Texas Democrats know they may lose redistricting protest, but hope to spark a national fight
But for the dozens of Democrats who left the state this week in protest of the map, it's not just about winning — it's about fighting.
Away from their families and regular jobs, Texas Democrats, most of whom are hunkered down in a suburb about an hour west of Chicago, are facing $500-per-day fines, civil arrest warrants and threats from Republican state leaders to remove them from office.
Now five days into the walkout, they plan to stay away until at least the end of the special session on Aug. 19. When they return, they face the possibility of being stripped of their leadership positions and even further marginalized in a chamber where they are already outnumbered. And no matter how long they stay away, Abbott can just call another special session to pass the map.
But it will all be worth it, they say, if they can lay the groundwork for a national fight over redistricting and ensure enough voters across the country understand what they frame as an attempt by President Donald Trump to stack the deck in the midterm election next year.
'It takes an act of defiance like this to wake up the country and let them know that our democracy is being stolen right in front of our eyes,' said Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer of San Antonio in an interview. 'If we're going to be the spark that lights that fire, then we're doing our jobs.'
When House Democrats last walked out in 2021 to stop new state voter restrictions, lawmakers were on the lam for over a month before the caucus fractured and enough members returned to restore quorum. Republicans quickly pushed the measure through, but Democrats say they were successful in drawing national and congressional attention to the topic and removing some of the worst parts of the bill.
This time around, they're seeking to block a congressional map redrawn in the middle of the decade to create five new GOP seats next year, putting them at the front lines of an issue with national stakes: control of the U.S. House for the last two years of Trump's term.
Those implications have elevated the Texas Democrats decamped in Illinois and elsewhere, stiffening their resolve and garnering them nationwide attention and support that they hope can help sustain their movement in a way that was missing four years ago.
'It's not, Houston, we have a problem,' Martinez Fischer said. 'It's, America, we have a problem, and we need to rise up.'
The walkout, meant to deny Republicans the quorum needed to conduct legislative business and bring the House to a standstill, has also set off a possible national redistricting war. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom of California has promised to draw more blue seats in his state if Texas approves its plan, and national Democratic leaders are looking to reshape maps in Illinois, New York and Maryland.
The effort reflects a push within the Democratic Party, particularly after last year's disastrous election results, to re-establish itself to voters as a party of fighters willing to meet Republicans on their level.
'We are going to match Donald Trump's energy when it comes to redistricting,' U.S. Rep. Marc Veasey of Fort Worth said Monday. 'Democrats we have shown up to a gunfight with nothing but good intentions and dull knives, and that era is over. We are not going to unilaterally disarm, and that is what's different this time around.'
The message was reiterated repeatedly this week, with top Democrats from Illinois, New York, California and Massachusetts all joining the Texas delegation in pledging to stand up to the Trump administration, which is also pressing other red states to redraw their congressional maps in favor of the GOP ahead of next year's midterm election.
'The Trump-Abbott gerrymander is a test case for the rest of the country,' Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said Tuesday alongside Texas Democrats. 'What Republicans are trying to do in Texas is a model for other red states to lie, cheat and steal their way to victory.'
Democrats began floating the possibility of a walkout as soon as Abbott put redistricting on the special session agenda in July at the behest of Trump.
But in discussions over Zoom and in person before the session began, they decided that the stakes of the issue hadn't yet been communicated to the public in a way that would explain a nuclear act. Some also held out for a committee process that might allow them to temper any draft map, or for a GOP proposal less aggressive than Trump had demanded.
Then, the Republican-led redistricting committee unveiled a map last week that would dismantle several Democratic districts to squeeze out five new red seats. While Republican lawmakers said the map was drawn purely to maximize partisan advantage — which is legal, according to the U.S. Supreme Court — Democrats saw a plan that would achieve that edge by suppressing the vote of people of color in violation of the Voting Rights Act.
'The power grab by Trump and Abbott doesn't just have the goal of getting five more seats in Congress,' Rep. Ramon Romero Jr. said Tuesday, the eve of the Voting Rights Act's 60th anniversary. 'It has another goal, a goal more sinister than that, and that is to make people believe that their vote doesn't really matter. That's why it's all of our fight.'
With Republicans moving to approve the map at a quick clip, the determination to deny quorum solidified among Democrats in the 48 hours before they got on a chartered plane headed for Chicago. Others made their way to Albany to meet with New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, and to Boston for a state legislative conference.
Democrats say they're buying valuable time by walking out, drawing attention to the issue among voters and getting other blue states involved — even while recognizing that Texas' map is likely to get passed and will need to be fought in court.
'The spotlight has been turned on,' Rep. James Talarico of Austin said in an interview. 'I'm hoping this courage that my colleagues and I have shown will be contagious, and it'll inspire other legislators in blue states to respond with their own redistricting attempts.'
Using their hotel complex as a base camp, Democrats have done scores of media interviews out of their cramped rooms and a small park off the Fox River in Illinois; hosted news conferences with federal, state and party leaders at local union halls and blue state capitols; and met with Democratic governors and elected officials from across the country.
Talarico, who is mulling a run for U.S. Senate, said he did 25 interviews in the first 24 hours of the quorum break, ranging from TV and traditional platforms to podcasts with ranging ideological bents. His TV hits alone reached 9.8 million viewers across the country, he said, not including thousands of others on social media.
Republicans appear to have more paths toward maximizing their representation in Congress in a redistricting war with Democrats. Redrawing congressional maps in the middle of the decade will be harder for the handful of blue states that have clamped down on partisan gerrymandering by handing their redistricting authority to independent commissions.
Still, Texas Democrats see the support blue state and national Democratic leaders have expressed for retaliatory redistricting as a sign that their gambit is working.
'This, I think, is well on its way becoming a national fight, and that's what's going to be important if we're going to counter' the GOP, said Rep. Chris Turner of Grand Prairie, who led the 2021 quorum break.
Republicans blasted the Democrats who left, arguing that they abandoned their office and were refusing to participate in the legislative process because they did not like the inevitable outcome. Critics also mocked the contingent for seeking refuge from Texas law enforcement in Illinois, which is heavily gerrymandered in favor of Democrats.
But Democrats said that by denying the House a quorum, they were doing the very job their constituents had elected them to do and were now demanding they follow through on.
While the 2021 walkout required Democrats to do a lot of explaining to their constituents about what a quorum break was and why they were doing it, Rep. Diego Bernal of San Antonio said, 'this time around, they were telling us that their expectation was that we would use everything at our disposal to try and stop it.'
Democrats also said they don't take the decision to leave lightly. Talarico noted that there's an abundance of GOP legislation that Democrats stay and fight against in the chamber. They reserved the most drastic option for what he framed as 'direct attacks on democracy.'
'We have to love democracy, even when we lose,' he said. 'But we do that because we always have a chance to win the next election. And if this happens, we won't — and so we have to take an extreme step to stand up for our constituents and for all Texans.'
The lineup for The Texas Tribune Festival continues to grow! Be there when all-star leaders, innovators and newsmakers take the stage in downtown Austin, Nov. 13–15. The newest additions include comedian, actor and writer John Mulaney; Dallas mayor Eric Johnson; U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minnesota; New York Media Editor-at-Large Kara Swisher; and U.S. Rep. Veronica Escobar, D-El Paso. Get your tickets today!
TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
16 minutes ago
- Fast Company
Newsom and Cuomo are using social media to try and replicate Mamdani's appeal. They're missing the point
According to Sun Tzu, in order to know your enemy, you must become your enemy. Some politicians might be taking that advice a little too literally, though. Zohran Mamdani's notably deft use of social media helped lead his well-run mayoral primary campaign to victory in June—and it may have inspired some recent pivots from other politicos. Former New York governor Andrew Cuomo is now taking a kitchen-sink approach to replicating his mayoral opponent's social media magic, while California Governor Gavin Newsom has taken to mimicking Donald Trump in an ongoing performance art piece on one of his X accounts. Neither seems to have a broader strategy beyond capturing attention. Memes and mimicking online Fresh off of copying Mamdani's distinct video style upon reentering the mayoral race as an Independent, Cuomo is now trying to flex his own social media fluency, with memes and a reply-heavy X account. In between the rash of posts attacking his opponent, Cuomo has been interacting with many of his followers and posting the occasional clunky meme from The Office. Apparently, this is just the beginning. Jason Levin, whose bio claims he builds 'software for meme marketing and memetic warfare,' took credit for Cuomo's memefication on Monday. In a thread posted to X, he recounted how his first meme for Cuomo hit 5.1 million views on the platform, with a triumphant tone more befitting someone who has just received the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. 'We are entering a golden age of meme'fied politics,' he wrote in one entry in the thread, urging his followers to take up arms (read: memes), and help 'save NYC.' Meanwhile, Governor Newsom also seems to believe we have 'entered a golden age of meme'fied politics.' Since the beginning of August, he has been taking a punchier approach on X, with the occasional clunky meme from The Office. The effort peaked last week, though, when Newsom began an elaborate trolling campaign against Trump, in which his tweets favor the president's all-caps, nickname-forward, syntactically challenged, self-worshipful style. In an effort to show he's willing to stand up to Trump—or, let's be real, more likely in an effort to lay further groundwork for his inevitable 2028 presidential bid—Newsom is acting on social media as though he were a Good Terminator sent back in time to stop the Bad one. Whether these efforts have had any meaningful impact on Trump is debatable, but what is beyond dispute is that this social media strategy has earned Newsom loads of attention. Cuomo trolls desperately for votes The attention a politician generates with memes or trolling, however, is not necessarily relevant if they don't match it with something more interesting to say. Social media fluency, after all, is not political fairy dust. In 2025, we're well past the point where a politician using memes, in and of itself, suggests youthful savviness. Michael Bloomberg went all in on the best memes money can buy in the 2020 election, and failed to move the needle one iota. A decade into Trump's political era, everyone has already been to this circus and seen these clowns. What they want instead are leaders. Throughout his campaign, Mamdani used social media to highlight key issues around the central theme of affordability, reveal his personality, and showcase transparency. His various accounts built off the organizing prowess of his ground game to make his progressive ideas more widely palatable and to give them moral heft. His posts were generally earnest and informative, and slyly packaged in smart experiments like his daylong walk across the entirety of Manhattan. Now that he has won the primary, his social media has an earned sense of triumphalism—as in a recent video filmed backstage at a Wu-Tang concert at Madison Square Garden —along with a whole lot of smoke for his opponent, Cuomo. If Mamdani has gotten a major boost from his social media usage—and he undoubtedly has—it's because it seems like a natural extension of the candidate himself. All that Cuomo is doing with his flailing efforts at being epic on social media (something Elon Musk has proved is no pathway to popularity) is reveal his desperation for capturing attention. That thirstiness leaves room in his tent for Trump supporters, like his new meme contributor, along with Trump himself, whose support Cuomo is actively, openly courting (despite him being less popular among conservative voters than both Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa and Mamdani). Posting—shockingly—is not politics As for Newsom, the best that can be said of his new social media trolling persona is that it's drawing attention to the hypocrisy of Trump's supporters in the media. Those anchors on Fox News who find Newsom's schtick 'childish' and 'unbecoming of a leader,' for instance, should indeed have to answer for why they don't attribute those traits to the guy Newsom is imitating. But the problem is that all this trolling is just empty calories. Newsom's Bizarro Trump act is an attention-getting spectacle. It's a one-note comedy routine, not a form of leadership. He could keep this up every day for the next three years and it would never make more of a material impact than his recent pledge to redraw the district maps in California, in order to match a gerrymandering effort underway in Texas. (It's worth noting that this issue is what initially kicked off Newsom's ongoing Trump impersonation.)
E&E News
16 minutes ago
- E&E News
Electric school buses hit pothole after major supplier goes bankrupt
Even Republicans have tolerated one Biden-era climate program: a $5 billion effort to buy electric school buses and give kids' lungs a break from diesel pollution. But now a major bus supplier has collapsed — leaving school districts with technology that's hard to fix. Lion, an electric truck- and bus-maker based in Quebec, is in bankruptcy after selling roughly 3,400 buses in the United States. Last month, its new investors notified alarmed school districts that they would not honor warranties. Advertisement 'They ran properly for approximately two weeks, then we started getting error messages,' said Andrew Dolloff, the superintendent of schools in Yarmouth, Maine, about the district's two Lion buses.
E&E News
16 minutes ago
- E&E News
Two 1950s coal plants defy financial gravity along the Ohio River
An Ohio law that took effect last week ended a decadelong subsidy program buttressing a pair of Rust Belt coal plants from volatile power markets. But the Kyger Creek and Clifty Creek plants along the Ohio River — each of which turns 70 this year — show no sign of giving in to financial pressures that have claimed dozens of similar generators in the region in past years. Their endurance is partly a sign of the times. The plants, owned by a consortium of eight utilities known as the Ohio Valley Electric Corp. (OVEC), sell their output into the nation's largest power market operated by PJM Interconnection, which is expecting a tsunami of new demand from data centers. And the coal industry, which faced headwinds under President Joe Biden, again has an ally in the White House. Advertisement Most importantly, OVEC companies are bound by a contract that calls for the plants, still saddled by nearly $1 billion in debt, to continue operating for 15 years. Any decision to pull the plug, or change how the plants are operated, must be the consensus of all the owners — a reason that utility lawyers and lobbyists have worked relentlessly to recover every dollar they can. The nature of the operating agreement has frustrated environmental groups because the plants are major sources of air pollution in the region. And while many of the area's large coal-burning power plants have been forced offline by failing economics — including the 2,000-megawatt Conesville plant, 2,200-MW Sammis plant and 1,300-MW Zimmer plants in Ohio — the OVEC plants keep going. Even critics agree there's likely to be little change in the future despite the loss of the subsidies in Ohio, a provision still stained by a connection to the state's largest-ever public corruption scandal. Devi Glick, senior principal with Synapse Energy Economics, has analyzed OVEC's economics as an expert witness in Ohio and Michigan over the past few years on behalf of groups ranging from the Sierra Club to the Michigan attorney general's office. She doesn't see the plants' owners taking any steps to shut them down. 'Given the current political climate and how tight the (PJM) capacity market is right now … I don't see the pressure being enough in the next couple of years,' Glick said. Columbus, Ohio-based American Electric Power has the largest stake in the plants with more than 43 percent. An AEP executive is OVEC's president. In an email response to questions, AEP spokesman Scott Blake said the state of the power market demonstrates a need for the plants. He cited soaring clearing prices in the recent PJM auction for power plant capacity — the cost of guaranteeing there will be power available at peak times — as proof there's increasing need for generating capacity. The PJM auction 'demonstrates that resources like the Clifty Creek and Kyger Creek facilities serve a critical reliability function,' Blake said. 'Customers and the communities around the facilities have benefited from reliable power produced and [the] economic contributions of the plants.' Neil Waggoner, who spent a decade working to help shut down coal plants as an Ohio-based member of the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign, said the subsidies authorized by state utility regulators in 2016 and later embedded in statute were never about preventing the plants from closing or protecting jobs. Waggoner, now part of Sierra Club's federal policy team, said the issue centered around protecting the bottom lines of three Ohio utilities contractually obligated to help pay the costs to operate the OVEC plants. It is that contract, known as the inter-company power agreement, that has kept the plants running and will continue to do so, he said. 'That is the No. 1 driver of what happens,' said Waggoner, who said some of OVEC's owners such as Kentucky Utilities, Louisville Gas and Electric, Centerpoint Energy, Indiana Michigan Power and Allegheny Energy operate in coal-friendly states where there's little if any scrutiny of the costs to operate the plants. The 1,304-MW Clifty Creek plant in Indiana and the 1,086-MW Kyger Creek plant in Ohio trace their roots back to the Cold War era. OVEC was founded in the early 1950s to supply power to the Atomic Energy Commission's uranium enrichment plant in Piketon, Ohio. OVEC's contract with the AEC's successor, the Department of Energy, ended in 2003. Bleeding red ink Rather than shutter their coal plants, OVEC's owners twice extended an agreement among themselves to continue operating and selling power into PJM's regional grid. The last extension in 2010 was necessary to help finance more than $1 billion in pollution controls and calls for the plants to operate until 2040, when they would be 85 years old. It was a decision that years later would send the utilities to the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) in search of financial help, and ultimately lead them to lobby the Legislature to entrench the subsidies in state law. The provision worked like this: The share of OVEC's output that was assigned to three Ohio utilities was sold into the PJM market. If revenues were less than the plant's cost of producing electricity, utility customers made up the difference. If revenues exceeded costs, customers got a credit. The mechanism helped OVEC weather ups and downs over the past decade, from surges and dips in natural gas prices, a global pandemic and, most recently, a projected surge in demand for electricity — one not seen in generations — to help power AI data centers. While prices in PJM are on the rise, so too are OVEC's costs. 'These plants are not getting any less expensive to operate, it's just that the supply of alternatives is becoming more constrained,' said Glick. 'At some point the supply will catch up, and these plants will still be old and expensive.' Fitch Ratings, in a December report, concluded the plants are likely to bleed red ink even with improvement in power demand and prices. 'While regional demand growth (especially from data centers) might tighten energy markets, Fitch expects OVEC's all-in costs to exceed prevailing merchant power prices, making the plants uneconomical for the foreseeable future,' the ratings company said. Regulators in at least one state have already taken notice. The Michigan Public Service Commission has three times disallowed recovery of more than $1 million in power costs by Indiana Michigan Power, which supplies electricity to about 133,000 customers in the southwest tip of the state. In those cases, Michigan regulators agreed that the utility, a unit of AEP, violated the state's code of conduct for affiliate transactions by paying above-market prices for power from OVEC. The PSC previously had made similar rulings that were upheld by the courts. And the commission had warned the utility to manage existing contracts to provide value for ratepayers, or regulators would be hard-pressed to consider more ratepayer recovery. The contract supersedes everything The utility's response: It found a more willing buyer in Indiana. The company told Indiana regulators that the state had a need for energy and capacity as large new electricity users, primarily data centers, began taking service, and that the OVEC plants provided an 'economically competitive resource.' The company further argued that the proposal was consistent with state policy to support existing coal plants. Despite Michigan regulators repeatedly slapping the utility's hand for trying to pass on above-market costs for power to consumers, Indiana's Regulatory Utility Commission bought in and approved the plan. 'It's just sort of indicative of Indiana being this incredibly favorable regulatory environment for energy holding companies,' said Kerwin Olson, executive director of the Citizens Action Coalition, an environmental and consumer advocacy group. 'It's just a big cash cow for these guys.' Glick, who provided testimony in the Michigan case, compared it to a child gaming their parents to get what they want. 'They asked mom and didn't like mom's answer, so they went to dad and got a better answer,' she said. Just as they did in Indiana this year, AEP promised big benefits to Ohio consumers in 2016 if utility regulators would approve a mechanism to insulate OVEC against higher natural gas prices, which strongly influenced power costs. The utility estimated that customers of AEP's Ohio Power Co. would see $110 million in benefits over eight years. The Public Utilities Commission of Ohio was convinced and approved what was effectively a revenue guarantee for the plants. They also approved similar requests by Duke Energy and Dayton Power & Light. Consumer groups, however, say the provision was no hedge. It was a financial albatross. An analysis by the Ohio Manufacturers Association estimates the subsidies approved by PUCO and later the Ohio Legislature cost utility consumers almost $600 million. The group projects the amount would have topped $1 billion by the time the law was supposed to sunset in 2030. In just one of the eight years that the mechanism was in place did the plants produce a net benefit to ratepayers, the report said. Meanwhile, efforts by OVEC utilities to sell their stake in the plants have received no takers. And when Akron-based FirstEnergy filed for bankruptcy protection in 2019, the utility unsuccessfully sought to get out from under its OVEC commitment, a request that the coal plants' other owners balked at because it would have required them to increase their ownership stake. While the meter has stopped running on OVEC subsidies in Ohio, the legal and regulatory battle over millions of dollars collected from Buckeye State consumers continues. Environmental and consumer groups are seeking to claw back hundreds of millions of dollars in OVEC charges already paid by customers — claims that the utilities are challenging. The groups are before the Ohio Supreme Court challenging an audit approved by the PUCO that determined the OVEC subsidies charged in 2020 were appropriate. A similar case for charges in 2021 to 2023 is currently pending before Ohio regulators. And the groups have petitioned the commission to audit charges for 2024 and part of 2025. At the core of the argument is the claim by advocates that OVEC's owners operated the coal plants more frequently than were justified by economics because the utilities knew they could pass on any losses to Ohio ratepayers. Typically, to minimize costs to consumers, grid operator PJM dispatches power plants according to their cost to operate. More costly units come online as a last resort to keep the lights on. By contrast, units designated as 'must run' or self-scheduled units are operated according to the owners, regardless of economics. The consumer groups say that's not what's happened with OVEC. Once again, critics say, the contract among the plants' owners supersedes everything. 'One of the really challenging things,' said Glick, is that 'nobody can really practice oversight on them because of how complicated their ownership structure is.'
