Texas Republicans are preparing to redraw the state’s Capitol map in 2026, urged by President Donald Trump, in a way that would defy the GOP with up to five seats.
Texas piloting is legal and is not unprecedented for the state that took over a Republican-led constituency in 2003. But Democrats are called this move and frustration over the traditional practice of bringing out new Congressional districts every ten years after the new census.
But the debate on Texas election maps also prompted broader questions about fairness in the voting district overview. And the states larger than Texas – California is attracting the attention of Vice President J.D. Vance.
“California’s Jerrymanders are outrageous,” Vance posted on X on July 30th.
Like Vance said, does California have an unfair map?
By numbers, California is not a dramatic outlier when it comes to differences between Congress and presidential votes. But this difference is multiplied by a large number of districts – California is the most populous state in the United States, and therefore produces more seating in homes than only the state’s presidential votes predict.
Vance’s description of the map as a “gerrymander” of California is also questionable – it was drawn by a bipartisan committee, not by Democrats. Gerrymandering is carried out by politicians and political parties.
Vance’s office did not respond to inquiries for this article.
What the numbers indicate
Our first step was to measure the difference between the breakdown of seating of houses by parties in each state and the disruption of presidential voices by parties, which Vance quoted. (Our analysis is built from the 2023 Sabato Crystal Ball Story written by this author. Sabato Crystal Ball is a publication of the University of Virginia Political Center.) These small states have broad differentiation that shakes comparisons, so one, two or three members of the House of Representatives have been removed considering either the nation of the delegation.
For the red states Trump won, he took the percentage of Republican seats in the House delegation and deducted the percentage of votes Trump won in that state. Conversely, in the case of the blue state that Kamala Harris won, we took the percentage of the Democratic seats in the House delegation and deducted the turnout Harris won in the state.
Our analysis shows that California elected more Democrats to the House than its presidential vote share predicted, but the state was not an outlier. With 83% of Democrats’ House seats and 58% of 2024 presidential votes going to Democrats, California ranks 13th in the nation among 35 states with at least four seats in delegation.
In California, there is the 13th widest difference between the House and Presidential outcomes
The top 13 differentiations were divided roughly evenly between the blue and red states.
In six states with at least four house seats: Red Iowa, Utah, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Blue Connecticut and Massachusetts, the winners’ presidential candidates won between 56% and 66% in these states, but one party controls all House seats.
Another six states included Red South Carolina and Tennessee, Blue Oregon, Illinois and Maryland, and even purple Wisconsin, which are comparable or wider than California.
California stands out on another scale because of its size.
Multiplying the difference between homes by the number of seats in the delegation house will give you the number “extra house sheets,” a term used in the 2023 Sabato Crystal Ball article. Essentially, you get a majority party bonus on the house sheet beyond what the president’s performance predicts.
California has a large population represented by many House districts, so even that modest disparity creates 12 extra democratic home seats, to be precise. It is the largest in any state. The closest competitors are Blue Illinois and New York and Red Florida, each with four or more over seats at a majority party.
The map of Texas’ current Congress has 3.7 excess seats for Republicans. If GOP can turn the five seats they are hoping for in 2026, it will increase to an 8.7-seat GOP bonus.
Is California “Jerrymander”?
Vance described the California map as a gerrymander, but political experts doubted the term would apply. Gerrymanders usually refer to maps drawn by partisan lawmakers, and California is drawn by committees approved by voters, specifically to remove partisans from the map drawings of the Congress.
“The map of California’s Congress is not Jerrymander,” said Nathaniel Rakich, a contributing analyst for the Inside election, a political analysis publication. “It was drawn by an independent committee of five Republicans, five Democrats and four independents who are generally supported as one of the most impartial map drawing groups in any state.”
Kyle Condik, managing editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball, said the committee tends to create a more competitive house battlefield than a completely partisan system. Of the 19 house seats, his outlet is currently rated as entering 2026. There are only two from the state where one party had free hands to gerrymand the current district line.
“I think it’s safe to say that the maps drawn by the committee and courts can inject some degree of competitiveness into the process,” Kondick said.
As the seats were drawn by the committee, there are many competitive seats in California. This will help California Republicans despite the state’s democratic leaps.
According to a pre-election assessment by Sabato Crystal Ball in 2024, California had three democratic seats in the “lean democratic” category, with two more being rated “probably democratic.”
So, when you enter the election, five of California’s 50 seats held by 40 Democrats are at least somewhat vulnerable to Republican takeovers. Texas Democrats are not so lucky under the existing maps. They can realistically target only one of the 25 GOP held.
Sometimes geography is the enemy of “fair” maps
Despite the efforts of mapmakers, it may be impossible to create a map that will jibe perfectly in the overall partisan balance of the state. The cold fact of geography can prevent this.
One example cited is Massachusetts, which has not elected Republicans to their US homes since 1994. Massachusetts has few Republican breeding grounds. Experts say it’s not easy to connect to a consistent council district.
“Participants tend to have a higher seating ratio than votes, especially in deep red or deep blue conditions,” Rakic said. “Imagine a state where Republicans get two-thirds of the vote in every district. Obviously, they’ll get 100% of their seats.”
Rakic said Democrats are geographically distributed more favorably in California. However, in other states, Republicans benefit from improved geographical distribution.
“I’ve never heard Vance complain about the fact that despite regularly winning 50% of the votes, Democrats only win 25% of the Wisconsin Capitol,” added Rakich.
