Readers had questions about redistricting. Here are some answers.

The question on the special election ballot has two simple answers — either “yes” or “no.”

Those seemingly simple options have spurred lots of questions. In a previous column, I answered some reader questions about redistricting. Today, I’ll answer some more. 

1. Election rules

I am confused on whether the votes will be counted by a popularity vote or by the side with the majority of districts that vote yes/no.
Jaxon Eline, Vinton

Whichever side gets the most votes wins.

Not to get philosophical beyond that straightforward answer, but that’s part of what’s at issue here. For the “yes” side, it’s as simple as “majority rules.” For the “no” side, the concern is that a lot of “yes” votes from Northern Virginia will eliminate most Republican representation of rural areas downstate. In a previous column, I addressed how our founders wrestled with the question of how much power a majority should have. 

2. How Virginia differs 

What are the specifics of how the Virginia ballot measure is different than what’s happened in Texas or North Carolina for example? 
Meg Lemmond, Roanoke

So far, six states have engaged in mid-decade redistricting since President Donald Trump urged Texas to do so on his behalf. What makes Virginia’s different from most of the others is that five of those states were able to redraw their congressional lines through a simple vote in the state legislature. California had to pass a constitutional amendment because its state constitution had set up a redistricting commission. Virginia is in the same position as California — the General Assembly presently doesn’t have the power to draw new lines. In 2020, Virginia voters approved a constitutional amendment to hand the power of redistricting to a bipartisan commission. That’s why another constitutional amendment is required now: to set aside that constitutional requirement for a bipartisan commission until after the 2030 census. 

Put more simply, legislatures in other states could redraw their lines without input from voters. In Virginia, voters have to approve the amendment to allow the legislature to implement new lines.

3. Starting date for new maps

If it passes, when would the new maps take effect? 
Fran Larkins, Fort Belvoir

How soon after the election do the maps go into effect if the vote is yes? 
(no first name) Coffelt, Boyce 

These two readers have questions that overlap, so I’ll handle them together. 

If redistricting passes, the new maps would take effect for the November election, with those winners taking office in January 2027. That means if you like your representative, you can keep your representative — through the end of his or her term. If you don’t like your representative, well, the answer is the same. After that, it depends on which new district you’d be in as to who your representative will be. 

So, reader Coffelt lives in Clarke County, currently in the 6th District, where the representative is Republican Ben Cline. If redistricting passes, Clarke County would be voting on a 10th District representative, but Cline would remain Coffelt’s representative until January 2027, when that 10th District rep (currently Suhas Subramanyam of Loudoun County) is sworn in.

In the case of Larkins in Fort Belvoir, she’s currently in the 8th District, now represented by Democrat Don Beyer. The new map puts Fort Belvoir in the 1st District. Beyer would be in that, too, so might well stay her representative should he win reelection in that new district. 

4. Status of legal challenges

When is the Virginia Supreme Court supposed to consider the constitutionality of the amendment? 
Fran Larkins, Fort Belvoir

Will any of the outstanding lawsuits have an effect on the maps? 
(no first name) Coffelt, Boyce 

Same two readers who are thinking alike, although the answers here are slightly different. Here’s why: There are currently two legal challenges pending before the Virginia Supreme Court, both arising out of suits that Republicans filed in Tazewell County. We’ll call these “the Tazewell cases.” The court, citing a 1912 precedent, said it would rule on these cases after the election. The legal rationale is that courts don’t intervene to tell the governor a particular bill is unconstitutional; the court waits until the bill is signed into law and then, if the law is challenged, the court rules. In this case, voters are acting as the governor in terms of deciding whether to approve or essentially veto a proposed piece of legislation — the constitutional amendment. 

The court will hold a hearing on at least one of those cases April 27, but don’t expect a ruling that day. There’s no particular schedule the court has to follow, but on a practical basis, we’re expecting a ruling by mid-May. That’s because the filing deadline for congressional candidates to make the Aug. 4 primary ballot is May 26. If the court goes beyond that, then the whole election calendar starts to get gummed up because sometime after that, ballots have to be printed and early voting is set to begin June 18 for those Aug. 4 primaries.

Now, as Donald Rumsfeld might have said, that’s what we know. Here’s what we don’t know: We don’t know what suits might be filed after the election (assuming the “yes” side prevails). Some legal challenges may only get filed after the maps are in place; those challenges would start, as all suits do, at the lowest court level, and might take their time to work their way up through the appeals process, depending on the lower court rulings. Is it possible that some court challenges we don’t know about yet might linger through the rest of the year? Umm, maybe. 

5. Candidate filing deadlines

Are people allowed to file for candidacy now, or do they have to wait for the maps to take effect? 
(no first name) Coffelt, Boyce 

There are lots of things for candidates to file, with different deadlines and different places. Once congressional candidates start raising money, they need to file with the Federal Election Commission. Let’s take the case of Beth Macy and Tom Perriello. Each entered the race last fall. For now, Macy is listed as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the 6th District and Perriello as a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the 5th District, because that’s where they live now. If redistricting passes, they’d both be in the same 6th District. Short version: Candidates who are raising money have to file now, for whatever district they’re in now.

As for actually getting listed on the ballot, that’s something the candidates have to do with the state Department of Elections. The deadline for House candidates to file there is May 26. I’m not sure how many have yet; we still have candidates popping up, and more might appear if redistricting passes. 

If all that sounds complicated, well, yes, there is a lot of paperwork required.

6. District numbers

Is there any rhyme or reason to how Congressional districts are numbered? Interstate exit numbers increase the further north and east one proceeds, if that logic were applied to the current district numbers the 9th would be the 1st, the 6th the 2nd, and the 5th the 3rd.
Patrick Johnson, Riner

Actually, there is. For the very first Congress, Virginia’s congressional districts were numbered west to east. Starting with the redistricting that followed the 1850 census, the number system went east to west, and it resumed that way after Virginia was readmitted to the Union after the Civil War. That changed almost immediately as Virginia’s population grew and new districts had to be added, while others had to be reshaped to account for population growth. That’s how we wound up with what seems a nonsensical numbering system where the 9th District is in Southwest Virginia but the 7th, 8th, 10th and 11th are all in or around Northern Virginia. Back in the 1870s, the 8th District’s congressman was from Wytheville, as the numbers logically progressed east to west, and the numbers didn’t go higher than nine.

When the bipartisan commission created by the 2020 constitutional amendment deadlocked in 2021, the task of drawing new districts went to the Virginia Supreme Court, which appointed two “special masters,” one from each party, to come up with the lines. In their preliminary report, they wrote that “our preference would be to renumber the districts in a sensible manner. For now, we have opted to retain the traditional regional numbering of the districts for Congressional Districts to facilitate public comment.” Those traditional numbers remained intact. There’s a lot of pride attached to some of the numbers, particularly the “Fightin’ Ninth” in Southwest Virginia — although it had more of a fighting reputation when it was more of a swing district.

Woe be to anyone who tries to take that number away from Southwest Virginia. 

7. Disinformation 

Do you feel that Cardinal News has been effective in exposing the incessant, unrelenting disinformation postcard campaign blanketing the state?
Barbara Andes, Roanoke 

Ultimately, that’s a question best answered not by me, but by our readers. I will say that Cardinal’s Elizabeth Beyer was one of the first to write about the controversial mailings sent out by groups affiliated with former Del. A.C. Cordoza, R-Hampton, that invoked the specter of Jim Crow to encourage a “no” vote — and a former Republican delegate from Roanoke was incorrectly blamed for sponsoring them. (See that story here.) There have been other mailings since then, but they’ve all had a similar theme, which we’ve also written about — that the “no” side has used images and quotes from former President Barack Obama and Gov. Abigail Spanberger in which they speak out against gerrymandering.

Those mailers are misleading — they lead voters to think that Obama and Spanberger are pushing a “no” vote when really they’re supporting a “yes” vote.

On the other hand, the quotes are absolutely accurate — Obama and Spanberger in the past both condemned gerrymandering. 

Some would see them now as hypocrites; others might say that the circumstances have changed so dramatically that those previous quotes don’t apply.

Voters need to decide how they feel about that.

You can also make a case that there’s disinformation coming from both sides. The “yes” side features ads from Obama that say a “yes” vote will “let voters decide, not politicians.” That’s debatable. If by that, Obama means Virginia can counteract Republican redistricting elsewhere, then yes, he’s right. However, what voters are voting to approve here is a map drawn by politicians, so casual listeners might think a “yes” vote is against gerrymandering when it’s really for gerrymandering.

This gives me an opportunity to make a point I make in almost every election: Voters need to be good consumers of political information. Politicians are no different from car companies — they’re all trying to sell you something, and you need to watch out for clever language that might be obfuscating an inconvenient point or two. The “yes” side doesn’t like to talk about gerrymandered districts in Virginia, and the “no” side doesn’t like to talk about how this is intended to counteract gerrymandering in other states. 

8. Expiration date

Why does Morgan Griffith say that this proposed change will last six years, other than that will be the following election after the next census? It will lapse in 2030 per the bill, correct? 
Mike Grant, Chesapeake

In the question and answer above, I looked at how flexible our language is. Will this proposed amendment last four years or six? Both answers are correct, depending on how you want to figure things.

The proposed amendment expires Oct. 31, 2030, so would appear to be of only a four-year duration. The intent is for a new bipartisan redistricting commission to be appointed to deal with the redistricting that follows the 2030 census. However, let’s walk through the timing.

If the “yes” side passes, we’d have three elections under the “new” maps: 2026, 2028 and 2030 (because that Oct. 31, 2030, expiration date comes too late to change the maps for that year). The representatives elected in November 2030 would take office in January 2031 and serve until January 2033. 

The next census will be in 2030, with numbers delivered in 2031, so the idea is that the next bipartisan commission will draw lines in 2031 to start with the 2032 election, with those representatives taking office in January 2033 when the terms of those elected in 2030 (and inaugurated in 2031) expire.

So if you want to show how temporary this amendment is, you want to push the “just four years” angle — through 2030. If you want to show how long it is, you want to push the “six years” (or even close to seven years) angle by emphasizing the January 2033 date.

Both are accurate; it just depends on what you’re measuring. 

9. Retirements

How much difference could “retirements” from Congress make in the D/R ratio? 
Fran Larkins, Fort Belvoir

So far, 57 House members have announced plans to retire — 36 Republicans and 21 Democrats. That’s on the high side, historically speaking. Two years ago, there were 44 retirements; four years ago, 35. Since incumbents almost always have an advantage, that would theoretically seem to mean 55 seats have a greater chance of changing parties — however, most of these are “safe” seats for one party or another. Ballotpedia says there were seven retiring House members who are in districts that were won by 10 or fewer percentage points two years ago, two held by Democrats, five by Republicans. While anything matters in a close election, these retirements strike me as likely only to change things at the margins. 

Since 1938, the president’s party has lost seats in the midterms in all but three elections, the most recent of which was in 2002, when Republicans picked up eight seats. That was also in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, which may have created a “rally around the flag” effect to benefit President George W. Bush. Over the past 20 years, the smallest swing was two years ago, when Republicans picked up nine seats under Democrat Joe Biden; the largest was in 2010, when Republicans picked up 63 seats under Democrat Barack Obama. In the midterms of Trump’s first term, Democrats picked up 40 seats. The average over the past 20 years has been for the president’s party to lose 31 seats. Against that backdrop, seven retirements in seats that have a three-seat edge for Republicans doesn’t seem like a big deal. If there’s some election blowout, it won’t be because of retirements.

10. What if …

What if the referendum fails and the governor and the legislature decide to implement the redistricting plan anyway? Sure, the Republicans will sue. But with the right stalling tactics, a final verdict may very well not be rendered until after the new congressional delegation is seated. Spanberger is term-limited, not subject to a recall and won’t be impeached. She has nothing to lose. Qui audet adipiscitur. (“Who dares, wins.”)
Chris Murphy, Staunton

Of all the things I worry about, this is not one of them. This just ain’t happening. Yes, courts are often painfully slow, but the scenario outlined here is basically a blatant refusal to follow the law — courts would be practically rushing to shut this down. I don’t know how else to assure this reader that this scenario won’t happen. If the referendum fails, it fails.