Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

When Politicians Draw Their Own Victories: Why and How To End Gerrymandering

Opinion

When Politicians Draw Their Own Victories: Why and How To End Gerrymandering

Alyssa West from Austin holds up a sign during the Fight the Trump Takeover rally at the Texas Capitol on Saturday, August. 16, 2025.

(Aaron E. Martinez/Austin American-Statesman via Getty Images)

From MAGA Republicans to progressive Democrats to those of us in the middle, Americans want real change – and they’re tired of politics as usual. They’re craving authenticity, real reform, and an end to the status quo. More and more, voters seem to be embracing disruption over the empty promises of establishment politicians, who too often live by the creed that “one bad idea deserves a bigger one.” Just look at how both parties are handling gerrymandering in Texas and California, and it’s difficult to see it as anything other than both parties trying to rig elections in their favor.

Instead of fixing the system, politicians are fueling a turbocharged redistricting arms race ahead of high-stakes midterm 2026 elections that will determine control of the U.S. Congress. In Texas, Republicans just redrew congressional lines, likely guaranteeing five new Republican seats, which has sparked Democratic strongholds like California and New York to threaten their own gerrymandered counterattacks.


This isn’t democracy. This destroys democracy. It’s a corrupt game where politicians choose their voters — not the voters selecting their representatives, as enumerated in our U.S. Constitution.

We represent different parties, but we have both seen the severe damage gerrymandering has done to American democracy. At this point, less than 12 percent of House races are expected to be competitive in 2026. That means in nearly 9 out of 10 House districts, voters may not have a genuine choice of candidates or be able to vote in an election that politicians do not already fix. That translates into 385 of the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives will be pre-determined. The result? Increased hyper-partisanship, little to no incentives for bipartisan compromise in Congress, and, most importantly, a vast majority of moderate middle voters (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans) like us whose voices and proposals are lost.

Fixing gerrymandering would put voters back in the driver's seat, ensuring their choices determine election outcomes and that elected officials are truly accountable to the people they serve. For the sake of our democracy, we need bold and bipartisan actions that put power back where it belongs: with the voters.

First, in the immediate term, all voters should make their voices heard. We should not settle for the status quo or mutually assured destruction by supporting either party's position to gerrymander. Attend a town meeting and contact your representatives to demand that they oppose all efforts to gerrymander by both parties. In recent days, a few political leaders, including Republican Governor of New Hampshire Kelly Ayotte and Democratic Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, have said ‘no’ to this mid-decade redistricting.

Second, Congress should pass redistricting reforms that prohibit partisan gerrymandering. These reforms should establish minimum standards for drawing congressional maps, which would require districts to be drawn using neutral, transparent criteria, such as equal population, geographic contiguity and compactness, and consideration of communities of interest and existing political boundaries.

Third, all states should adopt independent, nonpartisan state redistricting commissions, which would remove legislators from the process. Eleven states that already use independent or bipartisan redistricting commissions, and evidence shows these commissions tend to create fairer maps, increase electoral competitiveness, and boost voter trust in the process. Polls have shown strong voter support across the political spectrum for independent commissions.

Better yet, to make sure this reform takes hold nationwide and to prevent future gerrymandering battles from escalating, Congress should require all states to set up independent redistricting commissions. This latest escalation shows that it only takes one “bad apple state” to spark a multi-state gerrymandering battle. That is why Congress must act now.

There have been bipartisan reform efforts in recent years, including the Fairness and Independence in Redistricting Act and the Redistricting Transparency and Accountability Act. But in each case, Congress has failed to do what is best for voters, instead acting on its own cynical partisan interests. Passing and abiding by redistricting reforms requires compromise, cross-partisan collaboration, and courage – values that have been eroded by the effects of decades of gerrymandering. But this latest escalation of gerrymandering threats shows why Congress cannot wait any longer.

Benedict Arnold, Joseph McCarthy, and Elbridge Gerry (from whom we derive the term “gerrymander”) are all names that are vilified in American history. While gerrymandering has been around for centuries, it is long past time to retire this wretched and corrupt practice. It is a direct threat to representative government, democratic ideals, and American values. Beginning in Texas, we must unite and oppose all efforts by states to manipulate the outcome of our elections. Now is the time for We the People to demand that Members of Congress declare publicly whether they support reform or choose the corrupt old ways.

Charles Boustany (R-LA), a former U.S. representative serving Louisiana’s 3rd and 7th congressional districts, and Amb.

Tim Roemer (D-IN), a former ambassador to India and U.S. representative serving Indiana’s 3rd congressional district, is a part of Issue One’s ReFormers Caucus, a group of nearly 200 former members of Congress united to fix our broken political system.



Read More

Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections
US Capitol
US Capitol

Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections

In the run-up to the midterms, President Trump continues to call for nationalizing congressional elections. He has sought to initiate the process through executive orders, such as one proposing to set “a ballot receipt deadline of Election Day for all methods of voting.” The words and spirit of the United States Constitution—the bedrock textualism and originalism of conservative constitutional interpretation—say he can’t nationalize elections.

Unlike some consequential constitutional questions, it’s not a close call.

Keep ReadingShow less
Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

Smoke billows after overnight airstrikes on oil depots on March 8, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

What Is The War Powers Resolution of 1973?

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 is a law enacted by Congress that limits the U.S. president’s ability to wage or escalate military operations overseas. Passed on November 7, 1973 amid the Vietnam War, the War Powers Resolution reasserts Congress’ constitutional power “to declare war” and “to raise and support Armies.” A key provision of the War Powers Resolution requires the president to submit a report to Congress within 48 hours of military deployment in the absence of an official declaration of war by Congress detailing:

  • The circumstances requiring U.S. forces;
  • The constitutional or legislative justification for the president’s actions;
  • The estimated duration of U.S. involvement in the hostilities.

If Congress does not formally declare war or enact special authorization for continuation of the U.S’ involvement in a conflict within 60 days of the report’s submission, the president must withdraw U.S. troops from the hostilities. If Congress does declare war, the president is instructed under the War Powers Resolution to report to Congress periodically on the status of the hostilities no less than once every 6 months.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protestors holding signs, including one that says "let the people vote."

Attendees hold signs advocating for voting rights and against the SAVE America Act at a rally to outside the U.S. Capitol on March 18, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Heather Diehl

SAVE America Act Debate Begins; Mullin for DHS Hearing

Both chambers of Congress are in session this week and next. The House will probably function about like it has been - lots of votes (often by voice) on uncontroversial bills; many fewer votes on Republican priority bills. Lots of hearings this week and a few legislator updates.

Committee Meetings

Both chambers have a busy week with 64 total committee meetings scheduled.

Keep ReadingShow less
Who Decides Whether America Goes to War?

A woman sifts through the rubble in her house in the Beryanak District after it was damaged by missile attacks two days before, on March 15, 2026, in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Who Decides Whether America Goes to War?

Because taking our country into war has the potential, if not the likelihood, even in modernwarfare, of costing the bodies and lives of American soldiers as well as disrupting the economy, this is an important question.

The Constitution is the guide to answering this question. The Constitution clearly states that Congress has the power to declare war. The President does not have that power.

Keep ReadingShow less