Texas redraws Congressional map — here’s the worst gerrymanders in the US

Texas House Republicans approved a newly gerrymandered congressional map that they believe will give them five new seats in the House of Representatives. The map was drawn to appease President Donald Trump, who wants to protect the razor-thin Republican majority in the chamber for the second half of his term. 

While the focus has been on Texas since the legislature began its special session on July 21, the Princeton Gerrymandering Project makes clear there are unfair maps across the country. 

After the 2021 redistricting cycle, the school published its redistricting report card, giving five states an “F” for competitiveness — California, Oregon, South Carolina, North Carolina and Illinois. 

Texas received a “C” in competitiveness, although that score could change with the new map. 

According to Princeton, a gerrymandered map produces a majority of districts that are not competitive, effectively guaranteeing one party consistently wins certain districts while the other never really has a chance. 

They define a competitive district as one where the candidates are within seven points of each other — 46.5% to 53.5%. 

In other words, Princeton’s scoring frowns upon a system where the primary election essentially chooses who is going to win the general election.

The Republican in South Carolina District 3 has an equally easy general election. Republican Rep. Sheri Biggs won her seat over the Democratic challenger 71.8% to 25.3%. 

Take California District 2 as another example. Rep. Jared Huffman, D, beat his Republican opponent 79.1% to 28.1%. The winner of the Democratic primary, in this case Huffman, knows they are going to glide to victory in November. 

The five states that got an F not only have uncompetitive seats. It also means they had many other ways to draw a more competitive map, but chose not to. 

State legislators consider many different variations of congressional maps during the redistricting process. Each one has small tweaks that change the number of Republicans, Democrats and Independents in each district. Each district is supposed to contain approximately 761,000 people. If the state got an F, that means it had fewer competitive seats than 95% of the other maps that were up for consideration that year. 

The aim of the latest round of redistricting isn’t necessarily to hand more lopsided wins to the ruling parties’ members. The goal is to maximize the total number of seats held by the respective ruling party. They do so by siphoning off just enough registered party members in neighboring districts to tip the scales in a competitive district held by the minority party. In some cases, such as Maryland or Missouri, the majority party could completely erase the state’s minority congressional presence. 

Both Republican and Democratic states are considering redrawing their maps ahead of the 2026 midterms. It will be harder for Democrats to draw more favorable maps in blue states because they are already gerrymandered extensively. 

For instance, in California, Trump received 38% of the vote in 2024, but Republicans hold only 17% of the state’s 52 congressional seats. That’s a 21-point discrepancy between the overall share of the vote Republicans received and the number of seats they hold in the state’s congressional delegation. There’s also a 20-plus point gap in New Jersey and Illinois. 

Former Vice President Kamala Harris received 42% of the vote in the Lone Star State. Under the current map, Democrats hold 34% of the state’s 38 congressional seats. If Republicans get five new seats as they hope, Democrats will only hold 18% of the state’s House seats.