Texas Democrats are fighting an important battle right now. And they’re fighting it on behalf of all of us.
In response to Texas Governor Greg Abbott’s decision to call a special session to redistrict the state, these Democratic members of the Texas House of Representatives are breaking quorum.
In other words, each day of the session that the House meets, and not enough House members are present to meet the quorum requirement, the House can’t conduct business that day. And so, redistricting can’t occur that day.
Why are the Democrats doing this?
Because it’s not time for district lines to be redrawn in the state. That is typically done just after the nation-wide census happens each 10 years (the Decennial).
That’s what the U.S. Constitution requires to be done, so that districts in a state will include roughly the same number of people, to fairly divide up the electoral votes each state has.
Neither the Constitution nor any Federal law prohibits mid-decade redistricting (Lily Kincannon, et.al, “What to Know About Redistricting and Gerrymandering,” bipartisanpolicy. org/explainer, August 8, 2025). So the question of when to redistrict is up to the governor and the legislature.
What’s the problem with redistricting between Decennials? Because the unfair practice of gerrymandering often accompanies it.
Gerrymandering is the drawing of district lines to increase or decrease the influence of certain groups of voters, such as African-Americans or Latinos, either clustering them together to create “safe” seats for a particular party or distributing them over several districts to lessen their influence.
Republicans aren’t the only party that has gerrymandered states to its advantage. In fact, the word “gerrymander” originated after Elbridge Gerry, the Democratic governor of Massachusetts, signed a bill in 1812 to allow his party to retain control of the legislature.
Besides serving as Massachusetts Governor, Gerry was a signer of the Declaration of Independence, a two-term member of the U.S. House of Representatives, and U.S. Vice President under President James Madison (Neely Tucker, “Gerrymandering: The Origin Story,” post to the Library of Congress Blogs, July 18, 2024).
Gerrymandering a state can result in oddly drawn districts. In fact, the word “gerrymander” couples Gerry’s name with the word “salamander,” a mythological creature that looks like a strangely-shaped winged dragon (Tucker, see political cartoon from Rare Book & Special Collection Division, Library of Congress).
At this writing, it’s impossible to know how the standoff over redistricting in Texas will conclude. The Democrats have vowed to stay away from the state as long as necessary to prevent redistricting by the Republican majority, but the strains of being away from home and jobs a long time could erode their determination.
Special sessions last 30 days in Texas, and a Governor can call as many as he/she wants. There doesn’t even have to be a break between sessions. Since this session began on July 21, it’s set to end August 19.
Abbott could call another special session beginning immediately, or he could wait a day, a week, a month or more between sessions. He has vowed to keep calling special sessions until he gets redistricting passed.
This potentially causes real hardship to Democratic legislators who have fled the state to break quorum, since they are part-time legislators and presumably will be leaving other jobs in Texas to stay away.
If Texas redistricts now, adding new Republican seats in the U. S. House as President Donald Trump has demanded, Democratic-led states will likely redistrict them to favor their party—some have already threatened to do so—and other Republican-led states will probably follow Texas on behalf of theirs.
Where will it end?
Rank partisanship such as this doesn’t look good for either party. We have never been totally without partisanship in U.S. politics, but I’m old enough to recall times when the parties could sit down together and negotiate with each other over issues.
I’ve even seen instances when they started far apart, with one party proposing Solution A to a problem, the other party proposing Solution B, but after calm negotiating they came up with Solution C, which was better than either A or B would have been.
No, that has never been the norm in American politics, but it can happen. I’ve seen it do so. In the struggle now taking place in Texas, the Rs hold the high cards. The Democrats will probably have to return at some point and allow a quorum.
But they’re putting up a fight, to try to prevent unfair redistricting and preserve their constituents’ ability to fairly influence political outcomes through their votes.
Sometimes battles are worth fighting, even if you ultimately lose.