Trump has asked Texas Republicans to gerrymander congressional districts ahead of the 2026 midterms. Doing so could (theoretically) give Republicans an additional five seats in the Texas congressional delegation. It appears that Democratic legislators in Texas are preparing to flee the state to prevent the necessary quorum to pass the gerrymandering legislation. Politico, Texas Dems to flee state amid national redistricting battle.
Dozens of Texas Democrats plan to flee the state amid a special session Sunday afternoon, making a last-ditch effort to disrupt a mid-decade redistricting attempt forced by President Donald Trump, according to two people briefed on the matter.
It marks their second act of breaking quorum — when the state House will lack the minimum number of lawmakers needed to conduct business — since 2021. And it comes as the party scrambles to counter the aggressive action in Texas, intended to keep Republicans in power in Congress next year by creating five GOP-friendly seats in the state.
In response, other states controlled by Democrats are considering mid-decade redistricting to counter gerrymandering efforts in Texas. To be clear, the point of those Democratic efforts would be to engage in political gerrymandering to offset gerrymandering in Texas.
Some readers have cautioned against Democratic gerrymandering, arguing that such efforts amount to voter suppression against Republicans. Other readers say that we are in an existential battle for democracy and that refusing to reciprocate in the (sadly) permissible practice of partisan gerrymandering is shortsighted. See, generally, Brennan Center for Justice, Gerrymandering Explained. (“[S]ince the Supreme Court’s 2019 ruling . . . gerrymandering for party advantage cannot be challenged in federal court.)
If Texas Democrats succeed in shutting down the Texas legislature by fleeing the state, then states controlled by Democrats can avoid the difficult issue of reciprocal partisan gerrymandering. The obvious solution to partisan gerrymandering is the passage of legislation like the Freedom to Vote Act, which Democrats attempted (but failed) to pass under President Biden
The effort by Texas Republicans to engage in mid-decade redistricting is but one of the many voter suppression efforts that Trump has put into play since his inauguration. The Brennan Center for Justice has summarized the current voter suppression efforts by the Trump administration in this article, The Trump Administration’s Campaign to Undermine the Next Election | Brennan Center for Justice.
The Brennan Center is a highly respected source of reliable information and scholarship. It accurately catalogs the Trump administration's voter suppression efforts. It would be easy and understandable to read the Brennan Center article and come away with a sense of dread and foreboding about 2026.
The article by the Brennan Center also lists the countermeasures to defeat the voter suppression efforts by the Trump administration. So, for example, per the article,
Voter suppression effort: Attempting to Impose a “Show Your Papers” Requirement on Voters. Status: Subject to challenge in five lawsuits across the nation, implementation of some provisions blocked by two of those lawsuits.
Voter suppression effort: Meddling with Election Equipment. Status: Challenged in two lawsuits, and “the agency still must follow several steps under federal law before the guidelines can be implemented, including consulting with advisory boards of nonpartisan experts and posting the guidelines for public comment.”
Voter suppression effort: Accessing Sensitive Voter File Data. Status: “In some states, giving voter records to the federal government without written consent from voters would also be a violation of state law; in others, redaction would be required.”
Voter suppression effort: Weaponizing federal agencies. Status: “Courts have already struck down this administration’s attempts to subvert the law. For example . . . two courts have preliminarily stopped the president from unlawfully trying to direct an independent, bipartisan agency to add a citizenship document requirement to the federal voter registration form.”
I could go on, but you get the point. Educating ourselves about the problem is the first step. Identifying solutions, including those already in the works, is the second step.
I receive emails from readers every week saying, in effect, “Okay, the 2026 elections will take place, but Trump will ensure they are not free and fair.” The obvious follow-up questions are, “How is he going to do that?” and “What can we do about it?”
Many readers highlight the “voter suppression” tactics without acknowledging the countermeasures that are already in place. To be clear, I am not saying that we can relax and let down our guard. That would be unwise, just as it would be unwise to communicate that “All is lost” and “Trump is going to rig the 2026 elections and there is nothing we can do about it.”
A more accurate statement is “Trump is trying to rig the 2026 elections, and Democrats are fighting back on all fronts.” Don’t just spot issues; spot solutions as well. And communicate both to nervous friends, neighbors, and fellow activists.
Finally, if you want some confidence about the path to reclaiming free and fair elections, I highly recommend this 37-minute video featuring David Pepper being interviewed by John Avlon. See The Bulwark, Fight Everywhere or Lose Everything! (w/ David Pepper)
The video explains that Republicans have an unfair electoral advantage in the US House because of decades of partisan gerrymandering, a practice that tends to “lock in” minority rule.
Sounds bad, right? Well, it is bad, but there is a solution.
As David Pepper explains, decades of gerrymandering have resulted in a situation where Democrats do not field a candidate in many state-level and federal-level districts. In some states, the number of unconstested races is shockingly high—as in 30 to 40%. When there is no Democratic candidate on the ballot, that sends a message to Democrats in that district that they should not bother to show up.
As David Pepper explains, just having a Democratic candidate on the ballot in “safe” red district can affect statewide and national races. For example, Allison Riggs just won a seat on the North Carolina Supreme Court by a margin of 700 votes. Riggs won her seat after the chair of the North Carolina Democratic Party, Anderson Clayton, committed to having a Democratic candidate in every state legislative race without regard to Democratic prospects for success in those districts.
Allison Riggs sits on the North Carolina Supreme Court today because civic-minded Democrats committed to running as a candidate in a safe red district in North Carolina. Per David Pepper, “There is a public service in running that goes beyond winning.”
David Pepper also explains that failing to contest every race at the state level distorts national elections as well. Mike Johnson, the current Speaker of the US House, began his political career with two unopposed terms in the Louisiana legislature. In 2022, Johnson won an uncontested congressional election, after which he was elected Speaker of the House. In 2024, he faced no Democratic opponent.
Mike Johnson has presided over some of the most reactionary legislation ever passed by the House. As David Pepper notes, “Without the gerrymander, most of the GOP’s extreme policies would lead the GOP to lose over and over again.” And yet, according to legacy media, Democrats are losing because of “their message,” not because the playing field has been stacked against them.
David Pepper says the following near the end of the video: “The battle for democracy runs through your backyard. Helping a 'red district' Democrat to run can help end gerrymandering. Fight from the bottom up!”
The message from David Pepper and John Avlon is empowering. If you are worried about 2026 and would like some thoughtful commentary on the path forward, I recommend John Avlon’s video interview of David Pepper. The Bulwark, Fight Everywhere or Lose Everything!
Trump's effort to “cook the books.”
Last Friday, Trump fired the chief statistician for the Bureau of Labor Statistics following a weaker-than-expected jobs report. That effort was greeted with widespread derision and alarm. Major media outlets and economists described the action as shortsighted and dangerous. See WSJ, The Bureau of Labor Denial. (Accessible to all.) (“The reality of slowing job growth is clear to anyone paying attention, no matter the official statistics. Mr. Trump’s data denial is one more reason fewer Americans will trust the government.”)
The White House spent the weekend mounting unconvincing defenses of Trump's action. As noted in the Wall Street Journal editorial above, even Trump's defenders couldn’t quite bring themselves to say that firing the chief statistician was warranted. See also, The Guardian, White House officials rush to defend Trump after shaky economic week | Trump administration.
Indeed, some of the defenders simply made matters worse. See CNN, Hassett says Trump ‘wants his own people’ at the Bureau of Labor Statistics after firing commissioner.
National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett defended Trump’s decision to fire Bureau of Labor Statistics Commissioner Erika McEntarfer, claiming the president “wants his own people there.”
It will further erode the trust of the American people by staffing a non-partisan function with political appointees. Future economic reports will merely be the “starting point” for endless political bickering about the true state of the economy. And it is a no-win situation for Trump and for American business.
If the jobs report magically rebounds after Trump appoints “his own people,” that outcome will be inherently suspect. But if employment and inflation continue to trend in the wrong direction, Trump will fire the next crop of new hires and continue to replace qualified statisticians with political hacks. (Think Mike Lindell, the “My Pillow Guy.”)
The real loser in a “cooked books” scenario is American business. Business leaders need accurate data to make appropriate hiring and investment decisions. Indeed, denying accurate data may be a recipe for disaster. See NYTimes, Trump Fired America’s Economic Data Collector. History Shows the Perils. (Accessible to all.)
The Times article is worth your attention. It discusses historical parallels, including Greece, where the government faked economic reports for years, resulting in a collapse of the Greek economy and multiple bailouts by the IMF and European Central Bank.
And when a Greek government statistician began to report accurate numbers, the Greek government persecuted him for nearly a decade in a series of overlapping criminal and civil cases. When the statistician would be acquitted of a charge, he would be tried (and convicted) by an appeals court on the charges rejected by a jury, or a different prosecutor would file the same charges again in a different venue. See American Statistical Association, Eight Years of Government Persecution of Greek Statistician.
Trump's firing of a statistician because he does not like the actual economic performance underlying the statistician’s report is affirmatively harmful to the US economy and another attack on the rule of law. Our elected representatives can do their jobs only if they know the truth about what is happening in America. By firing the chief statistician, Trump is attacking the truth and, derivatively, the democratic system.
Robert B. Hubbell Newsletter
blakekathryn
andulkaphoto
tangentwithtanner
theartofmadeline
dailybridgerton
janainaart
