REGAN: Redistrict This

By Brent Regan

“That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed” The Declaration of Independence.

In our Republican form of government the people select those that will govern. Gerrymandering is where those that govern select the people.

Since the Reapportionment Act of 1929 the number of seats in the House of Representatives is fixed at 435. The Constitution guarantees each state at least one seat and the remaining 385 are apportioned in proportion to the population. States with large populations get more and states with small populations get less, but never less than the one guaranteed seat.

The apportionment of seats among the states is updated after each decennial census. Since the total is fixed at 435, if one state gains a seat then some other state must lose a seat.

After the apportionment the states then draw congressional district maps to define the geographic area, and therefore the voters, in each district. It is the drawing of these maps where the gerrymandering occurs.

Imagine you have two adjacent districts, one rural and one urban, with approximately the same number of voters in each. The urban district is 80% majority democrat and the rural district is 70% majority Republican. As a result you have one democrat representative and one Republican representative.

Now imagine the democrats control the statehouse and it is time to redistrict; to draw new maps. If you carefully draw the boundaries you can put more democrats in the rural district. This will decrease the democrat margin in the urban district but you now have a 55% democrat majority in BOTH urban and rural districts. Now democrats have two democrat congressmen and the Republicans have none.

The term “gerrymander” originated in Massachusetts in 1812 when Governor Elbridge Gerry oversaw a map that included a district in the shape of a salamander. Thus was born the term “gerrymander” to describe the manipulation of electoral boundaries for partisan advantage. Gerrymandering acts like a positive feedback loop such that the party in power during reapportionment has the advantage of gaining more seats. Both parties are guilty of using redistricting to gain an advantage but democrat efforts have been historically more egregious. As a consequence there are nine states with zero Republican representatives in congress despite the fact that 32% to 48% of the voters are Republican.

Democrats used reapportionment as a tool to suppress black votes during and after reconstruction. The 1965 Voting Rights Act (VRA) prohibits redistricting plans that discriminate on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group, particularly by diluting the voting strength of protected groups. This applies nationwide and has been used to challenge maps that unfairly disadvantage minority voters.

The recent redistricting fight in Texas revolves around a rare mid-decade effort by Republicans to redraw congressional maps, aiming to flip up to five Democratic-held seats in the U.S. House ahead of the 2026 midterms. This was triggered on July 7 when, a letter from Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon of the DOJ Civil Rights Division served Texas with “formal notice” of the DOJ’s “serious concerns regarding the legality of four of Texas’s congressional districts.” “Congressional Districts TX-09, TX-18, TX-29, and TX-33 currently constitute unconstitutional ‘coalition districts,’” the letter detailed. “So-called ‘coalition districts’ run afoul of the Voting Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment.” A “coalition district,” or “minority coalition district” is one in which “combined racial minorities make up a majority of the population.” Democrats counter that the new Texas map itself may violate the VRA by diluting minority voting power.

This push to redistrict, encouraged by President Trump, spawned intense partisan battles, legal debates, and national repercussions. Democrats initially broke quorum by fleeing the state to block the process but returned on August 18, 2025, allowing Republicans to advance the maps.

The Texas fight has escalated into a potential national redistricting war. Democrats hope to inspire blue states like California, New York, Illinois, and Maryland to redraw maps in their favor if Texas passes its plan. For example, California Governor Gavin Newsom and New York Governor Kathy Hochul have threatened retaliatory redistricting. The problem with this strategy is that the democrat majority states have already gerrymandered their districts to the maximum resulting in California, Illinois, New York, Maryland, New Jersey and Oregon having half the Republican representatives their populations would indicate. California is 40% Republican but Republicans hold only 9 of the 52 congressional seats.

On August 1st the Supreme Court decided to rehear a case (Louisiana v. Callais) in which it looks poised to decide whether racial gerrymanders violate the U.S. Constitution. The same nine justices recently overturned affirmative action in college admissions, and they may take the same approach to affirmative action in redistricting.

Idaho has been spared the congressional district battle for two reasons. We only have two congressional seats and the democrats have only 11% of the affiliated voters making it impossible for them to Gerrymander a majority district. Even if Idaho gains a third seat, which is likely to happen after the next census, democrats would need to double their voters and heavily gerrymander the map to secure one congressional seat.

The Texas fight exemplifies how redistricting can devolve into partisan warfare, with Texas’s actions potentially triggering a cascade of retaliatory redraws nationwide. Substantiated claims of gerrymandering by both parties underscore the need for reforms like independent commissions to prioritize fairness over power. The outcome could reshape Congress, but at the cost of deepening divisions and taxpayer expense.

If redistricting battles sweep the nation the democrats would likely lose overall congressional seats because they have already stretched gerrymandering to the breaking point. Never start a fight you are likely to lose.

It’s just common sense.