|
America's Coalition of Losers
Recent gerrymanders will cost more than 19 members of Congress their jobs. On their way out, they're the perfect people to end this gerrymandering nonsense.
|
| |||||||||||||||
This post is all about gerrymandering.¹ If you live in Missouri, sign the petition to undo the state’s recent gerrymander! You’ll have to do it in person; here’s more info on where you can sign.² The deadline to gather enough signatures to qualify for a ballot measure is in early December, so get on it.
In the months since Texas kicked off its gerrymander, it’s become clear that the Republicans probably overplayed their hand.
When I first wrote about this back in August, I predicted that when the dust settled, Republicans would probably net two House seats. But as the tit-for-tat gerrymanders have played out more, it’s become possible that the Democrats will actually gain seats, in large part because of how aggressive Democrats have been in pushing for state constitutional amendments.³
 |
|
I supported California’s efforts to redraw its Congressional districts to counter what was happening in Texas, but I also called out that the whole fight around gerrymandering is really bad for Americans:
The American people lose out here. Why? More gerrymandering leads to fewer competitive races and fewer Americans whose votes really matter.
There are 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Of those 435, only 40 seats—just 9%!—are likely to be competitive. That means that 91% of us—including basically everyone in Missouri—votes in an election where the outcome is all but decided.
But amidst all of the gerrymanders, there’s an unusual bipartisan opportunity that may emerge: because of all the districts that have been redrawn, a lot of members of Congress are about to lose their jobs.
Untethered from regular pressures to win elections, they have a chance to come together and create a bipartisan coalition to fight gerrymandering. Why might this work? Because for once, doing the right thing is in their self-interest. And self-interest is the most powerful motivator in politics.
Article summary:
Gerrymandering is happening all over the U.S., even though it’s immensely unpopular among Republicans, independents, and Democrats.
Because of gerrymandering, a lot of members of Congress are about to lose their jobs. They all have very strong personal incentives to push for nonpartisan redistricting.
That group could push for meaningful changes. There’s nothing more impactful they could do with their last year in Congress.
Why gerrymandering happens
Gerrymandering is immensely unpopular. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat or a Republican; people do not like it.
82% of Americans say that Congressional seats should be drawn by nonpartisan commissions. Overwhelming majorities of Republicans, independents, and Democrats agree that gerrymandering is a threat to democracy, and basically everyone agrees that it shouldn’t be legal for parties to gerrymander themselves to power.
 |
For something so overwhelmingly unpopular, why does this keep happening? Because the people in power have the least incentive to change anything.
Sure, it’s what the American people want. But why would you vote yourself into a more difficult election? Why make election results more unpredictable? Why make it harder to elect people to share your agendas and policy goals?
Ballot measures to end gerrymandering in Colorado, Michigan, and Utah⁴ were successful because it’s something voters want. But when you leave those reforms in the hands of elected officials, they don’t happen, because no one in elected office wants to make their own life harder. And that’s why they haven’t gone anywhere at the federal level.
With the latest surprise mid-decade gerrymanders, there’s a new opportunity.
The Coalition of Losers
(Or the Gang of the Gerrymandered. Whatever you prefer.⁵)
The New York Times says that the impact of the gerrymanders will be “roughly even.” What they mean is that when every state has maximally carved itself up, Republicans and Democrats won’t really have gained any partisan edge against one another.
But do you know who doesn’t feel like that impact is “roughly even”? California Republican Congressman Kevin Kiley.
Kiley represents a sprawling Congressional district that covers most of the California–Nevada border. He’s also just 40, young by political standards. I don’t know Kevin, but I’m guessing he has ambitions for higher office.⁶ Yes, that’s tricky as a Republican in California, but maybe he could climb into Republican House leadership one day.
So another Republican might vote like Kevin Kiley. But if you’re Kevin Kiley, you would very strongly prefer to be that Republican, versus another Republican from Texas who’s coming in to replace you.
In any event, because Californians passed Proposition 50 to gerrymander the state, he’ll likely be out of a job in 14 months.⁷ So will four of his colleagues from California and a bunch of other Republicans across the U.S. The same is true on the other side of the aisle; Democrats in Texas, Ohio, Missouri, and elsewhere could find themselves out of a job too.
Suddenly, we find ourselves with at least 19 members of Congress, and possibly more, who have a very strong incentive to push for nonpartisan redistricting, because it’s how they get to keep their job.
That’s our Coalition of Losers: the members of Congress who may not share a party or policy goals, but who are very much in the same boat in wanting to keep their jobs. Here’s that ever-evolving list.⁸
 |
This group could come together to push for common-sense reforms around redistricting, and they have very little to lose. (What they have to gain: their jobs.) The people who stand to benefit from all of these gerrymanders are five Republicans in Texas and five Democrats in California, but they’re not in Congress yet.
Already, Kevin Kiley is making some noise that he’s been left for dead by Republican leadership:
“I did hear the Speaker [Mike Johnson] say something to that effect at a press conference, but then he also went and said, ‘Well I think Republicans are going to come out ahead in the redistricting across the country’ which I honestly did not appreciate,” Kiley said.
“I think this whole redistricting thing is terrible for the country, and you shouldn’t be celebrating whether your party is going to gain in one state or across the country or not, we shouldn’t be drawing lines in a partisan way,” Kiley said.
Let’s see if Kiley—and the others who only have another year left in Congress—want to put their money where their mouth is.
Is a federal law for nonpartisan redistricting feasible?
Well, the status quo isn’t working, and I haven’t seen any better ideas.
I do think there’d be enough votes to bring this to a vote (through a discharge petition⁹) and pass it in the House. Why I’m confident:
On the Democratic side: the For the People Act of 2021, which included national nonpartisan redistricting, was cosponsored by literally every Democrat in the House.
On the Republican side: you don’t need many Republicans to join this bipartisan group. They’ve already been sold out by Republican leadership and have nothing to lose. (What they have to gain: support for a popular policy, and their jobs.)
From there, it’d go to the Senate for a vote. Senators have different personal incentives; there’s no redistricting in the Senate. Republicans would only play along if it really looks like they’re losing ground.
And in the long-shot scenario that it gets to the President for a signature, would Trump sign? Republicans would really have to be falling behind for him to get behind this.¹⁰
Winning doesn’t happen overnight
So, do I think this is likely to pass? No, not in the next few years. But here’s what I do think:
Americans believe that there’s less bipartisanship than in the past, but Americans still want the parties to work together.
A bipartisan group of lawmakers pushing for something that’s overwhelmingly popular like this does create political pressure on anyone running for office to take a position on gerrymandering.
A reminder that public opinion isn’t fixed,¹¹ and politicians do change their minds.
Democrats and Republicans can work together on issues, especially when they’re overwhelmingly popular. The bill to increase the smoking age to 21 passed with bipartisan support. So did the bill that legalized gay marriage.
Most members of Congress leave little lasting legacy; most are just rubber-stamp votes for their party.
The irony of America’s Coalition of Losers is that, even though they’re about to be out of work, they have an opportunity few members of Congress truly have: to shape the public narrative, to move public opinion, and to change public policy for the better.
Feel free to share this post with someone who will find this interesting. If you’re reading this email because someone sent it to you, please consider subscribing. And Missourians, don’t forget to sign the petition to send the anti-gerrymandering ballot measure to the voters!
I considered writing about a few different things, since it’s been an eventful week in politics:
Democrats won decisively in the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial elections. In both, energy costs were pivotal issues, something I wrote about two weeks ago.
The other major victory: California’s Proposition 50, which gerrymanders California and balances out gerrymanders in Texas.
Then, there’s the end of the government shutdown. Nate Silver and Matt Yglesias offered good perspectives on how that was handled, and I don’t have anything novel to add.
The (rough) process for these kinds of ballot measures in Missouri:
When the state legislature passes a bill, if Missouri voters don’t like what was passed, they have a limited period of time to collect signatures for a ballot measure. They have to gather signatures from 5% of the state’s voters.
If enough signatures are gathered, then a ballot measure is sent directly to the voters. They’ll be asked whether or not they approve of the legislation.
If a majority of voters disapprove of the state’s gerrymander, then Missouri will go back to using its old Congressional maps, not the ones they just created.
Utah’s recent history of nonpartisan redistricting is tortuous:
Voters passed a ballot measure in 2018 that mandated that the state use an independent redistricting commission.
The state legislature all but ignored it in 2022 by splitting Salt Lake City across the state’s four Congressional districts.
In August, the courts ruled that the districts need to be redrawn.
The legislature drew new maps in October that were back in the courts until yesterday, when a judge ruled against the legislature’s new map too.
Utah’s Republican Party is also considering a ballot measure that would throw out its nonpartisan redistricting.
So who knows! But the likeliest scenario is that Democrats will pick up one U.S. House seat in Utah.
By the way: as someone who was personally gerrymandered when I ran for Congress in ’22, I consider myself one of these losers.
Doesn’t take an investigative reporter to figure this one out: he ran for Governor in the 2021 recall election. He didn’t come close to winning (and the recall failed anyway).
He hasn’t given up yet; he says he’s considered six (!) different Congressional districts where he might run. But I think it’s highly unlikely.
A few notes on who’s in this table:
This list will undoubtedly change (and grow) over the coming weeks and months.
Obviously, elections aren’t predictable; sometimes people win even when no one expects them to win.
Redistricting in a lot of states isn’t finalized, so I’m working off Politico reporting in Virginia to guess who’s about to lose their job, and off of Roll Call reporting for the same info from Ohio.
Missouri, as discussed, has a mechanism to claw back its gerrymander. Fingers crossed!
Indiana may also try to gerrymander Democrat André Carson out of his district and create an additional Republican seat.
I’m excluding Utah from this list—see their redistricting saga above—because a Republican may end up losing his job because of nonpartisan redistricting. But that’s not set in stone; it’s likely to be a very competitive district.
This is precisely what’s happening with the vote to release federal files related to Jeffrey Epstein.
If Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Minnesota, and other Democratic states start pushing for aggressive gerrymanders, maybe that’d happen. But that’s not a likely outcome.
Just look at how much things have shifted on gay marriage, marijuana, and the death penalty, for instance.
| ||||||||||
