Gov. Wes Moore wanted to hear from Maryland residents about the state’s congressional district maps. At the first public comment session of the Governor’s Redistricting Advisory Commission on Friday night, many opposed the idea.
Moore created the panel 10 days ago and charged it with a “pressure test” of the state’s current congressional district map to ensure it is fair. He’s never defined the term and has instead talked about Republican-led states that are engaged in hyper-partisan midcycle redistricting to send more Republicans to Congress in 2026.
But many of those who spoke during Friday’s nearly two-hour meeting said the redistricting scheme has less to do with fairness than with partisanship.
“Attempting to disenfranchise one-third of Maryland’s voters and deny them a seat in Congress in a vain attempt to capture the one remaining seat held by a Republican is not only a fool’s errand, it’s wrong,” said Gary Hodge of the state’s Republican voters. “This shouldn’t be the Maryland way.”
Hodge described himself as a lifelong Democrat who is interested in electing more Democrats, but he called on the panel to resist the urge to join the national redistricting frenzy.
“In these troubled times for our democracy, it’s more important than ever to set an example, remain true to our principles of representative government, and not be lured into a tawdry pursuit of base partisanship that has compromised the integrity and reputation of the Congress in the eyes of the American people and poisoned the civility of our politics,” he said.
The 40 speakers at Friday’s hearing, who included Republicans, Democrats and others, spoke against midcycle redistricting by a 2-1 margin. But supporters of redistricting said it’s necessary to respond to states, like Texas, that are redrawing their congressional district lines for partisan advantage.
“We are at a moment where it’s not just Texas, but it’s North Carolina and Missouri, and other states are moving ahead,” said Hadley Anthony, a Baltimore City resident. Anthony lives in the district of Senate President Bill Ferguson (D-Baltimore City), a prominent opponent of redistricting.
“Those three I mentioned have already changed the rules and changed their maps to consolidate power there, and this disenfranchises not just the residents of those states, but here in Maryland as well, because we are the United States of America,” Anthony said. “We have to stand up in this moment and move forward with this redistricting to make sure that we have fair representation, not just here in the state, but more broadly at the federal level.”
The virtual meeting was the second meeting of the five-member panel led by U.S. Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D), and the first at which the public was allowed to speak.
The panel is scheduled to hold a second public comment session Tuesday. Alsobrooks said she hoped to get in two more meetings in early December and possibly produce a map on which the public can comment.
The panel is expected to make a recommendation to Moore that could lead to legislation drawing up new maps, possibly in a special session in December. Moore has not committed to a special session nor taken the idea off the table.
Congressional districts are typically redrawn every 10 years, after the decennial census leads to a reapportionment of seats in Congress based on population. Maryland’s current map was approved for 2022, after a contentious fight that led a state court to reject one Democratic proposal for “extreme partisan redistricting.” A compromise led to the current map, in which only one of the state’s eight congressional districts is Republican-friendly.
A quarter century ago, the eight districts were split evenly between the two parties.
Hodge was one of nearly a dozen who told the panel to reject redrawing the three-year old districts. He praised Ferguson for opposing calls to redistrict.
Ferguson, in a letter earlier this month, said midcycle redistricting was “too risky” and could backfire in a way that spawns court scrutiny or as many as three Republican seats instead of an 8-0 plan that eliminates Rep. Andy Harris (R-1st).
In a radio interview earlier this week, Ferguson said his office received more than 6,000 calls on redistricting. Less than 100 of those were said to be from Maryland residents, he said.
Hodge said the Senate leader offered “a wise, principled and practical argument against it…. This commission should heed his advice instead of getting down in the mud and wrestling with our political adversaries. Let’s beat them at the polls with better ideas for serving the people and solving the nation’s problems.”
Maryland has roughly 6.1 million residents, of which 4.3 million are registered to vote. A little more than half are registered Democrats, while Republicans and unaffiliated voters account for a little less than one quarter each, according to the latest figures from the Maryland State Board of Elections.
Pearl Seidman, a Howard County resident who once worked for Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a 10-term Missouri Democrat, said she understands “the concept of fighting fire with fire,” but that midcycle redistricting is not the way to go.
“I also know that humans have a less-than-stellar record in divining the future,” Seidman said. “I close with two questions for this esteemed panel. Can you anticipate the outcomes in Maryland of fighting fire with fire? How can you ensure a controlled burn?”
Hodge and Seidman were joined by Republicans who also decried an effort to eliminate the last Republican Maryland Congress member.
A small number of speakers called on the panel to recommend a nonpartisan or independent panel to oversee future redistricting efforts. Eric Rockel said Maryland already has a reputation for its gerrymandered districts.
“This is not something that we should be proud of, and this is not simply an exercise to outdo the efforts by Republicans in Texas because Maryland, along with states like Illinois, Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Jersey are already highly gerrymandered,” Rockel said.
“I would urge this commission, as one of its findings, to recommend that a non-partisan redistricting commission be established in time for the next census, so that we can have a little more objective and not as partisan a process in 2030,” he said.
It is unclear how much of the testimony was heard live by Alsobrooks, who opened the meeting and made brief remarks, including a schedule of future meetings, before turning off her camera about nine minutes in, as the first speaker began his remarks. The other four members remained on screen. Alsobrooks did not announce that she would turn off the camera.
A spokesperson for Alsobrooks’ campaign initially said that the senator was present but off camera. Later, the same spokesperson said Alsobrooks “left near the end and didn’t make it back for her closing.” She will not attend Tuesday’s meeting because the Senate is in session, the spokesperson said.