Hunter Casperson (12:21)
Here'S what the Right is saying the right mostly supports the effort in Texas, saying that Republicans are only adopting Democrats tactics. Some say Democrats prospects in the House are dim even if California and others succeed with their own redistricting. Others question Texas state Democrats decision to flee the state. In PJ Media, Matt Margolis wrote Democrats were never against partisan gerrymandering. The moment Texas made its move, Democrats in blue states started scrambling to redraw their own maps, some even looking to override their supposedly sacred independent commissions. So much for their high minded rhetoric. Texas didn't just redraw lines, it exposed the left's dirty little secret. Democrats hate gerrymandering only when they're not the ones doing it, margolis said. That high ground vanishes the moment Democrats get the pen. When Republicans redraw lines, it's a quote crisis. When Democrats do it in places such as Illinois or New York, it's rebranded as a noble fight for representation. In recent years, Democratic lawmakers in New York, Maryland and Illinois have aggressively redrawn congressional maps to favor their party, often sidestepping legal norms, margolis wrote. In New York, Democrats bypassed an independent commission and passed a mid decade map that the state's highest court struck down as unconstitutional. Maryland's legislature overrode a veto to push a map aimed at eliminating the state's lone GOP seat, which a judge labeled extreme partisan gerrymandering. Illinois Democrats moved early to lock in a heavily favorable map. These cases reveal a clear pattern of Democrats manipulating redistricting to secure political advantage for their party in Congress. In Hot Air, Ed Morrissey argued Dems will lose the redistricting war with the gop. Democrats have total control in fewer states, but those tend to be the most populous New York, California, Illinois, Massachusetts and Maryland mainly. That offers Democrats a chance to squeeze on more seats, at least theoretically, Morrissey said. In practice, though, Democrats may have already beaten themselves. Most blue states forced redistricting into the hands of supposedly nonpartisan commissions, which means the fight could be over in the redistricting war before Democrats can even take the field. In most of these states, including California, Colorado and New Jersey, changes to the state constitution would have to go to the voters first. New York actually tried this in 2022 and got shot down in court over their absurdly gerrymandered map. None of these efforts would finish up in time to help out in 2026, with the possible exception of New Jersey, which has a regularly scheduled general election this November, morrissey wrote. The biggest problem for Democrats is time in a different context. The states they want to redistrict are bleeding voters to red states over economic and cultural differences, even if they successfully squeeze a half dozen seats or a dozen seats through these efforts for the 2026 election. And I doubt they'd outdo the GOP. Still, they will lose that much or more in 2023 after the next census. In the Fort Worth Star Telegram, Ryan J. Ruscic criticized Democrats fleeing Texas over redistricting. Trump does not want to see his final two years in office thwarted and investigated by a Democratic majority, so he demands creative cartography to forge five more districts likely to elect Republicans. Texas Republicans are happy to help, even if it means using outdated population data, wiping out black and Hispanic lawmakers, and worst of all, doing it in the middle of the decade absent a court order, rusak said. It's so egregious, Democrats say that they had to leave the state to prevent a House quorum and thus a vote Monday on the new maps. Here's the it's super important to them as politicians, to their amped up base voters and donors, and to the national party. And just about no one else cares. Schlepping to Chicago, Boston and Albany. New York will probably grind the gears in Austin enough to force a second special session, assuming the lawmakers can afford to stay there. It will cost them, though. Democrats have lost the moral high ground when it comes to the other important business of the state, rusak wrote Texas must respond to the failures of the Hill country floods, but the quorum break prevents that, too. Had they stayed, they could have railed against Republicans prioritizing the congressional power play before passing a single bill to help flood victims or prevent future tragedies. Now they bear the blame. Now here's what the left is saying. The left strongly opposes Texas redistricting effort, but many caution that Democrats should not follow suit. Some push back on claims that Democratic gerrymandering is as bad as Republican efforts. Others suggest the move by Texas Republicans could backfire. The Washington Post editorial board explored how GOP gerrymandering in Texas could spiral into partisan warfare. Advancing technology enables redistricting with a precision that the founders could never have dreamed of. Splicing and dicing the electorate in this way after every election reduces the number of truly competitive seats, which leads lawmakers to worry more about the primary challengers than the general election, the board wrote. Efforts to redraw congressional district maps are especially troubling this year, five years before the end of the decade when redistricting is supposed to happen. Although it's true that plenty of states have reworked their maps mid decade, they've typically done so after a court ruling required the change. The GOP's power play invites Democratic controlled states to further weaponize their own congressional maps. Former Texas congressman Beta o' Rourke said, we have to be absolutely ruthless about getting back in power. So yes, in California, in Illinois, in New York, wherever we have the trifecta of power, we have to use that to its absolute extent, the board noted. These are dangerous words that Democrats need to resist. Yes, in the short term, responding in kind to Republican gerrymandering might preserve Congress's balance of power, but it would be a disservice to voters in the long run. In cnn, Aaron Blake wrote, no, both sides don't gerrymander the same. Republicans pretty clearly benefit more from gerrymandering, and there is an increasingly strong case to be made that they go further in using the tools available to them. Gambits like what Texas is doing are rare, and it's been Republicans who have led the charge, Blake said. A big reason more maps appear to have a GOP bias is that Republicans simply get more opportunities to gerrymander. They have full control of more states because they hold the trifecta of the governor's mansion and both chambers of the state legislature. In the most recent round of post census redistricting, Republicans controlled the drawing of 177 districts. Estimates on this vary slightly compared to just 49 for Democrats, the reason Texas is so controversial isn't just that Republicans are drawing such a slanted map. It's mostly when they have chosen to do it. We have seen three or four modern attempts like this at mid decade redistricting, blake wrote. The GOP did this in Texas and Colorado in 2003, though the Colorado map was struck down, and in Georgia in 2005. They also redrew the maps in North Carolina in 2023. Indeed, Republicans seem to be leaning in on a mid decade redistricting arms race, knowing they have superior capabilities and can take things further just like they have before. In the Houston Chronicle, Michael Lee said Texas's redistricting puts Washington, D.C. over the rights of Texans. In 2019, when the Supreme Court said federal courts might not set limits on partisan gerrymandering, some wondered how bad it could get. Texas is about to provide an answer, and it's not good. Republicans are doing everything possible to help politicians pick their voters rather than the other way around, putting requests from Washington, D.C. over the rights of Texans, lee wrote. The Texas map already rates as one of the country's most extreme gerrymanders. Republicans are virtually assured winning two thirds of the state's seats, even though Democrats now regularly win around 45% of the vote in statewide elections. But gerrymanders this aggressive are not without risks. For starters, maximizing seats will by necessity mean making safe GOP seats less safe as map drawers spread reliably Republican voters among more districts to knock off Democrats. That move could easily backfire with Texas rapid growth and changing demographics, Lee said. Just consider last decade's map. More than half a dozen Republican districts that seemed rock solid at the start of the decade became highly competitive by the end. District populations diversified so quickly and white suburban voters shifted so sharply towards Democrats after 2016 that the districts became a nightmare for Republicans. All right, that is it for what the right and left are saying. I will pass it back over to Isaac for his take and the reader question.
