The Mid-Decade Redistricting War brewing between Republicans and Democrats is spotlighting a troubling truth about American democracy – the voters themselves might have less influence than ever over who controls the US House of Representatives.
Last month, Texas Republicans, fueled by Donald Trump’s political momentum, rolled out a plan to grab five more US House seats. In a swift counterpunch, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced on Thursday his own proposal — to scrap districts drawn by an independent commission and replace them with new ones designed to give Democrats an additional five seats. Meanwhile, Republicans are also gearing up to redraw maps in Ohio, Missouri, Florida, and potentially Indiana, tilting the advantage further their way.
With Republicans holding just a three-seat majority in the US House, these moves could decisively shape next year’s midterm elections. And in this redistricting war, they currently hold the upper hand in manipulating district boundaries to their benefit.
“Gerrymandering is bad enough once a decade,” warned Richard Pildes, a law professor at New York University. “But if we open the door to constant political map manipulation, it’s devastating for voters who already struggle to connect with their representatives — and it fuels deep cynicism about our democracy.”
Thanks to technology, extreme partisan gerrymandering has been a political weapon for decades. But mid-decade redistricting? Experts call it “the next level” of manipulation. Lee Drutman, a senior fellow at New America, put it bluntly: “It makes elections feel secondary to the political games of lawmakers and judges, which is terrible for democratic legitimacy.”
Under the US Constitution, states must redraw their district maps at least once every 10 years. Even with gerrymandering, these maps must usually hold for a decade, giving demographic shifts and political changes a chance to make some districts competitive again. Mid-decade redraws erase that possibility.
Nicholas Stephanopoulos, an election law professor at Harvard, explained, “It supercharges gerrymandering because you’re using fresh data, and the map doesn’t need to last long. The nightmare scenario is continuous re-redistricting — tweaking districts before every election to protect vulnerable incumbents by a few extra percentage points.”
In recent years, Democrats have championed reforms to curb extreme gerrymandering, advocating for fairness rules or independent commissions to draw maps. The Biden administration’s failed voting rights legislation would have required such commissions nationwide.
Yet, faced with aggressive Republican gerrymanders, even some reform advocates have shifted strategy. Eric Holder, former US Attorney General and leader of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, admitted on Meet the Press that Democrats must respond in kind to the current political threat.
Common Cause, a long-time opponent of gerrymandering, recently said it wouldn’t block Democratic retaliation — as long as the maps met certain fairness standards.
But critics warn that fighting fire with fire risks burning down democracy altogether. Chuck Todd, former Meet the Press host, wrote: “If the only way to protect democracy is to undermine it — what exactly are you protecting?” Alex Lee, a California assembly Democrat, echoed: “Gerrymandering undermines democracy. The goal should be abolishing politicians drawing their own districts, not racing to the bottom.”
Currently, the US congressional map is nearly evenly balanced between Republicans and Democrats. But, Stephanopoulos cautions, if only one side gerrymanders and the other doesn’t, we’ll end up with a US House that doesn’t represent the majority of Americans — passing laws that don’t reflect what people actually want.”
Beyond representation, mid-decade redistricting worsens another issue: the shrinking number of competitive districts. In the 2024 midterms, only 27 out of 435 districts — about 6% — were competitive. Under the proposed Texas map, neither Donald Trump nor Kamala Harris would have won a district by less than 10 points.
As Drutman warned, “It’s ultimately unsustainable. This is making a mockery of democracy. Eventually, people will have to realize there are better ways to run elections.”