Democrats are saying that this is all an undemocratic authoritarian grab at power by Donald Trump, once again asserting that they must resist and fight fire with fire or our democracy will die. Republicans are countering by highlighting examples of Democrats states that are already seriously gerrymandered. They say the Republican states have more room than Democrats to increase house seats for the GOP, and are telling Dems not to escalate this fight.
Here is a overview of the facts about Texas and California’s representation gap for the political minorities in their states, and how the new plans will increase that disparity:
Texas Minority Representation:
- In the 2024 presidential election, Kamala Harris received approximately 42.5% of the vote.
- As of August 2025, Democrats held 11 out of Texas 38 congressional seats, that’s 29% of congressional representation.
- A 13.5% gap in Democrat representation.
- Republicans are expected to gain five additional House seats, this could reduce the Democratic delegation to 6 seats, or approximately 15.8% of Texas’s congressional delegation.
- A 26.7% gap in Democrat representation.
- In the 2024 presidential election, Republicans received 38.3% of the vote in California.
- Republicans hold 9 out of California’s 52 congressional seats, that’s 17.3% of congressional representation.
- That’s a 21% gap in Republican representation.
- New plan seeks to gain five more Democrat seats, leaving Republicans with only 4 seats, or 7.7% of California’s congressional representation.
- A 30.6% gap in Republican representation.
Before Redistricting:
TX - Democrat Disadvantage: 13.5 point
CA - Republican Disadvantage: 21 point
After Redistricting:
TX - Democrat Disadvantage: 26.7 point
CA - Republican Disadvantage: 30.6 point
How do Texas and California compare to other states?
Well, it may surprise you to learn they are not nearly the worst at balance in representation, they aren’t even in the top 10. The following chart shows the percentage gap between the political minority vote in the state and the congressional representation for the political minority.
After this dive into proportional representation the question is: Should congressional representation in the states reflect as near as possible the party vote of its citizens?
Many would say yes, but the problems in achieving such outcomes are numerous; here’s a few of them:
*You can view a breakdown of the data as recorded in 2024 election here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fjqCHOJSrrV_-BUW8p9h75GRhODgejTk/view?usp=drivesdk
Well, it may surprise you to learn they are not nearly the worst at balance in representation, they aren’t even in the top 10. The following chart shows the percentage gap between the political minority vote in the state and the congressional representation for the political minority.
*Based on data from 2024 elections. States with two or fewer representatives are not included in these rankings.
It’s important to note that a state generally needs to have at least three congressional seats before it becomes statistically possible to provide relatively balanced representation between the two major political parties in its congressional delegation. With three or more seats, especially if drawn as at-large or multi-member districts rather than single-member, it becomes much more viable for the state’s delegation to reflect more nuanced division in party support. Even so, three districts may not guarantee proportionality unless seats are drawn fairly and votes are not strongly geographically clustered. If you take states with only 3 congressional seats out of the top ten, New Mexico and Nebraska would fall out and Tennessee and Maryland would fall in. Still the top ten is dominated by mostly smaller states with the exceptions of Massachusetts, Illinois, Tennessee and Maryland.
It’s important to note that a state generally needs to have at least three congressional seats before it becomes statistically possible to provide relatively balanced representation between the two major political parties in its congressional delegation. With three or more seats, especially if drawn as at-large or multi-member districts rather than single-member, it becomes much more viable for the state’s delegation to reflect more nuanced division in party support. Even so, three districts may not guarantee proportionality unless seats are drawn fairly and votes are not strongly geographically clustered. If you take states with only 3 congressional seats out of the top ten, New Mexico and Nebraska would fall out and Tennessee and Maryland would fall in. Still the top ten is dominated by mostly smaller states with the exceptions of Massachusetts, Illinois, Tennessee and Maryland.
As a matter of national politics, it’s an imbalance in the largest states that have the largest impact through gerrymandering. Among the 10 most populated states, and therefore the most politically powerful in Congress, here’s a look at the gap between their political minority and representation for that minority. The higher the number the greater the gap, and therefore, the more disadvantage the political minority is in their congressional representation. Notice the last 3 states are verily balanced, but they are also states with more political divisions in state leadership.
* Based on data from 2024 elections. States with two or fewer representatives are not included in these rankings. Notice that in 2024 Georgia has 1.5 in favor of their political minority. This is a reflection of the political shift in Georgia toward the Republicans.
So who has more imbalance in representation, Republican or Democrat states?
In the top 20 states with the greatest gap between their minority vote and their minority representation, the top four stars are Democrat majority states, the next 3 are Republican, and the final 3 are swing states. The more divided the state government the more likely the state is to have a more proportional congressional representation. It’s long standing one party rule that results in the most under representation for the states political minority. With smaller states throwing their representation almost entirely to the political majorities of those states, and swing states having relatively balanced representation, in the end, congressional control is most significantly impacted by gerrymandering in a few large population states with one party control.
In the top 20 states with the greatest gap between their minority vote and their minority representation, the top four stars are Democrat majority states, the next 3 are Republican, and the final 3 are swing states. The more divided the state government the more likely the state is to have a more proportional congressional representation. It’s long standing one party rule that results in the most under representation for the states political minority. With smaller states throwing their representation almost entirely to the political majorities of those states, and swing states having relatively balanced representation, in the end, congressional control is most significantly impacted by gerrymandering in a few large population states with one party control.
Texas has already redistricted in 2025 and California shows signs of counter attacking. How a redistricting war would turn out depends on how many seats could be moved by the states on this chart as you move down. Which states have more room to move representation in favor of the majority. On a heads to heads competition between New York and Florida, Florida has more room to add majority representatives. Between Illinois and Ohio, Ohio has the advantage. Overall the large Democrat states are more gerrymandered than the Republican counterpart, however as you move down the list you see states who are less incentivized by their state cultures to enter a redistricting war.
After this dive into proportional representation the question is: Should congressional representation in the states reflect as near as possible the party vote of its citizens?
Many would say yes, but the problems in achieving such outcomes are numerous; here’s a few of them:
1) The US Constitution makes these questions a matter for the state governments to figure out, and by no means are states created equal. There are various factors that prompt states to maximum the majority power in congress through drawing favorable districts for the political majority.
2) People’s voting preferences and party affiliations can shift from one election to another, thus making it nearly impossible to make representation proportional at all times.
3) The power to draw congressional maps is one of the many consequences of elections in Democracies where the majority rules plays out in greater power.
4) States who have sought to establish some kind of independent, non-partisan way of drawing congressional maps, have found out that keeping politics out of something that is so intrinsically connected to the reigns of power in Washington D.C. is extremely difficult.
Despite the extraordinary political powers that push and pull states in different directions, it’s surprising how many states have done a good job representing their citizens as fairly as possible. Twelve states have a less than 10% disadvantage to their political minorities.
Despite the extraordinary political powers that push and pull states in different directions, it’s surprising how many states have done a good job representing their citizens as fairly as possible. Twelve states have a less than 10% disadvantage to their political minorities.
*Based on data from 2024 elections.
Virginia, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, Minnesota, and Colorado have a number that favors the political minority slightly. This is a result of the political shift toward Republicans in the 2024 election.
The nature of the national coalitions for the Democrat and Republican parties shapes the dynamics for how states draw their congressional districts. For the Republican party, their coalition is a large group of smaller less populated states that must counter the power of densely populated areas that tend to vote for Democrats. Thus you will see a lot of small Republican states that do all they can to gain an advantage for the Republican Party in Congress through drawing Republican districts.
Virginia, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, Minnesota, and Colorado have a number that favors the political minority slightly. This is a result of the political shift toward Republicans in the 2024 election.
The nature of the national coalitions for the Democrat and Republican parties shapes the dynamics for how states draw their congressional districts. For the Republican party, their coalition is a large group of smaller less populated states that must counter the power of densely populated areas that tend to vote for Democrats. Thus you will see a lot of small Republican states that do all they can to gain an advantage for the Republican Party in Congress through drawing Republican districts.
In conclusion:
Majority political powers within the states, using that power to increase the party power in Washington DC is almost as old as our Republican form of government. It’s a political dynamic that should be put in the bucket of things that remind us that elections have consequences.
By the data, the single greatest factor that makes representation proportional is divided government at the state level. On a national level the best way to bring about the most lasting change and stop aggressive gerrymandering would be to support a significant reduction in the size and power of the federal government. A federal government kept inside its constitutional bounds would hold less attraction for political power wars over the halls of the Federal Congress.
Majority political powers within the states, using that power to increase the party power in Washington DC is almost as old as our Republican form of government. It’s a political dynamic that should be put in the bucket of things that remind us that elections have consequences.
By the data, the single greatest factor that makes representation proportional is divided government at the state level. On a national level the best way to bring about the most lasting change and stop aggressive gerrymandering would be to support a significant reduction in the size and power of the federal government. A federal government kept inside its constitutional bounds would hold less attraction for political power wars over the halls of the Federal Congress.
*You can view a breakdown of the data as recorded in 2024 election here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fjqCHOJSrrV_-BUW8p9h75GRhODgejTk/view?usp=drivesdk
