Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Indiana Republicans Could Lose at the Ballot over Redistricting Plan

News

Indiana Republicans Could Lose at the Ballot over Redistricting Plan
Image generated by IVN staff

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. -- As Indiana Republicans weigh whether to call a special session to redraw the state’s congressional map, a new Unite America poll shows that voters overwhelmingly oppose the idea — including a majority of GOP primary voters.

The survey, conducted October 7–9 by 3D Strategic Research, found that 44% of Hoosiers oppose mid-decade redistricting while only 31% support it. After hearing balanced arguments from both sides, opposition jumped to 69%, with just 21% still in favor.


The results were released days after Vice President JD Vance visited Indiana to rally support for the redistricting push, a sign of how deeply the Trump administration has inserted itself into state-level redistricting battles.

“Voters across Indiana — including a majority of Republicans — are sick of partisan games that put party over country,” said Nick Troiano, executive director of Unite America.

A Mid-Decade Gerrymander: Few Support, Even Among GOP Voters

Only 10% of Indiana voters say the governor and legislature should call a special session for redistricting. Even among Republican primary voters — the base legislators are targeting — enthusiasm is low:

  • 28% said they would be less likely to support a candidate backing mid-decade redistricting.
  • Just 17% said they’d be more likely to do so.

When presented with 14 public-policy priorities, “redrawing congressional maps” ranked dead last among GOP primary voters – behind concerns like cost of living, jobs, and public safety.

The results echo concerns voiced by some Republican lawmakers that reopening the maps could backfire politically and further erode public trust.

Unite America has found in yearly research that 90% of U.S. elections are safe for the party in power, whether it is a GOP-controlled district or a Democratic district. This creates an electoral environment where the most consequential votes are made in primary elections.

General elections are all but inconsequential. Thus, the incentive for lawmakers is to cater only to a small, partisan minority that votes in the primaries. This is why polling these voters is so important.

If lawmakers make them happy, they are guaranteed re-election. If they don’t, a primary challenger could take their seat.

Voters Also Reject Closing Primaries to Party Members

The Unite America poll also found that Indiana voters are strongly opposed to closing state primaries to registered party members -- another idea under consideration by GOP lawmakers.

Initially, 52% opposed the move. After hearing arguments from both sides, opposition soared to 77% -- including 66% of Republican primary voters.

Such a change would lock out roughly 2 million independent voters from the elections that matter most in a state where all 9 congressional seats are effectively decided in the primary.

“Every voter should have the freedom to cast a ballot in every taxpayer-funded election,” Troiano said. “I’m not surprised Indiana voters don’t want to give up that right.”

A Message to Lawmakers: Focus on Real Issues

The poll’s findings underscore a consistent message: Indiana voters, across party lines, want lawmakers to focus on cost of living, safety, and the economy – not partisan power plays.

As the Republican caucus meets this week to consider a special session, the data suggest that moving forward with redistricting could deepen voter frustration at a time when trust in government is already at historic lows.

Poll details: Conducted Oct. 7–9, 2025 by 3D Strategic Research among 500 registered voters and 450 Republican primary voters in Indiana. Full results available via Unite America.

New Poll Shows Indiana Republicans Could Lose at the Ballot over Redistricting Plan was first published on IVN and republished with permission.

Shawn Griffiths Is An Election Reform Expert And National Editor Of IVN.us.


Read More

An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
  • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
  • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
  • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

Keep ReadingShow less
Towards a Reformed Capitalism
oval brown wooden conference table and chairs inside conference room

Towards a Reformed Capitalism

Despite all the laws and regulations that apply to corporations, which for the most part are designed to make corporations more responsive to the greater good, corporations have wreaked great harm on our environment, their workers, their customers, and the general public. Despite all the rules, capitalism can still pretty much do what it wants.

The problem is not that the laws and regulations are not enforced, although that is partly true. The problem is more that the laws and regulations are weak because of the strong influence corporations have on both Congress (this is true of Democrats as well as Republicans) and those responsible for regulating.

Keep ReadingShow less
Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

The Bring Our Families Home campaign brought together loved ones of Americans wrongly detained overseas to display portraits in the Senate Russell Rotunda on Wednesday, May 6.

(Jacques Abou-Rizk, MNS)

Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

WASHINGTON – American journalist Reza Valizadeh visited his elderly Iranian parents in March 2024 for the first time in 15 years. Valizadeh’s stories for Voice of America and other U.S. government-funded outlets often criticized the Iranian regime. So before traveling, he sought and received confirmation that he would be safe from a high-ranking commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of Iran’s armed forces. However, in September that same year, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps arrested Valizadeh, and Tehran’s Revolutionary Court sentenced him to ten years in prison for “collaboration with a hostile government.”

In the Rotunda of the Senate Russell Building last week, the Bring Our Families Home campaign set up portraits of Valizadeh and 12 other Americans currently wrongfully detained overseas. The group, family members of illegitimately detained Americans, appealed to Congress to push for their safe return. Each foam poster board included the name, home state, and country of detainment. The display also included portraits of the 33 people released after advocacy by the James W. Foley Foundation.

Keep ReadingShow less
DHS Funding During the Shutdown
Getty Images, Charles-McClintock Wilson

DHS Funding During the Shutdown

When Congress failed to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of this fiscal year in February, almost all of its employees began to work without pay. That situation changed, however, on April 3, when President Donald Trump issued a memorandum ordering the DHS secretary and director of the Office of Management and Budget to “use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS” to pay its employees and issue back pay.

Trump shifted money to avoid the political embarrassment that would be caused by the collapse of airport security screening through the actions of disgruntled agents and the disruption to air travel that would ensue. But it’s legally dubious.

Keep ReadingShow less