Though my mom has tried on numerous occasions to have me put a puzzle together with her, I must confess that I find building puzzles to be one of the least entertaining activities known to man. It’s actually quite infuriating. That said, I’ve read through countless articles reporting on the fiasco of redistricting in Texas and I can’t help but see the irony.
Redistricting is like piecing together a puzzle with the help of people you love and well … people who love to test your last nerve. It’s as if you’re assigned to build a puzzle with the sibling you always fight with, friends that go along with anything you suggest, the classmate that believes they’re the most intuitive human being since Christopher Columbus mistakenly declared he had discovered East Asia on the coast of the Bahamas, or your enemy that only participates to completely thwart any and every one of your efforts.
Other than being assigned to work this puzzle, you look around and think to yourself “Why am I actually doing this?” This is how I understand redistricting.
With this humorous scenario comparing puzzle-building to redistricting as one in the same (give or take), let’s continue the discussion in the Texas legislature.
WHAT IS REDISTRICTING?
Texas legislators recently made a bold move to redistrict the state mid-decade rather than waiting for the Decennial Census in 2030. That’s already a lot of words so let’s break it down.
Every 10 years, the U.S. releases a census report that tracks how many people are located in districts per their representative seat in the House of Representatives. Districts may encompass one singular county, divide multiple counties, or combine multiple counties. For example, Brown County is in the 11th Congressional District which makes Congressman August Pfluger the representative of that district. The 11th district encompasses Brownwood, Killeen, Llano, Midland, Odessa and San Angelo.
Once the census report is released, states redraw district lines so that each district gets a near-equal number of citizens per representative seat. This is called redistricting. It is a crucial aspect of preserving and determining political representation for U.S. citizens despite the negative narrative often spun by mainstream news – that it is a manipulative tool of deceit. The reality is that redistricting is essential to gauge an ever-expanding and evolving national population so that U.S. citizens may be accurately represented in Washington according to their vote.
It’s not the tool itself that is manipulative but rather, the operator of the tool that distorts the proper intention and usefulness of it.
According to the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Article 1 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, states have the primary responsibility to redistrict while being governed by federal law and judicial precedent. States are also able to redistrict mid-decade before the next census report if their state laws and constitution allow it. Despite its’ origination from the Spider-Man comic books and films, the coming phrase is an important one to note – With great power comes great responsibility.
State legislatures obtain significant authority concerning redistricting. With that bestowed authority, there are bounds and guidelines legislators must abide by to ensure this delicate and consequential process is strictly fulfilled for the profit of U.S. citizens and the flow of government. That said, redistricting mid-decade as opposed to every 10 years may not be common practice, but it can and does happen. It just happened in Texas.
WHAT HAPPENED IN TEXAS?
A mid-decade map that redistricts the state of Texas was recently approved by the Texas House, Senate and the Governor’s desk.
This will successfully add five more Republicans seats in Congress for 2026, allowing Republicans to maintain a majority in the House of Representatives. Specifically, there were 38 House members from Texas with seats in Washington – 12 Democrats and 25 Republicans with one vacancy. Now five more seats will be added to the Republicans making it 8 Democrats and 30 Republicans.
President Donald Trump gave unusual support for this update to the Texas map saying, “Texas never lets us down.”
Prior to being passed in the Texas Senate, Democrat legislators attempted to halt progress on a vote by fleeing from the state. They challenged the new map, calling it illegal and racially discriminating, an unjust attempt at stacking the deck for the 2026 midterm election. This sparked outrage as Governor Abbott of Texas demanded the members return or else face being arrested. As we later saw, the vote went through passing the new district map.
Representative Todd Hunter (R-Corpus Christi) stated that the new map is intended to “improve Republican political performance” in line with the bounds of legal mid-decade redistricting that are outlined in H.B. 4.
Senator Phil King (R-Weatherford) also commented saying that “the plan meets the critically important goods of legality, of political performance for Republicans and of improved compactness.” He made specific mention of the fact that members crafting the map did not consider the data of the racial population in the process therefore, it was not made to suppress minorities on the basis of race.
OPPOSITION TO THE NEW MAP
Unsurprisingly, opposition to the new map is far from dying down. Lawsuits have been filed alleging racial discrimination, Democrats complain of a violation of the U.S. Constitution Equal Protection Clause by relying on outdated data, as well as a violation of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. *It is plausible that data used for the new map is outdated given the fact that lawmakers would’ve had to rely on data from 2020 since states are required to refer to decennial census reports only*. Republican lawmakers have been accused by opposers of “packing” minority communities, specifically people of color around Dallas, Austin and Houston.
“Packing” is when one political party is given a district inhabited by as many voters acclaiming to that political party as possible in order to cancel out the significance of their votes during elections. This, and other ways in which redistricting can be manipulated, fall under the term “gerrymandering” that describes redistricting with the intention of boosting future electoral success for a particular party.
LET’S ANALYZE THIS
We’ve already established that mid-decade redistricting is not a problem and is, in fact, quite a legal move for states to make. It’s the way in which mid-decade redistricting is conducted that tends to expose issues. Do state laws and constitutions allow it? Does it attempt to usurp the federal courts and the U.S. Constitution?
On the basis of gerrymandering (redistricting gone wrong), Republicans and Democrats alike are not strangers to this discussion. It is a common point of attack upon one another so, it is neither a Democrat nor a Republican thing. It’s a political thing.
Partisan gerrymandering (redistricting to favor one political party) is more often than not too ambiguous of an accusation for federal courts to confront. It’s up to the states to create anti-gerrymandering language within their constitutions to combat potential partisanship. If it should be presented as a case to federal courts, there needs to be exclusive evidence of racial motives more than motives that show political partisanship.
Surely this is not a new thing… attempts at redistricting faced with aggressive opposition? For Texas, it definitely isn’t a new thing.
In 1961, Democrats held control of Texas and made their own attempt at redistricting. They did the same in 1971 as well. In 1981, the state was split between Democrats and Republicans, but Democrats dominated the U.S. House of Representatives for over a decade. Then in 1991, they regained majority in Texas. The state split again in 2001, Republicans gained control in 2011, 2021 and today.
However, 1991 proved to be a momentous time for redistricting in the Texas legislature. Democrats controlled the Texas governorship, legislative chambers and spearheaded the initiative for redistricting after the 1990 Census had been released. Within their new map, minority-majority districts in Dallas and Houston were made into new districts as H.B. 150 and S.B. 31 were passed.
Immediately, Republicans and various civil rights groups put forward lawsuits alleging unadjusted census numbers that undercounted minorities and violated the Voting Rights Act on claims of racial discrimination. Republicans said the new maps diluted the minority voting power, while Democrats responded that this provided new minority-opportunity districts.
This prompted an extensive legal battle involving many cases that eventually led to the Supreme Court weighing in for a ruling.
WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US?
The point we can draw from this extensive article is that, at the bare minimum, this is not a new and unprecedented situation. Especially considering the severity of polarized politics that flood our news feeds and federal institutions, we should expect to see bold political actions confronted by aggressive offense.
Especially after receiving support and eager prompting from President Donald Trump, which is not a common thing for the President to do/get involved with, Texas Republicans certainly face testy waters. This has quickly escalated from being a state-wide issue to a nation-wide crisis as other states like California have taken it upon themselves to retaliate with their own redrawn maps.
It’s important to take a step back, look at the big picture, and refer to history. This column will not suggest whether mid-decade redistricting in Texas is a rightful move of the legislature or not, as definite answers to complex dilemmas are never offered here. The point is to offer a meager attempt at displaying the bigger picture so you, the reader, can decide where you stand.
Is your community impacted by the new district maps? Do you believe Republicans referred to racial discrimination when creating the maps? What does the history of redistricting and political dominance in Texas tell you? What might this national redistricting crisis lead to for Congress come the midterm elections? Should the federal government have more authority over redistricting? That is for you to decide.
***
Katelyn Sims is a senior at Howard Payne University, pursuing a Bachelor of Arts degree in social science with emphasis in American political studies, global studies and jurisprudence. She is also a student in the university’s Guy D. Newman Honors Academy, as well as a prominent member of the Student Speaker Bureau speech and debate team. Following graduation, Katelyn will pursue a career in the field of U.S. foreign policy.
Katelyn has worked as a news writer and marketing coordinator with Brownwood News since 2023. Her column The Truth Will Set You Free is intended for all people from all walks of life. Katelyn aspires to inform readers of major U.S. political and legislative activity with an unbiased analysis that engages with political ideologies on all sides of the aisle. She believes the public ought to exercise their free will to cultivate personalized opinions on controversial issues without the influence of mainstream media.
