New Moves, Same War

Our last story mapped out who's winning the 2026 redistricting scoreboard. The people getting hurt by this fight are now fighting back — and both parties' leadership is telling them to sit down.

Representative Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Representative Tom Suozzi (D-NY), co-chairs of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus, went on record this week calling for a gerrymandering truce, according to The Atlantic. Their pitch: both parties stop the mid-decade map-drawing and agree it's destroying the country.

"There's got to be people that come to the table and agree that it's in the best interest of our nation to not do this, that it's a race to the bottom," Fitzpatrick told The Atlantic directly.

The caucus has formally resolved to make a push against gerrymandering.

Why These Two Have Skin in the Game

Fitzpatrick and Suozzi aren't crusading purely on principle. Fitzpatrick holds one of only three GOP-held districts that voted for Kamala Harris in 2024. Suozzi's Long Island seat was carried by Trump — narrowly, but still. These are exactly the purple, competitive districts that both parties carve up when they get the chance.

They're calling for a truce partly because they'd be among the first casualties if the war escalates. That's honesty. And it doesn't make their point wrong.

The Democratic Reform Bill

Separately, on September 18, 2025, Representative John Larson (D-CT) introduced the Redistricting Reform Act alongside Senator Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Democratic House leaders from Texas, California, and North Carolina, according to a press release from Larson's official congressional office.

The bill would do two things: ban mid-decade redistricting and require all states to establish independent redistricting commissions.

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder backed the bill publicly, calling current mid-decade redistricting efforts in Texas and Missouri "unprecedented and unpopular power grabs."

Larson's office was blunt: this is a direct response to Trump White House pressure on Republican-led states to redraw maps diluting Black and Hispanic voting power. That framing is one-sided — but the underlying policy ask (independent commissions, no mid-decade moves) is one that plenty of Republicans and independents have supported in the past.

What Both Parties' Leaders Are Actually Doing

The caucus truce push and the Democratic bill face significant obstacles.

President Trump has directed Republicans to draw House maps aggressively in their favor, betting that enough gerrymandered seats can protect the GOP majority against what are currently sagging poll numbers heading into the 2026 midterms, according to The Atlantic's reporting.

The Supreme Court's recent decision weakening the Voting Rights Act gave Republicans more room to redistrict across the Deep South — building on gains already locked in from Texas and other states.

Democrats hit back in California. They lost a court fight in Virginia. And House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told reporters: "We're going to win in November. And then we're going to crush their souls."

That's not the language of people looking for a truce.

Representative Kevin Kiley Adds His Voice

California Republican Representative Kevin Kiley also went on record calling on Congress to end gerrymandering, according to C-SPAN coverage. Kiley's presence in this conversation matters — he's a California Republican in a state where Democrats just rewrote the maps. He's got direct standing to complain, and he's using it.

What Mainstream Coverage Is Missing

Left-leaning outlets are covering this almost entirely through the frame of Republican aggression and Voting Rights Act rollback. That's a real part of the story — but it leaves out that Democrats in California went first on the retaliatory map-drawing and that Jeffries is openly threatening escalation in blue states next year.

Right-leaning outlets are largely ignoring the bipartisan truce push altogether, because it undercuts the narrative that every Republican is on board with the map wars.

Both parties' leadership are using district lines as a weapon, and the handful of members in competitive seats who'd prefer to win on actual policy are being steamrolled by safe-seat leadership who have no incentive to stop.

Does the Larson Bill Have a Chance?

No. Not right now. A version of this type of reform passed the Democratic House in 2019, 2021, and 2022 and was filibustered by Senate Republicans each time, according to Larson's own office. Nothing in the current Senate math changes that outcome.

This is a messaging bill. It's meant to draw contrast heading into 2026, not to become law. Calling it a "commonsense, nonpartisan solution" when it's being introduced exclusively by Democrats with Eric Holder at the press conference is a stretch — even if the underlying policy ideas have broad public support.

What This Means for Regular People

If you live in a competitive congressional district, your vote is the target. Both parties want to either protect you or eliminate you from the math — depending on which party drew the map.

The Fitzpatrick-Suozzi truce push is the most honest thing to come out of Congress on this topic in months. It's also going nowhere as long as Trump is directing the Republican strategy and Jeffries is promising to "crush souls."

The redistricting war doesn't end with a reform bill nobody will pass. It ends when one party loses badly enough that the maps stop working. We're not there yet.