By MICHAEL A. SMITH
Insight Kansas
Can Republicans score some Congressional seats by gerrymandering maps in Texas and other states? If Kansas’ experience is any guide, the answer is, it’s complicated.
In 2002, the Kansas Legislature targeted the KC-area Third District, then represented by Democrat Dennis Moore. They adjusted for population growth in the district by splitting heavily-Democratic Lawrence along Iowa Street, moving west Lawrence into the Second District, represented by Republican Jim Ryan.
It was Ryan, not Moore whose career was ended by this map. Ryan held on in 2004, but in 2006, the district flipped for Democrat Nancy Boyda, ending Ryan’s long political career. Boyda served only one term, being defeated by Lynn Jenkins in 2008, but for two years, deep-red Kansas was represented by two Democrats in the U.S. House. In the Third–the original target– Moore’s re-election margins remained comfortable until he retired.
Fast-forward to 2022.
Once again, there was only one Kansas Congressional District held by a Democrat, the Third District centered on Johnson County. The Legislature passed a new map which appeared to greatly diminish Rep. Sharice Davids’ chances of re-election.
Known as “Ad Astra 2,” the final map split heavily-Democratic Wyandotte County in two, removing the northern portion into the Second District. The map then added all of Miami, Franklin, and Anderson counties to the Third District.
The loss of urban votes and addition of rural ones appears intended to remove Davids’ partisan advantage in the Third, but despite facing a serious, well-financed opponent in a new district, Davids still won re-election in the newly-redrawn district by the same ten point advantage that she had one in the old one.
When a population is moved, it creates a “domino effect” changing other districts.
Adding northern Wyandotte County into a district that already contained Lawrence and Topeka would make that district Democratic. Not taking any chances and perhaps responding to what happened after 2002, this time Kansas legislators gerrymandered Lawrence into the “Big First” district, which is heavily rural and extends to Colorado. Viewed on a map, a “hook” reaches east from the rest of the First, ultimately plunging south to “scoop” Lawrence out of Douglas County. This makes an ungainly district and puts the voters of Lawrence into a district where they are out of place.
To the east, it makes an oddly-shaped Second District, in which the northern part is connected to the rest by a narrow corridor that consists only of eastern Douglas County.
There were numerous court challenges, but ultimately the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that in most cases, the courts do not have jurisdiction over redistricting. (Disclosure: I served as an expert witness for the plaintiffs challenging the map in one of these cases).
The situation is even more complicated in Texas. Most of the Democratic districts the Texas Legislature seeks to eliminate are “majority minority” (majority non-white) districts, which have special protection due to the Voting Rights Act. These protections have been upheld recently by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In addition, after the 2030 Census, Kansas may lose a district, while Texas stands to gain.
Gerrymandered district maps get complicated, and have unintended consequences. Just ask the Kansas Legislature.
A map of Kansas’ current Congressional districts can be viewed here: Kansas House approves congressional district maps which would split Flint Hills, Douglas County
Michael A. Smith is a professor of political science and chair of social sciences at Emporia State University.