The News
Democrats are struggling to respond to a White House-backed push to redraw Texas’ congressional maps with five new safe GOP seats, which could short-circuit their entire midterm campaign effort.
A huge part of the problem: The party has split into two factions. One is ready to ditch the long-running practice of nonpartisan redistricting wherever possible, recognizing that the new Texas map would put the recapture of the House all but out of reach.
The other group of Democrats is dreading a map-making arms race that the party would be waging on uneven turf, all while exposing its members to charges of hypocrisy after their years-long push for fair congressional districts.
“What they’re doing is wrong,” Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., told Semafor when asked about Texas Republicans. “It’s this win-at-any-cost devolution of our political system. But I don’t think the response is to undo the good work that’s been done.”
Over in Maryland, Sen. Chris Van Hollen aligned with the fight-back camp. The Democrat told Semafor that his state “should maximize its ability to respond to what Republicans are clearly trying to do in places like Texas,” which would include trying to eliminate the safe seat drawn for GOP Rep. Andy Harris.
Worst of all for Democrats, it’s not as simple as rewriting their own blue-state maps. A nationwide, mid-cycle redistricting battle would likely favor Republicans, given the comparative lack of impediments that exist in red states.
Outgunned and facing relentless pressure to respond to President Donald Trump’s power plays, Democrats are still trying to get on the same page about what to do.
At the state level, as Republicans in Austin held public hearings that were dominated by opponents of mid-decade redistricting, Democrats are starting by combing over the rules. Depending on the state, they’re facing obstacles from tight deadlines to supermajority map-making requirements to constitutional bans on gerrymandering.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom has led the party in pressing to redraw maps anyway, meeting with frustrated Texas Democrats and warning of dire consequences if Republicans hold the House next year thanks to the new seats in Texas.
“All eyes on Texas,” Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., told Semafor, adding that “if Texas follows Trump’s extreme agenda, then I think not just California, but states across the country, would have to consider all options.”
Texas Democrats, particularly Black lawmakers who might lose their seats as a result of a redraw that Republicans have billed as necessary for diversity, are embracing that stance.
“The cruelty is the point, and to stay silent is to betray the generations who bled for us so we could have the right to vote,” Rep. Marc Veasey, whose Fort Worth seat could be erased by Republicans, said during Monday’s hearing in Austin.
But some progressive-leaning nonprofits are openly distancing themselves from Democrats whom they’ve partnered with on successful independent redistricting campaigns in the past.
Common Cause on Tuesday launched a campaign against both the Texas plan and a “partisan power grab” by Newsom.
Know More
The numbers tell the tale of Democrats’ disadvantage in any redistricting standoff: They hold “trifectas” — control of the governor’s mansion, plus both houses of the legislature — in just 15 states, eight fewer than the GOP.
It gets worse from there. In seven of their trifecta states, Democrats already hold every House seat, leaving them no room to gain the way Republicans want to in Texas.
In California, New Jersey, New York, Washington, and Hickenlooper’s Colorado, there are also nonpartisan backstops against partisan gerrymanders that Democrats supported to their own electoral detriment. Texas Republicans, by contrast, face no similar legal hurdle in their mid-decade redraw.
“Some states, like California, have a commission. I don’t think it’s easy to overcome,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., told Semafor. “I don’t know what the chances are. But this could change the whole dynamic.”
One potential strategy, of re-mapping California and arguing that its commission only had power to weigh in once per decade, would be vulnerable to legal challenges. Another possible approach Newsom could take, outright repeal of the commission, would have to be added to a statewide ballot first (thus negating it for 2026).
Notably, not every Democrat who once celebrated nonpartisan redistricting is resisting a Newsom-style response now.
At a recent Center for American Progress forum, progressive legal activist Norm Eisen said that he would favor a gloves-off counter-strategy to a potential Texas gerrymander that could help Trump rule without any checks through 2028.
Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke, who joined Eisen on the panel, was more direct: The party’s concerns about fair play had to be sacrificed in order to win the midterms.
“I buy the argument that we don’t like Republicans doing it, [so] we certainly shouldn’t do it as well,” he said. “But this is for the very future and fate of the Republic. We lose it, you will never, ever get it back.”
Sen. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., who had urged his state Democrats to gerrymander where they could, said that he’s begun reaching out to colleagues in trifecta states to see what is possible.
Nobody, he added, had pushed back, “mostly because they know I would give them the business.”
The View From Republicans
Republicans have endorsed the Texas GOP’s move while condemning Newsom’s threat of reprisal — and saying that a California redraw would justify more new maps in red states. And there’s always the risk that aggressive redraws end up backfiring by making currently safe seats more competitive.
In Missouri, the conservative Freedom Caucus in Jefferson City has called for Gov. Bob Kehoe to call a special session and wipe out a Kansas City-based district that is safe for Democrats. In Indiana, Republicans are considering whether to nix a northwest district that has trended their way but consistently re-elected Democrat Frank Mrvan.
“If Democrats play games in California, then Republicans should follow suit,” said Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind.
Room for Disagreement
Some Democrats have called for blue states to gerrymander out every Republican they can, whether or not the states can do that without altering their constitutions.
Former Colorado Rep. Yadira Caraveo, who’s running for a swing seat she lost last year, urged her state “to repeal our independent commission” to respond to Texas.
Isaiah Martin, a frequent candidate now running for a Houston-area seat that Republicans are planning to demolish, got arrested at a hearing about it; he posted on X on Wednesday that “every blue state you can think of must now make it their mission to gerrymander out as many Repubs out as possible.”
David and Burgess’ View
Democrats’ opposition to partisan gerrymandering is not exactly in their DNA, but it was in their most recent platform; their recent voting-rights bill would have banned it nationwide.
But their disadvantage in a redistricting tit-for-tat isn’t their only problem. It’s still surprisingly easy to convince voters that independent drawing of congressional maps is toxic.
To beat a 2024 anti-gerrymandering measure in Ohio, for example, Republicans wrote ballot language that warned it would create a “taxpayer-funded” commission of elites that would improperly mess with district boundaries.
This is an underappreciated part of the reason why Democrats haven’t yet agreed on their strategy in Texas.
The party is confident that voters will dislike the part of the story they can see in plain view — the president commanding Republicans to take more seats from Democrats.
But even if Democrats abandon their partly successful push for nonpartisan redistricting, it’s not at all clear that their own voters will like a Trump-style approach.
After all, in the states where Democrats have drawn previous brutal maps to squeeze out Republicans (think Illinois), blue-state voters didn’t erase the GOP entirely.
Notable
- In the Texas Tribune, Gabby Birenbaum and Eleanor Klibanoff report from the Capitol on the latest GOP moves and Democratic resistance plans.