As the dust begins to settle on the nation’s once-in-a-decade redistricting process, the congressional political landscape for the next decade is coming into view. As with every cycle, the implications of who benefitted from redistricting is critical, as favorable district lines can give a party the ability to protect their seats (or even their majority) from unfavorable cycles.
For instance, during the last redistricting cycle Republicans had control of many critical state legislatures from the 2010 Tea Party wave, and as a result, were able to gerrymander many states across the country, such as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Florida. By gerrymandering so effectively and in so many places, they were able to effectively insulate their House majority from unfavorable political environments, like in 2012 when President Obama was reelected and Democrats won the House popular vote.
Coming into this cycle, Democrats were rightly worried. After they failed to flip many state legislatures in 2020 — a task they had set out to do to control more of the redistricting process — this cycle contained many of the same markings as its predecessor. For one, Democrats only had absolute control over the drawing of 10 states (with more than one district) and 82 seats, while Republicans had control over 20 states and 187 seats. Moreover, while Democrats had success implementing independent or bipartisan redistricting commissions in many states through ballot measures, they were less effective than previously hoped for. For instance, many of the commissions lacked singular authority or could be ignored by partisan actors, such as in Ohio. Additionally, Democrats ceded valuable ground in states they unilaterally controlled such as California and Colorado, where the implementation of independent commissions limited their ability to effectively counter Republican gerrymandering efforts.
However, as the process is coming to a close and only a handful of states have yet to finalize their maps, it is clear that Democrats avoided their ‘doomsday scenario’, where Republicans would be able to easily win a majority in the House in 2022 from redistricting wins alone. In fact, it is becoming more likely than not that Democrats will actually gain from the redistricting process. As Nate Rakich, senior elections analyst at FiveThirtyEight, said, “Democrats are actually up a few seats nationally.”
This raises the question, how did we get here?
For one, Democrats finally realized that their strategy of unilateral disarmament only hurt their ability to curtail gerrymandering. Democrats giving up redistricting power in the states they controlled to independent commissions did nothing to get Republicans to lead by example. Why would Republicans gaining from a corrupt process disengage from it if they benefit electorally? If anything, the Republican Party of the past decade has shown just how far they will go to stay in power, democratic norms notwithstanding.
To actually incentivize Republicans from gerrymandering themselves, especially after a failed federal attempt to ban partisan gerrymandering, Democrats needed Republicans to understand how the process could actually hurt them. Thus, Democrats went for the jugular in New Mexico, Oregon, Illinois, and most recently New York, putting forth aggressive gerrymanders designed to help Democrats gain seats.
They decided that while they would pursue policies at the federal level to outlaw gerrymandering and other partisan practices, they would not be caught off guard if and when the legislation failed to materialize. In essence, they would no longer be bringing a protest sign to a gunfight.
However, this was only one piece of the puzzle. Another important thing to consider in this decade’s redistricting process was that Democrats had done a good job in the past decade of prioritizing judicial seat races, especially in competitive states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, and North Carolina.
Notably, these are some of the last states that have yet to complete their maps, as Republican maps (and other redraws) were overturned in the moderate-to-liberal courts for partisan gerrymandering, leaving an ongoing battle in their wake. In these states, Democrats were able to subvert three different gerrymanders and potentially get maps that actually increase the amount of seats they hold in a state through winning judicial races at the state level.
Finally, Democrats have had a fair amount of luck as well. For instance, an independent redistricting commission in California yielded a map that was incredibly beneficial to Democratic incumbents. Additionally, Republicans have refrained from dismantling Democratic seats in Indiana, Missouri, and Kentucky.
But through all of the moving parts and layers in redistricting, the most impactful effects of the redistricting cycle Democrats’ favor will not be visible in the 2022 midterm elections. Even with redistricting wins in state legislatures and courts, the change in House math will not be nearly enough to offset the increasingly ominous signs of an impending GOP wave in 2022.
So then, why does this matter?
The implications of this redistricting cycle are important because they indicate a Democratic Party willing to get into the mud and leverage gerrymandered maps onto Republicans in order to incentivize a mutual disarmament of gerrymandering and the abolishment of gerrymandering nationwide.
While this may sound counterintuitive at first glance– gerrymandering more to get rid of gerrymandering– its logic is more sound when you recognize that politicians more often act from their own self-interest rather than the common good.
Knowing this, the only way to get rid of gerrymandering nationwide is if both major parties feel cheated– not ashamed– by gerrymandering, which it seems Republicans may be finally feeling.
Thus, while this cycle contained some of the most corrupt maps in this nation’s history, the Democratic Party’s abandonment of unilateral disarmament in redistricting means that there may be a near future of mutual disarmament in favor of free and fair elections– which is undoubtedly good for our democracy.
