达拉斯北部快速发展的郊区的共和党人去年受到了惊吓。
民主党人乔·拜登与当时的总统仅差一个百分点唐纳德·特朗普在共和党人范·泰勒代表的国会选区。尽管泰勒轻松赢得了美国众议院的连任，但特朗普的微弱优势是一个警告信号，表明典型的轻松获胜可能不再那么容易。
因此，当控制德克萨斯州议会的共和党人今年秋天重新绘制该州的国会地图时，他们保护了泰勒。他们将他的选民分散到多个地区，合并共和党选民以建立安全的地区。一个是形状怪异的三脚架:一条窄腿伸向郊区，抓住倾向共和党的选民，而另两条腿伸向农村地区，一直延伸到俄克拉荷马州边境。
泰勒的新区不再有竞争力了。它以15个百分点的优势投票给特朗普。司法部本周起诉得克萨斯州，称该州新的选区界线歧视少数族裔选民。
随着美国十年一次的政治版图重划接近一半，竞争激烈的国会选区越来越少。两党的立法者，尤其是共和党人，正在创建支持他们脆弱成员的选区，并试图确保轻松连任。
新地图可能会加速竞争的消亡选举这是一个警告信号健康专家说，民主。越来越多地，聚会初选是最有可能让现任总统下台的竞争。这使得代表们迎合他们政党的基础，几乎没有动力去吸引中间派选民。最终，它加剧了毒害华盛顿的党派分化。
“这绝对是一个问题，每个周期你都会在一定程度上看到它，”主张彻底改革选区划分的“代表”组织的乔·卡布尔克说。“缺少竞争席位意味着什么选举s在开始之前基本上已经结束了。"
在上一次总统选举中，435个众议院席位中只有13个在两党之间转换。这是竞争力下降的证据，可以追溯到20世纪中期，随着两个主要政党变得更加意识形态化，竞争力下降的速度加快了。乔治城大学政府事务研究所高级研究员乔希·哈德说，在20世纪50年代，政治障碍者将众议院大约130个席位归类为竞争性席位，但现在只将大约48个席位归类为竞争性席位。
哈德指出，重新划分选区并不是唯一的原因。一个更大的因素是，选民选择住在他们周围都是志同道合的邻居的地方——例如，民主党人聚集在城市，共和党人聚集在农村地区。这使得选区更有可能由一个政党的选民主导。
竞争的下降导致了党派之争的加剧。众议院共和党人213人中只有19人最近投票支持新的基础设施法案，这一措施在民调和参议院获得了两党的广泛支持。
“当你有安全的席位时，它会极大地改变国会议员的动力和激励，”哈德说。他指出，大多数代表只需要赢得“通常更极端的党羽”就能继续掌权。
这种重新划分选区的循环注定会让情况变得更糟。
“几乎不可避免的是，我们将在这些真正安全的地区看到两极分化，”普林斯顿选区划分项目的亚当·波多维茨-托马斯说，该项目负责监督选区划分。“温和派或与另一方合作的人在这些地区更难当选。”
两党都同意潜在摇摆区的数量正在减少。
共和党的主要选区划分组织——全国共和党选区划分信托机构发现，在绘制了新地图的州中，2020年胜率为10个百分点或更低的席位现在减少了15个。它的民主党对手，全国民主党选区划分委员会，对竞争力的追踪略有不同，但发现少了16个席位。
这些例子在已经完成重新划分选区的21个州很普遍。在伊利诺伊州，最后剩下的温和派共和党人之一，众议员亚当·金辛格(Adam Kinzinger)宣布，在民主党人拆除了他在芝加哥区以西的选区后，他不会竞选连任。
“在这一天，要取得胜利，你必须属于一个部落，”金辛格在宣布退休的视频中说。"我们的政党只有吸引其中最有动机和最极端的因素才能生存。"
在佐治亚州，共和党控制的立法机构取消了两个由民主党代表的竞争激烈的亚特兰大郊区国会选区，将众议员露西·麦克巴斯的摇摆选区变成了共和党占主导地位的选区，并将众议员卡罗琳·布尔多的选区变成了民主党的安全席位。在犹他州，共和党人将盐湖城的一个摇摆席位转变为特朗普以16个百分点获胜的席位。
科罗拉多州煽动者、共和党人劳伦·博伯特(Lauren Boebert)以6个百分点的优势赢得了2020年的竞选，现在她有了一条更容易连任的道路。但划定科罗拉多州界线的独立委员会在丹佛北部设立了一个摇摆席位。
更多的摇摆区可能会成为砧板:
——在佛罗里达州，共和党人正在考虑将民主党众议员斯蒂芬妮·墨菲的席位转变为安全的共和党选区。
——民主党人担心，堪萨斯共和党人可能会将矛头指向众议员沙里斯·戴维斯(Sharice Davids)，他曾于2018年在堪萨斯城西郊驱逐了一名共和党人。
—在纽约，多个温和派共和党人，包括纽约州北部的约翰·卡特科和斯塔滕岛的妮可·马利托基斯，可能会看到他们的摇摆席位发生变化
—在弗吉尼亚州，新提出的地图取消了民主党著名温和派众议员阿比盖尔·斯潘伯格(Abigail Spanberger)的选区，尽管总体而言，它们保持了该州相同数量的竞争选区。
但是没有一个州有可能超越德克萨斯州，因为德州将多达9个竞争席位转变为安全席位。这是共和党人明确战略的一部分，他们焦虑地看着自己的州成为国会战场。
民主党在2018年的选举中获得了两个众议院席位，然后在去年与共和党斗争至停滞。随着该州的增长由倾向于民主党的有色选民推动，共和党绘制了一张地图，将锁定他们的收益，避免不得不担心德克萨斯州的席位。这张地图引发了拜登政府的法律挑战，称限制计划稀释了拉丁裔的选票，尤其是在达拉斯地区。
达拉斯的北郊是一个杀死竞争的案例研究。泰勒选区南端的民主党选民被转移到一个新的安全的民主党选区。作为交换，泰勒的选区扩大到郊区以东的保守农村地区。
对共和党人来说，这些举措节省了现任者的钱。全国共和党选区重新划分信托基金执行董事亚当·金凯(Adam Kincaid)表示，共和党及其盟友去年花费了2000万美元捍卫德克萨斯州脆弱的共和党控制的国会席位。
“现在他们可以把钱花在可以进攻的地方，”金凯说。“你总是宁愿进攻也不愿防守。”
How redistricting is killing competition for House seats
Republicans in the fast-growing suburbs north of Dallas had a scare last year.
Democrat Joe Biden came within a single percentage point of then-PresidentDonald Trumpin the congressional district represented by Republican Van Taylor. Though Taylor easily won reelection to the U.S. House, Trump’s narrow margin was a warning sign that a typically easy win might not be so easy anymore.
So when Republicans, who control the Texas Legislature, redrew the state's congressional maps this fall, they protected Taylor. They scattered his constituents into multiple districts, consolidating GOP voters to make safe districts. One is a bizarrely shaped tripod: a narrow leg jabs into a suburb to grab Republican-leaning voters, while the other two legs reach into rural areas all the way to the Oklahoma border.
Taylor’s new district isn’t competitive anymore. It voted for Trump by 15 percentage points. The Justice Department this week sued Texas, saying the state's new district lines discriminate against minority voters.
As the country approaches the halfway mark in its once-a-decade redrawing of political maps, competitive congressional districts are becoming rarer and rarer. Lawmakers in both parties, but especially Republicans, are creating districts that shore up their vulnerable members and trying to ensure easy reelections.
The new maps are likely to accelerate the demise of competitiveelections, a warning sign for thehealthof democracy, experts say. Increasingly,partyprimaries are the contests most likely to unseat an incumbent. That leaves representatives catering to their party's base, with little incentive to appeal to middle-of-the-road voters. Ultimately, it feeds the heightened partisan polarization that has poisoned Washington.
“It's definitely a problem and you see it to some degree every cycle,” said Joe Kabourek of RepresentUS, an advocate for overhauling redistricting. “What the lack of competitive seats means iselections are basically over before they begin.”
In the last presidential election, only 13 of 435 House seats switched between the two parties. It's evidence of a decline in competitiveness that dates from the middle of the 20th century and has accelerated as the two main political parties have become more ideological. In the 1950s, political handicappers ranked about 130 of the seats in the House as competitive, but now only categorize about 48 like that, said Josh Huder, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Governmental Affairs Institute.
Huder notes redistricting isn't the only cause. An even bigger factor is that voters are choosing to live in places where they are surrounded by like-minded neighbors — Democrats clustering in cities, Republicans in rural areas, for example. That makes it more likely that districts will be dominated by voters of just one party.
The decline of competition has helped lead to growing partisanship. Just 19 of 213 House Republicans recently voted for the new infrastructure bill, a measure with broad bipartisan support in polls and in the Senate.
“It shifts the dynamics and incentives of members of Congress pretty dramatically when you have safe seats,” Huder said. He noted that most representatives only need to win over “partisans who are typically much more extreme” to stay in power.
This redistricting cycle is poised to make it worse.
“It’s almost inevitable that we’re going to see polarization in these really safe districts,” said Adam Podowitz-Thomas of the Princeton Gerrymandering Project, which monitors redistricting. “It’s going to be harder for moderates or people who work with the other side to get elected in these districts.”
Both parties agree that the number of potential swing districts is dwindling.
The main Republican redistricting organization, the National Republican Redistricting Trust, found that, in the states that have drawn new maps, there are now 15 fewer seats where the margin of victory was 10 percentage points or less in 2020. Its Democratic counterpart, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, tracks competitiveness slightly differently but finds 16 fewer seats.
The examples are widespread in the 21 states that have finished redistricting. In Illinois, one of the last remaining moderate Republicans, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, announced he would not run for reelection after Democrats dismantled his district west of Chicago district.
“In this day, to prevail, you must belong to a tribe,” Kinzinger said in a video announcing his retirement. “Our political parties only survive by appealing to the most motivated and extreme elements within it.”
In Georgia, the Republican-controlled legislature eliminated two competitive suburban Atlanta congressional districts represented by Democrats, turning Rep. Lucy McBath's swing district into a heavily Republican one and Rep. Carolyn Bourdeaux's district into a safe Democratic seat. In Utah, Republicans transformed a Salt Lake City-based swing seat into one Trump won by 16 percentage points.
Colorado firebrand Republican Lauren Boebert, who won her 2020 race by 6 percentage points, now has a easier path to reelection. But the independent commission that drew Colorado's lines created a swing seat north of Denver.
More swing districts may be on the chopping block:
—In Florida, Republicans are mulling turning Democratic Rep. Stephanie Murphy's seat into safe GOP district.
—Democrats worry that Kansas Republicans could target Rep. Sharice Davids, who ousted a Republican in 2018 in Kansas City's western suburbs.
—In New York, multiple moderate Republicans, including John Katko upstate and Nicole Malliotakis on Staten Island, could see their swing seats changed
—In Virginia, newly proposed maps eliminate the district of a prominent Democratic moderate, Rep. Abigail Spanberger, although overall they maintain the same number of competitive districts in the state.
But no state is likely to outdo Texas, which transformed as many as nine competitive into safe seats. That was part of an explicit strategy from Republicans who watched anxiously as their state became a congressional battleground.
Democrats picked up two House seats in the 2018 election and then fought the GOP to a standstill last year. With the state's growth powered by voters of color who lean Democratic, Republicans drew a map that would lock in their gains and avoid having to worry about the Texas seats. The map spurred the legal challenge from the Biden administration, alleging the restricting plan dilutes Latinos' votes, particularly in the Dallas area.
Dallas' northern suburbs are a case study in killing competition. The Democratic voters in the southern end of Taylor's district were moved to create a newly safe Democratic district. In exchange, Taylor's district expanded into conservative rural areas east of the suburbs.
For Republicans the moves save incumbents — and money. Republicans and their allies spent $20 million defending Texas' vulnerable, GOP-held congressional seats last year, said Adam Kincaid, executive director of the National Republican Redistricting Trust.
“Now they can go spend that money on places where they can go on offense,” Kincaid said. “You'd always rather be on offense than defense.”
