新华社北京11月25日电 美国共和、民主两党围绕国会众议院议席的"选区版图大战"近期愈演愈 烈。在共和党阵营"先锋"得克萨斯州，一家联邦法院18日禁止该州明年采用有利于共和党的新选区划 分，但联邦最高法院21日下令暂停执行这一裁决。 共和党着眼明年国会中期选举发起这场"版图大战"，民主党展开反击。媒体预计，局势瞬息万变， 这场政治角力影响深远。 这是11月17日从美国首都华盛顿的华盛顿纪念碑上拍摄的美国国会大厦。新华社记者胡友松摄 两党摩拳擦掌 共和党目前在国会众议院的席位优势不超过5席。为确保明年中期选举后依然掌控众议院，美国总 统特朗普等共和党人今年早些时候开始推动重新划分选区。 共和党在本党占优势的得州率先"开战"。该州议会一些民主党籍议员集体"跑路"以躲避议会表决， 遭共和党阵营以出动联邦调查局拘捕相威胁。最终共和党籍州长格雷格·阿博特8月将新选区划分签署成 法。得州新划选区有望让共和党在中期选举中多夺取5个国会众议院议席。 民主党人也没有坐以待毙。民主党主政的加利福尼亚州于11月初举行选民投票，通过州政府提出的 新选区划分方案，同样有望让民主党在中期选举中夺取5席。加州与得州分别是美国人口第一、第二 ...

Core Points - Trump is actively pushing for redistricting in key states to break the historical trend of the ruling party losing in midterm elections [1][3] - The Republican Party currently holds a slim majority in the House of Representatives with 219 seats to the Democrats' 212, making the House crucial for Trump's policy agenda [3][5] - The strategy of redistricting, known as "gerrymandering," involves manipulating electoral district boundaries to favor one party over another [5][7] Group 1 - The concept of "gerrymandering" allows the ruling party to concentrate opposition voters into fewer districts while spreading their own supporters across multiple districts to secure wins [7][9] - Trump has targeted Texas for redistricting, aiming to gain five additional seats for the Republican Party [9][11] - The Democratic Party is also engaging in redistricting efforts in California, seeking to gain five seats in response to Republican actions [11][12] Group 2 - The ongoing "map war" reflects the polarization in American politics, with both parties using technical means to outmaneuver each other within the rules [14][15] - This strategic manipulation of electoral maps may lead to election outcomes that diverge from the actual public sentiment, pushing moderate representatives out of the political landscape [15][16] - If Trump successfully breaks the midterm election curse through this strategy, it may set a precedent for future political maneuvers following the decennial census [15][16]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses significant changes in voting procedures in the United States, particularly focusing on Trump's announcement regarding voter ID requirements and the elimination of mail-in voting [1][3][4]. Group 1: Voter ID and Mail-in Voting - Trump announced plans to issue an executive order requiring voter ID for every vote, emphasizing that no exceptions will be made [3]. - He criticized mail-in voting, stating that it undermines election integrity and vowed to lead a movement to abolish it before the 2026 midterm elections [1][3]. - In March, Trump signed an executive order mandating proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration and prohibiting the counting of mail-in ballots received after election day [3][4]. Group 2: Political Landscape and Redistricting - The article highlights ongoing redistricting battles, particularly in Missouri and Texas, where Republican governors are pushing for new congressional district maps to gain electoral advantages [5][6]. - Trump's support for these redistricting efforts is framed as a significant victory for the "America First" agenda [5]. - The historical context of gerrymandering, referred to as "gerrymandering," is discussed, noting its long-standing role in U.S. politics to benefit specific parties [8]. Group 3: Implications for Future Elections - The article notes that the Republican Party aims to increase its representation in Congress through these redistricting efforts, especially in light of the upcoming 2024 elections [6][7]. - Historical trends indicate that the party of the sitting president often loses seats in midterm elections, which Trump seeks to counteract through these measures [7]. - The article suggests that the current political climate is increasingly polarized, with both parties vying for control through strategic redistricting [8].

Core Viewpoint - The redistricting battle in the U.S. is adding instability and high risks to the upcoming midterm elections, with Texas and California leading the charge in a national struggle that could reshape congressional control [1][4]. Group 1: Texas Redistricting - The Texas Senate passed a redistricting bill that could allow the Republican Party to gain five additional seats in the House of Representatives during the midterm elections [1][3]. - Governor Abbott expressed his intent to sign the bill, which he described as a significant opportunity for Texas voters to elect more Republican representatives [3]. - The redistricting efforts are seen as a political maneuver to maintain Republican control in Congress, with Trump urging for more Republican-leaning districts [3][7]. Group 2: Democratic Response - Texas Democrats attempted to block the redistricting bill by staging a walkout, which delayed the legislative process [4]. - Following the passage of the bill, Texas Democrats vowed to file a lawsuit against the new congressional map, claiming it undermines voting rights for Latino and African American communities [4][6]. - California's Democratic-controlled legislature responded by passing a package of bills to hold a special vote on redistricting, aiming to secure additional seats for Democrats in the midterms [5]. Group 3: National Implications - The redistricting conflict is part of a broader trend where both parties are engaging in redistricting battles across multiple states, with potential advantages for Republicans in states like Ohio and Florida [5][6]. - The practice of redistricting for partisan gain, known as "gerrymandering," has been a longstanding issue in U.S. politics, with modern data analysis tools exacerbating the situation [7]. - Historical patterns indicate that the party of the sitting president often loses seats in midterm elections, a trend that Trump aims to counteract through these redistricting efforts [6][7].

Core Points - The article discusses the escalating political drama in the U.S. surrounding gerrymandering, particularly in Texas, where Republicans are redrawing congressional districts while Democrats resist through various means [1] - The historical context of gerrymandering is highlighted, tracing back to the early 19th century with the term "Gerrymander" originating from Massachusetts [1] - The article emphasizes the detrimental effects of gerrymandering on democracy, leading to a situation where elected officials manipulate voter demographics to secure their positions, undermining true public representation [2] Group 1 - Gerrymandering has become a common tactic for both major political parties in the U.S., with recent actions in Texas and California illustrating this trend [1][2] - The judicial system, particularly the U.S. Supreme Court, has largely avoided substantive rulings on gerrymandering cases, effectively legitimizing the practice [2] - The manipulation of electoral rules has resulted in a disconnect between popular votes and actual representation, leading to increased public disillusionment with the political system [2] Group 2 - The zero-sum game mentality between the two parties has extended beyond elections, causing dysfunction within the U.S. governance system [2] - Legislative gridlock has become common, with significant issues like budgetary disputes and immigration reform being stalled due to partisan conflicts [2] - The article notes that extreme political polarization has led to increased violence and threats against politicians, contrasting sharply with the U.S.'s self-image as a democratic leader [3]

Group 1 - The article highlights the ongoing political maneuvering in the U.S. as both Republican and Democratic parties prepare for the upcoming midterm elections, with a focus on redistricting efforts in Texas and California [1][2] - The practice of gerrymandering, where political parties redraw electoral districts to benefit their own candidates, has a long history in the U.S., with 15 out of 50 states currently exhibiting significant partisan bias in district maps [1][2] - The judicial system, particularly the U.S. Supreme Court, has largely avoided making substantive rulings on gerrymandering cases, effectively legitimizing the practice and undermining the representation of true public opinion [2][3] Group 2 - The article discusses the detrimental effects of partisan politics on U.S. governance, leading to a breakdown in cooperation and increased political gridlock, as evidenced by repeated government shutdowns and legislative inefficiencies [2][3] - The extreme polarization of political discourse has resulted in heightened social tensions, including violent incidents and threats against politicians, which starkly contrasts with the U.S.'s self-image as a democratic leader [3] - The manipulation of electoral processes for political gain has led to a disconnection between popular votes and actual representation, raising concerns about the integrity of democracy in the U.S. [2][3]

Core Points - The California legislature approved a redistricting plan aimed at increasing Democratic representation in the U.S. House of Representatives by five seats [1] - Governor Gavin Newsom has indicated plans to advance a vote on the redistricting process during a special election on November 4, seeking voter approval for the new congressional district map [2] - The practice of redistricting, often referred to as "gerrymandering," has a long history in the U.S., with both major parties attempting to reshape political boundaries to gain electoral advantages [2] Summary by Category - **Legislative Action** - The California Assembly has passed a plan for redistricting that is intended to add five congressional seats for the Democratic Party [1] - The new congressional district map will be submitted for state legislative review and ultimately requires voter approval [2] - **Political Strategy** - Governor Newsom is pushing for a vote on the redistricting plan in a special election scheduled for November 4 [2] - The strategy of redistricting to benefit a political party is a longstanding practice in U.S. politics, known as "gerrymandering" [2] - **Historical Context** - The practice of redistricting has been utilized for over 200 years in the U.S. to help political parties secure more seats through strategic boundary drawing [2]

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing conflict between the Republican and Democratic parties over the redistricting of congressional districts in Texas is primarily driven by the Republican desire to gain additional seats in the House of Representatives for the upcoming midterm elections, with the process being directly influenced by former President Trump [1][4][5]. Group 1: Redistricting Conflict - The Texas Senate passed a bill to redraw congressional districts, aiming to increase Republican seats in the House [1][2]. - The last redistricting occurred approximately five years ago, which is unusual as states typically redistrict every ten years following the census [2]. - Currently, Texas has 38 congressional seats, with Republicans holding 25 and Democrats 12, and the proposed changes could potentially add five more seats for Republicans [2]. Group 2: Democratic Resistance - Over 50 Democratic state legislators have left Texas to prevent the House from reaching a quorum necessary for legislative work, effectively halting proceedings [2][3]. - The Republican leadership has threatened various actions to compel the return of the absent Democratic legislators, including civil arrest warrants and daily fines [2]. Group 3: Political Violence and Tensions - The political tensions have escalated to the point of threats of violence, as evidenced by a bomb threat at a hotel where Democratic legislators were staying [3]. - The Democratic walkout has drawn significant media attention and mobilized Democratic voters, despite the challenges in stopping the redistricting [3]. Group 4: Trump's Influence - Trump has been a key figure in pushing for the redistricting, suggesting that it could secure five additional congressional seats for Republicans [4][5]. - His influence extends beyond Texas, as he has encouraged other Republican-led states to consider similar redistricting efforts ahead of the midterm elections [4]. Group 5: Broader Implications - The redistricting battle is part of a larger trend where both parties are engaging in aggressive tactics to reshape the political landscape in their favor, with Democrats planning countermeasures in blue states [6][7]. - The term "gerrymandering" has evolved, with both parties openly acknowledging their intent to manipulate district boundaries for electoral advantage, reflecting a decline in trust in the democratic process [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing political struggle in Texas over redistricting highlights the increasing polarization between the Democratic and Republican parties, with potential implications for the 2026 midterm elections [1][4][5] Group 1: Political Maneuvering - Texas Democratic lawmakers are boycotting legislative sessions to resist the Republican-led redistricting plan, causing the Texas House to be unable to meet due to lack of quorum [2][4] - Texas Governor Greg Abbott has initiated proceedings to remove the Democratic House leader and has called for the FBI to assist in locating absent Democratic lawmakers [2][3] - The redistricting effort is primarily driven by the Trump administration, aiming to enhance Republican electoral advantages in upcoming elections [2][4] Group 2: National Implications - The redistricting actions in Texas could trigger a nationwide response from Democratic governors, who have indicated they may retaliate with similar measures in their states [3][5] - The situation reflects a broader issue within the U.S. electoral system, where political parties manipulate district boundaries to secure their advantages, leading to increased political polarization [4][5] Group 3: Historical Context - The phenomenon of lawmakers "striking" to obstruct legislation has occurred in other states, indicating a trend of heightened political conflict and partisanship in the U.S. [4][5] - The current political climate in Texas serves as a microcosm of national political dynamics, with significant implications for future electoral outcomes [4][5]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the political maneuvering between the Republican and Democratic parties in Texas regarding the redistricting of congressional seats ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, highlighting the ongoing conflict and strategies employed by both parties to gain electoral advantages [1][10]. Group 1: Political Maneuvering - Over 50 Democratic state legislators left Texas to prevent a vote on redistricting, leading to a lack of quorum in the Texas House of Representatives [2][4]. - The Texas House, controlled by Republicans, issued civil arrest warrants for the absent Democratic legislators, with threats of fines and potential expulsion from the legislature [2][4]. - The redistricting proposal, if passed, could potentially add five congressional seats for Republicans in the upcoming elections [4][10]. Group 2: Historical Context - The tactic of legislators leaving to block votes is not new; similar actions occurred in Texas in 2021 and in Oregon in 2023 [3][4]. - The practice of gerrymandering, or redistricting for political advantage, has a long history in the U.S., dating back to the early 19th century [6]. Group 3: Democratic Response - In response to Republican efforts in Texas, Democrats in California are drafting plans to redraw districts to reduce Republican representation in Congress [10][11]. - California currently holds 52 congressional seats, with Democrats occupying 43; proposed changes could increase Democratic seats to 48 while reducing Republican seats by five [10]. Group 4: Broader Implications - The conflict in Texas reflects a larger trend of both parties engaging in a "arms race" over redistricting, with each side seeking to manipulate district boundaries to their electoral benefit [10][11]. - Democratic leaders in California and New York have publicly stated their intent to counter Republican strategies, indicating a significant escalation in partisan tactics surrounding redistricting [11].