How Far Can The Redistricting Arms Race Go?
Summary
Host Galen Drosdner and guest Dave Wasserman analyze the impact of mid-cycle redistricting on the 2026 House map, noting that Republican gains have reduced competitive districts to a historic low. They discuss how the Supreme Court’s ruling in *Crawford v. Marion County* has enabled further gerrymandering in the South, while Democratic efforts in states like Virginia face legal hurdles. The conversation explores the interplay between partisan sorting and map manipulation, concluding that Democrats now need a significantly larger national vote margin to reclaim the House majority.
Topics discussed
Intro: Missouri Supreme Court blocks new map
Current state of congressional maps and competitiveness
Interview intro: Unusual year for redistricting
Twists and turns: Texas and California map battles
Impact of Supreme Court ruling on map changes
Democratic path to majority: National vote thresholds
Simulating 2018 wave under new district lines
Historical context: Comparing gerrymandering eras
Decline in competitive districts since 2000
Texas specifics: Latino voter snapback and seat flips
Overview of 10 states that changed maps
Explaining the Calais decision and Voting Rights Act
Legal standards: Partisan vs. racial gerrymandering
Consequences for Southern majority-minority districts
Sponsorship break and future redistricting battles
Potential future map changes in other states
Virginia's redistricting history and legal hurdles
Can Virginia Democrats redraw again? Political costs
Geography problem: Census projections and seat losses
Polarization vs. gerrymandering: Which drives results?
Proposal for algorithmic, non-partisan redistricting
Political incentives and the problem of capture
Key districts to watch in the 2026 midterms
Listen ad-free on Castria