Redistricting

Proposed reforms in 2023

What is Redistricting?

Every ten years after the census is taken, electoral district maps are redrawn in a process called redistricting. These maps show the geographic boundaries of political representation in state legislatures and the US Congress. Redistricting laws govern the way these electoral districts are drawn, and the process has been subject to manipulation for decades by power-hungry politicians in a practice known as gerrymandering. Gerrymandering happens when electoral districts are drawn and manipulated in order to favor one party over another or dilute the voting power of a targeted group.

…the bills filed reveal continued energy to reform this process, even in what’s considered an “off-year” for redistricting.

Why are we tracking it?

Americans are increasingly recognizing gerrymandering as a driving force behind uncompetitive elections with unrepresentative outcomes. Many reformers see policies like independent redistricting commissions (IRC), which take control over the redistricting process away from state legislatures and put it in the hands of a group of citizens with strict conflict-of-interest and partisan balance requirements, as an effective way to promote fairness and better representation. This report tracks IRC laws in addition to bills that implement nonpartisan redistrict reforms, increase transparency in the redistricting process, or revise the process itself in a substantial way. It does not include bills that actually pass new district maps and does not include proposed changes to sub-components of the process.

Categories and definitions:

  • Transparency – A bill that increases public access and transparency to the redistricting process. This can include requiring legislative committees to hold public hearings and allow for public comment on redistricting.
  • Independent redistricting commission (IRC) – A body of citizens separate from the legislature, responsible for drawing the districts used in congressional and state legislative maps. Independent redistricting commission laws typically establish criteria for who can serve on the commission and how maps should be drawn to make the process more transparent and impartial. To qualify as a truly independent commission, it must include a body with partisan balance (including independents), that operates independently of the legislature, isn’t appointed by the legislature, and creates maps that don’t need to be approved by the legislature.
  • Nonpartisan redistricting reform – A proposal that creates a nonpartisan process for redistricting, but falls short of including all of the criteria to qualify as a fully independent redistricting commission.
  • Revise Process – A bill that substantially changes the process and/or criteria for how districts are apportioned.

Fast stats:

Total proposals:

25

Total states:

9

States with the most proposals:

TX (9) and NC (5)

Proposals passed:

1

Proposals passing only one chamber:

0

Bipartisan proposals

1

Additional Analysis:

2023 is a few years removed from the last decennial redistricting process. New maps are in place, elections have occurred under the new maps, and most major court battles over contested maps have been settled. One wouldn’t expect to see many bills filed about the redistricting process since the next redistricting cycle is seven years away. However, the bills filed reveal continued energy to reform this process, even in what’s considered an “off-year” for redistricting.

  • ➤ Redistricting by the numbers:

    • 2 bills about transparency were introduced, 1 in Democratic trifecta New York and 1 in Louisiana, which has a divided government. Both bills were introduced by Democrats
      • The Louisiana bill (SB80), requiring legislative committees to hold public hearings and allow for public comment on redistricting, passed.
    • 13 bills establishing Independent Redistricting Commissions were introduced in 6 states (IN, NC, OK, OR, SC, TX); none passed. All but 2 bills were introduced by Democrats; there was 1 bill (OR’s SJR10) with bipartisan sponsorship (10 Republicans and 2 Democrats) and 1 bill sponsored by Republicans.
      • 9 bills were introduced by Democrats in Republican trifecta states (IN, OK, SC, TX).
      • 2 bills were introduced in a Democratic trifecta state (OR), one by Republicans (OR’s SJR9, the only bill sponsored by Republicans in this category) and one by Democrats.
      • 2 bills were introduced by Democrats in a state with divided government (NC).
    • 7 bills on Nonpartisan Redistricting Reform were introduced in 3 states (SC, TX, NC), all by democrats. None passed.
      • 5 bills were introduced by Democrats in Republican trifecta states (SC, TX)
      • 2 bills were introduced by Democrats in a state with divided government (NC).
      • These proposals fell short of qualifying as a fully independent redistricting reform, either because an elected or appointed official still plays a substantial role in establishing the commission or commissioner selection process, or because the independent commission is not required to have partisan balance. 
    • 3 bills including Major process revisions were introduced in 3 states (DE, NC, SC); none passed
      • 1 bill was introduced by Republicans in a Democratic trifecta state (DE).
      • 1 bill was introduced by Democrats in a Republican trifecta state (SC).
      • 1 bill was introduced by Republicans in divided state (NC). 
      • 2 of these bills proposed better criteria and processes for redistricting. The Delaware bill, proposed by Republicans, proposed the Carnegie Mellon Method.21
      • The bill from North Carolina (H376) would’ve allowed Senators to revise senate districts “from time to time” which presents big red flags for impractical administration and potential gerrymandering

Texas and North Carolina saw several bills filed to improve the process, which correlated with particularly contentious redistricting cycles in those states.22 The vast majority of proposed redistricting bills were attempts to pass an independent redistricting commission. When we look at the partisanship of sponsors, we see that almost 100% of the time, it’s the party in the minority that’s sponsoring ambitious redistricting reforms. In Texas and the Carolinas, Democrats introduced the vast majority of redistricting reform legislation and in Oregon, Republicans sponsored a bill for an independent redistricting commission. There was even a bipartisan IRC bill proposed in Oregon, but ultimately, none of the IRC bills introduced this year passed a single house.

The only redistricting reform to pass this year was Louisiana’s SB80, which requires the legislative committee to hold public hearings and allow for public comment on redistricting.

  • ➤ Full list of Redistricting bills we tracked

    Download the full list (PDF)

    State Bill Number Category sub-category Final Disposition Last Action # of sponsors partisanship
    IN HB1131 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    NC S642 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 9 D
    NC H9 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 43 D
    NC S306 Redistricting Nonpartisan redistricting reform did not pass Introduced 16 D
    NC H362 Redistricting Nonpartisan redistricting reform did not pass Introduced 24 D
    OK HJR1024 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    OR SJR9 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 2 R
    OR SJR10 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 12 B
    SC H3245 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    SC HJR 3173 Redistricting Nonpartisan redistricting reform did not pass Introduced 1 D
    SC HJR 3243 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    TX HJR15 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    TX HB731 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    TX HB693 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    TX HB21 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 1 D
    TX SB115 Redistricting Independent redistricting commission did not pass Introduced 2 D
    TX SJR 16 Redistricting Nonpartisan redistricting reform did not pass Introduced 2 D
    TX HJR 4 Redistricting Nonpartisan redistricting reform did not pass Introduced 1 D
    TX HJR 48 Redistricting Nonpartisan redistricting reform did not pass Introduced 1 D
    TX SJR 12 Redistricting Nonpartisan redistricting reform did not pass Introduced 1 D
    DE HB 44 Redistricting Process revision did not pass Introduced 6 R
    NC H376 Redistricting Process revision did not pass Introduced 8 R
    OK SB1085 Redistricting Process revision did not pass Introduced 2 R
    SC HB 3069 Redistricting Process revision did not pass Introduced 1 D
    LA SB80 Redistricting Transparency passed Signed into law 1 D
    NY A3286 Redistricting Transparency did not pass Introduced 3 D

Footnotes

21 This is also known as an “I cut, you choose” method involving both parties in the process as a solution to gerrymandering. Bryon Spice, Carnegie Mellon University News, “I-Cut-You-Choose” Cake-Cutting Protocol Inspires Solution to Gerrymandering.

22 Elvia Limón, Texas Tribune, Gov. Greg Abbott signs off on Texas’ new political maps, which protect GOP majorities while diluting voices of voters of color; Lucille Sherman, Axios, What to know about NC’s latest redistricting process.