendance and their interrupted livelihoods when they are away. And Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a key Trump ally, could call further special sessions later in the year.
This is why some Democrats believe that if they can threaten Republican seats in their own states, they might convince House Speaker Mike Johnson to call off his allies in Austin. 'Perhaps the Republican members of Congress here in New York could say to their Republican colleagues in Texas — 'Hey, slow down on this because this could affect us,'' Carl Heastie, the speaker of the New York State Assembly, said.
This seems a long shot, however, not least because there are considerable impediments in New York to a swift redrawing of maps. Hochul admitted that that even if everything goes smoothly, redistricting that would bypass New York's current nonpartisan commission could only be in place for the 2028 election — a lifetime away in Trump-era politics. And attempts by Democratic states to rebalance electoral maps might convince more GOP bastions to do the same.
So, if an outside Texas strategy is unlikely to force the Texas Republicans to back down, why are Democrats pursuing it?
This may be one of those times in politics when a party can win something by losing.
Democrats might not only engage their demoralized partisans by taking the fight to Trump on Texas; they can use the battle to organize and focus their message as they grapple for traction after a grim political year.
Defending democracy might be a desirable project in the abstract. But in the past, especially when Biden was warning that Trump imperiled America's 'soul,' the idea felt distant from voters infuriated by high grocery prices and the cost of housing. And impassioned warnings from Democratic leadership about how Trump would threaten democracy didn't stop his reelection.
Hochul and other Democrats seemed on Monday to be reaching for a way to connect the democracy question to more immediate voter concerns through the prism of the Texas power grab. She argued that stopping such schemes was critical to charting a path back to power so Democrats could reverse Trump's policies on tariffs and deportations.
That will require a toughening of the Democratic approach, one that underscores the distance traveled since former first lady Michelle Obama warned that when Republicans like Trump go low, 'we go high.'
'With all respect to the good governance groups, politics is a political process,' Hochul said, dismissing 'purity tests' that would make electoral maps fair to everyone involved through nonpartisan commissions.
'If Republicans win the legislature, they can have at it. But until then, we are in charge, and we are sick and tired of being pushed around.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker rallies with Texas Democrats, calls Trump a ‘cheater'
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker rallies with Texas Democrats, calls Trump a ‘cheater'

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker rallies with Texas Democrats, calls Trump a ‘cheater'

Joined by national and state Democratic leaders, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker accused President Donald Trump and Republicans of trying to cheat American democracy ahead of the 2026 midterm elections by redrawing Texas' congressional maps. The 60-year-old Illinois leader, a possible presidential contender, said Democratic governors cannot ignore Trump's aggressive steps, which under the Texas GOP plan would push as many as five House Democrats out of office. Such a move would provide national Republicans with a slightly heftier cushion next year to protect their slim majority in the House of Representatives as they prepare to defend Trump's agenda and other controversial moves. "Donald Trump is a cheater... and if they're going to cheat, then all of us have to take a hard look at what the effect of that cheating is on democracy, and that means we've all got to stand up and do the right thing," Pritzker said at an Aug. 5 press conference, flanked by Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin along with Texas Democrats and others. "So as far as I'm concerned, everything is on the table," he added. The comments underscore a noticeable shift within the Democratic ranks among even institutionally-minded party and elected leaders who have been hesitant to embrace the mantra of "fighting fire with fire." But many grassroots progressives and their allies have demanded for months that the party take a more aggressive approach, citing how the administration and its MAGA-aligned allies have been bending several U.S. institutions to their will since Trump's return to power. Asked if Texas is providing Democratic-controlled state leaders with a roadmap on how to draw their own maps, Martin told reporters at the press conference that the party will fight back in the same way. "Our constitution is under assault. Voting rights are being completely violated," he said. "Now is not the time for one party to play by the rules while the other party has completely ignored it." Earlier in the day, Trump, appearing on CNBC by telephone, said Republicans were "entitled" to the five new seats drafted by a Texas House committee on Aug. 2, and called out the group of Texas Democrats who fled to liberal-leaning states, saying those places have been using the same tactics when crafting their congressional districts. "Do you notice they go to Illinois for safety, but that's all gerrymandered," he said. "California is gerrymandered. We should have many more seats in Congress. It's all gerrymandered." This story will be updated. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker says Texas GOP, Trump cheating democracy

‘Morning Joe': Scarborough Scoffs at ‘Idiotic' Plan to Gerrymander Texas Further
‘Morning Joe': Scarborough Scoffs at ‘Idiotic' Plan to Gerrymander Texas Further

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

‘Morning Joe': Scarborough Scoffs at ‘Idiotic' Plan to Gerrymander Texas Further

"And worse than that, it's just not right," the MSNBC host says Texas Republicans are trying to gerrymander the state even further in their favor, and on Tuesday morning, MSNBC host Joe Scarborough could do nothing but scoff at how 'idiotic' their plan is, on top of being anti-democratic. During their discussion, the 'Morning Joe' hosts zeroed in on the fact that Texas Democrats deliberately left the state this week, to avoid Republicans forcing through a vote to redraw the districts and grab another five house seats. More than that, the MSNBC hosts scoffed at the response of Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows, who angrily said that the politicians 'abandoned their posts and turned their backs on the constituents they swore to represent.' More from TheWrap 'Morning Joe': Scarborough Scoffs at 'Idiotic' Plan to Gerrymander Texas Further | Video Jimmy Fallon Jokes Trump Fired the Weatherman So Now the East Coast Heat Wave Doesn't Exist | Video Roku Debuts Ad-Free Subscription Service Howdy in Partnership With Lionsgate, WBD, FilmRise Seth Meyers Leaves Jenna Ortega Speechless With Suggestion for Combatting Her 'Resting Bitch Face' | Video 'Oh, my goodness, it's almost like Lincoln talking to Congress at the beginning of the Civil War. The stakes are so high. Oh wait, no they're not Willie!' Scarborough mocked. 'To do what's right for the people of Texas? To take the vote away from anybody in Texas who's basically a Democrat by gerrymandering the districts?' Scarborough then explained how the redistricting would be 'so out of whack' that, even if state legislative races came down to a 50/50 split by voters, Republicans would still win handily. 'That guy, and the rest of the Texas legislature, and Greg Abbott want to rig the system,' Scarborough said. 'They want to make sure that Republicans are over-represented on election day. They want to rig the process. And so they're acting so indignant about it!' The MSNBC host then called out the 'short-sightedness' of the Republicans' plan, arguing that it would open the door for blue states to do the exact same thing. 'If Texas achieves what they want to achieve, then California will go back! And then they will draw up even more rigged lines that will help Democrats,' Scarborough said. 'And New York State will do it, and who knows? Maybe then Florida decides to — I mean, it really is, it's an idiotic thing to do.' 'They used to do it every 10 years, and now, I don't know if the President told them to do this or somebody else told them to do it, but it's just stupid,' he continued. 'And worse than that, it's just not right.' You can watch the full discussion from 'Morning Joe' in the video above. The post 'Morning Joe': Scarborough Scoffs at 'Idiotic' Plan to Gerrymander Texas Further | Video appeared first on TheWrap.

Trump Says JPMorgan, Bank of America Refused His Business
Trump Says JPMorgan, Bank of America Refused His Business

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump Says JPMorgan, Bank of America Refused His Business

(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump accused two of the nation's largest banks of rejecting his business, following as his administration was preparing an executive order threatening financial institutions who refused to work with certain customers on ideological grounds. PATH Train Service Resumes After Fire at Jersey City Station Mayor Asked to Explain $1.4 Billion of Wasted Johannesburg Funds Chicago Curbs Hiring, Travel to Tackle $1 Billion Budget Hole All Hail the Humble Speed Hump 'The banks discriminated against me very badly,' Trump said in an interview Tuesday with CNBC. Trump said he had been 'informed by my people' that JPMorgan Chase & Co. had asked him to close accounts he held for decades within 20 days, and that Bank of America Corp. declined his attempt to deposit more than $1 billion with their company. 'I ended up going to small banks all over the place,' Trump said. The president added that he believed banking regulators during the Biden administration had been ordered to 'do everything you can to destroy Trump, and that's what they did.' 'Banks are not afraid of anything but a regulator — their regulators and their wives,' Trump said. He didn't offer exact dates for his dealings with JPMorgan and Bank of America, though he suggested the latter occurred between his two presidential terms. The defeat in New York's civil fraud suit against Trump and his real estate company last year put restrictions on his ability to do business in the state. That included a three-year ban on the Trump Organization getting loans from New York-chartered banks. Trump has asked a Manhattan appeals court to overturn the civil fraud verdict. Trump was asked on Tuesday about a Wall Street Journal report that his administration was drafting an order that would direct bank regulators to investigate whether any financial institutions might have violated federal laws in closing certain accounts. Any direction from the White House would require both banks and regulators to review and submit their findings of how they engage with their customers. In the draft of the executive order being circulated among industry participants, banks would undergo a 120-day review process of their rationale for closing customer accounts, the people familiar with the matter said. Financial regulators would also undergo their own review process, between 120 and 180 days, to examine how they regulate and impose restrictions on banks that could lead to account closures, the people said, asking not to be identified discussing nonpublic information. The order also would call for any criminal findings that come from the review process to be submitted directly to the Department of Justice, said the people. A final executive order is expected to be submitted at some point this week, though timing and the material itself could change, they added. A representative for the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Both JPMorgan and Bank of America have previously denied rejecting business on ideological grounds. 'Desperately Needed' 'We don't close accounts for political reasons, and we agree with President Trump that regulatory change is desperately needed,' Trish Wexler, a JPMorgan spokesperson, said in a statement. 'We commend the White House for addressing this issue and look forward to working with them to get this right.' 'We welcome the Trump administration's efforts to provide regulatory clarity to banks,' Bank of America spokesperson William Halldin said in a statement. 'We've provided detailed proposals and will continue to work with the administration and Congress to improve the regulatory framework.' The Bank Policy Institute also said rules need to be reworked. 'The heart of the problem is regulatory overreach and supervisory discretion,' Austin Anton, a Bank Policy Institute spokesperson, said Tuesday. 'The banking agencies have already taken steps to address issues like reputational risk, and we're hopeful that any forthcoming executive order will reinforce this progress by directing regulators to confront the flawed regulatory framework that gave rise to these concerns in the first place.' Federal banking regulators have said they'll remove reputation risk from their bank exams, aiming to eliminate a factor that lenders have blamed for forcing them to exit some client relationships. Conservatives have complained that major Wall Street firms have debanked gunmakers, fossil-fuel companies, religious groups and cryptocurrency firms. Trump aired that complaint to Bank of America Chief Executive Officer Brian Moynihan directly during a panel at the World Economic Forum in Davos earlier this year. 'We serve more than 70 million clients and we welcome conservatives. We are required to follow extensive government rules and regulations that sometimes result in decisions to exit client relationships,' a representative for Bank of America said in an emailed statement at the time. 'We never close accounts for political reasons and don't have a political litmus test.' Bank of America, the second-largest US bank, had restricted lending to companies that make assault-style guns used for non-military purposes, following shootings at a high school in Florida early in 2018. Citigroup Inc. also announced its own set of restrictions for clients selling guns that year. In June, Citigroup ended a seven-year policy that placed restrictions on firearms sales by its retail sector clients, citing recent legislative developments and concerns over access to banking services. The Trump Organization sued Capital One Financial Corp. in March, accusing it of closing hundreds of the real estate company's accounts in 2021 for political reasons. The president's company claims the bank ended the decades-old relationship 'simply because Capital One believed that the political views at the time favored doing so.' In a setback for Trump's company, a federal judge in July granted Capital One's request to delay the exchange of evidence in the case until after the bank's motion to dismiss is resolved. Capital One argues its agreements with the Trump Organization allowed it to close its accounts for any reason and that it gave the business plenty of advanced notice. The bank also says Trump's company has failed to provide any evidence that the accounts were closed for political purposes. Earlier this year JPMorgan Chase & Co.'s Jamie Dimon on Capitol Hill offered his support to a restructuring of US financial regulators. Bank of America went on to loosen its gun restrictions and made similar changes to its energy-lending policies, including dropping a blanket ban on financing for Arctic drilling, according to an environmental and social risk policy from late 2023. The issue of debanking customers has come up outside of the US as well. In the UK, it prompted an outcry a few years ago, when right-wing politician Nigel Farage — who now leads the Reform UK party — revealed NatWest Group Plc's upmarket Coutts unit had closed his account, saying his political views were a factor in that decision. The subsequent row led to the resignation of the bosses of NatWest and Coutts, while Farage had vowed to campaign for others who were been 'debanked' on questionable grounds. A preliminary review by the UK's Financial Conduct Authority found no evidence that banks were dropping customers for their political opinion. --With assistance from Hannah Levitt, Erik Larson and Hadriana Lowenkron. (Updates with details on draft executive order in paragraphs 10-13) Russia's Secret War and the Plot to Kill a German CEO AI Flight Pricing Can Push Travelers to the Limit of Their Ability to Pay Government Steps Up Campaign Against Business School Diversity What Happens to AI Startups When Their Founders Jump Ship for Big Tech How Podcast-Obsessed Tech Investors Made a New Media Industry ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store