President Donald Trump’s claim that the Republican Party is “entitled to five more seats” in Texas’ legislature is a concerning sign regarding the state of democracy in the U.S. However, the Democratic Party choosing to gerrymander their own states is an equally problematic response.
Trump’s endorsement of Texas’ redistricting to give the Republican Party an advantage in Congress is unusual, but not because it’s a completely new development.
The term gerrymandering was first created in 1812, after Governor Elbridge Gerry signed off on his party’s redistricting plan to give themselves an unfair advantage in Massachusetts. The “Boston Gazette” mocked Gerry’s plan by redrawing a new, contorted voting district created by the plan as a salamander-like monster and naming it after Gerry.
Though Gerry’s name is tied to this underhanded practice, he was not the first to use it.
Scot Schraufnagel, a professor of political science, explained what gerrymandering is.
“Gerrymandering is a phenomenon that first started after the 1790 census, in trying to gain a political advantage, and it’s been going on for the entire history of the country,” Schraufnagel said.
What makes the Texas redistricting plan stand out from centuries of gerrymandering is that it is occurring mid-decade. Normally, maps are redrawn after new census data is released each decade.
The Republicans’ current rush to redistrict Texas is a blatant attempt to tip the scales in their favor before the 2026 midterm elections. Typically, the president’s party loses seats in Congress during the midterms, and the Republican Party’s current majorities in the House and Senate are slim.
Moreover, this adds discord to an administration that is already ridden with controversy not even one year after Trump won reelection, ranging from the infamous Jeffrey Epstein scandal to concerning job reports and Trump’s immediate response of firing the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
When the Texas redistricting plan was first revealed, the Democratic Party vowed to gerrymander in retaliation, arguing that doing so would paradoxically preserve democracy against Republican aggression.
However, the Democrats have no means of ensuring that their gerrymandering will create a House or Senate that better represents the population of the U.S., and they have no reason to reset their maps even if the Republicans succeed in keeping the majority.
There is no world in which gerrymandering is not an attack on democracy and the power of citizens. The current situation is nothing more than a selfish power struggle between the major political parties of the U.S., and the average citizen will be the one to suffer.
Intense gerrymandering only divides the U.S. further and reduces the power of left-leaning voters living in red states and vice versa, changing the U.S. from a democracy where the average citizen can influence their state through negotiation and seeking out those with like minds, to citizens picking and choosing which state aligns best with their beliefs and hoping they stay that way.
For the sake of democracy in the U.S., gerrymandering must end, and it starts with the states.
“We call the states laboratories of democracy, right?” Schraufnagel said. “Some states have fought gerrymandering successfully, Iowa, right? Maybe just, like, legalizing marijuana or passing a lottery, or you know, like, when one state does it and they don’t fall apart, then people begin to accept the fact that maybe, you know, they could do it as other states could do it.”
Regardless of who controls Congress in 2026, voters should bear one thing in mind: A party that gerrymanders does not have their constituents’ best interests in mind. If they did, they would not be trying to suppress the power of voters.
