Although Democrats May Benefit From Redistricting, Midterm Outlook Remains Grim

The redistricting process used to redraw congressional districts has not been as catastrophic for Democrats as many observers thought. The consequences for democracy could still prove to be devastating: The latest round o Republican gerrymanders is likely to weaken the political power of voters from color and push the Republican Party further towards the Trumpist extreme.

Despite months of warnings that Republicans could retake the House, it has happened. through redistricting aloneRecent analyses by the independent Cook Political Report with Amy Walter And the left-leaning Data for ProgressWe have discovered that redistricting has been surprisingly successful for House Democrats.

Instead of redrawing Democratic district boundaries into Republican ones, the GOP has largely emphasized the need to stabilize existing districts that were created in the ultra-aggressive 2011 redistricting cycle while the few Democratic-led states that haven’t ceded redistricting to independent commissions, such as Oregon And Illinois, have aggressively sought to add likely Democratic seat. Even though Republicans are redrawing 187 House seats, compared to 75 for Democrats, that’s a significant improvement over the five-to-one advantage the GOP held in 2011.

As a result, “redistricting is going surprisingly well for Democrats,” wrote Joel Wertheimer at Data for Progress, noting that some states were already so red that it was virtually impossible for Republicans to add seats. “There will be a few more Biden-won districts after redistricting than there are now,” wrote the Cook Political Report’s Dave Wasserman.

But the surprisingly good news actually isn’t all that good — and not just because both analyses also predict that Republicans will likely win back control of the House this year regardless of redistricting patterns. Wasserman cautioned that Democrats already hold 11 of the 15 “newly Democratic-leaning” seats, meaning there are only a handful of pickup opportunities, while Republicans currently hold just one of the nine “newly GOP-leaning” seats.

“Because Democrats currently possess the lion’s share of marginal seats, estimating the practical effect of new lines in 2022 still points towards a wash or a slight GOP gain,” Wasserman wrote. States that have not completed redistricting, such as Florida, Tennessee, and New Hampshire could further reduce Democratic gains.

But the surprisingly good news actually isn’t all that good — and not just because both analyses also predict that Republicans will likely win back control of the House this year regardless of redistricting patterns. Wasserman cautioned that Democrats already hold 11 of the 15 “newly Democratic-leaning” seats, meaning there are only a handful of pickup opportunities, while Republicans currently hold just one of the nine “newly GOP-leaning” seats.

“Because Democrats currently possess the lion’s share of marginal seats, estimating the practical effect of new lines in 2022 still points towards a wash or a slight GOP gain,” Wasserman wrote. States that have not completed redistricting, such as Florida, Tennessee, and New Hampshire could further reduce Democratic gains.

Multiple lawsuits are also being filed to challenge extreme Republican gerrymanders. Ohio And Georgia. However, while Democrats were able last decade to defeat several gerrymanders in court, legal remedies are limited following the Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that federal courts have no jurisdiction over partisan gerrymanders (which are deemed to be “political” matters), although they may still hear cases about racial gerrymanders. These lawsuits will be heard in the state courts of predominantly red states, where Republican governors have appointed large numbers of state judges.

Federal courts could eventually weigh in on maps where voting rights groups claim racial manipulation.

Most legal analyses of the latest round of gerrymanders, Li said, “don’t take into account how these gerrymanders are being accomplished, which is predominantly at the expense of communities of color.”

Even though Texas gained two congressional seats in the census and people of color (mostly Latinos) accounted for 95% of the state’s population growth, for instance, Republican mapmakers created creating two more white-majority districts where Republicans are likely to win. Last month, the Justice Department filed a lawsuit alleging that the state’s new maps violate the Voting Rights Act.

“Texas has violated Section 2 by creating redistricting plans that deny or abridge the rights of Latino and Black voters to vote on account of their race, color or membership in a language minority group,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.

These lawsuits follow Democrats’ latest push to advance voting right legislation, which includes a ban of partisan gerrymandering. Democrats would need to change the Senate’s filibuster rules to advance their bills but they’ve run into stringent opposition, and not just from notorious filibuster fans Like Sens. Joe Manchin, West Virginia, and Kyrsten Sinema, Arizona. Li said he worries that the “not so bad” analyses could undercut the urgency of passing voting-rights bills and warned Democrats not to take any “victory laps” just yet.

“When people say, ‘Well, these articles say it’s not so bad,’ talk to a voter in Texas,” he said. “Better yet, go talk to a voter of color in Texas — which could be a really deep blue state, and Republicans would still have a two-to-one advantage in the congressional delegation. Ask a Texas voter if that seems fair or ‘not so bad.’ That’s a real danger, because people have taken one part of the story and presented it as the whole of the story, and I think that’s a dangerous thing to do.”

G.K. Butterfield, a former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, a North Carolina Democrat decided to retire last ye after the Republican state legislature. redrew his district He said that it would harm Black voters.

“The map that was recently enacted by the legislature is a partisan map. It’s racially gerrymandered. It will disadvantage African American communities all across the 1st congressional district,” Butterfield said last month.

In Georgia, Rep. Lucy McBath’s district was redrawn to be heavily Republican, forcing her to run in the same district as Rep. Carolyn Bourdeaux, a fellow Black Democrat. Voting rights organizations filed a federal lawsuit The changes were made earlier in the month.

“These maps intentionally discriminate against Georgians of color by silencing our voices at the ballot box,” Aunna Dennis, executive director of Common Cause Georgia, the lead plaintiff in the case, said in a statement.

This trend is even more evident at the state level. North Carolina mapmakers redrawed the districts of five Black state senators and five Black representatives, in ways that could easily cost them their seat. New York Times reported last month. Four Black state representatives were elected by Republicans in South Carolina into districts that are now occupied by Democrats. The Ohio mapmakers also changed the districts of four Black state representatives, or drew them into new districts.

The Justice Department, in its lawsuit against Texas, argued that the state’s legislative districts also violate the Voting Rights Act because they result in “minority voters having less opportunity than other citizens to participate in the political process and elect legislators of their choice.”

While the redistricting process slows down and the litigation over the new maps ramps back up, one of the key casualties of these new maps is already obvious: competitive elections.

The number of districts where Trump or Biden won in a close race has fallen by 58% so far this cycle. According to the Cook Political Report. Texas has seen a rise in the number Biden-winning districts by more than 15 percentage points, with 12 districts now winning by Biden. Trump’s victory margin of 15 points or more has almost doubled, going from 11 to 21. In four of the most gerrymandered states — Texas, North Carolina, Ohio and Georgia — the number of districts where Trump won by 15 or more points increased from 27 to 39.

Though competitive seats have long been on the decline, it’s well understood that competitive elections tend to have a moderating effect on both parties. Parties will nominate more moderate candidates if they are up against a competitive race in general elections. Additionally, they are more likely nominate candidates that appeal to base voters if there is little chance of losing the general. The Republicans could see more candidates like Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina or Marjorie Taylor Greene in Georgia, who are not concerned about losing to Democrats even though they have alienated large swathes of voters.

“You’re looking at a potentially much more fractious and much more extreme [Republican] caucus,” Li said. “This may be a case where Republicans were in the classic case of ‘Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it.’ I don’t think people have factored that in: They’re really surrendering to the MAGA wing of the party.”