RICHMOND, Va. — The borders of certain voting districts in Virginia could be changed more than state lawmakers may have expected. A group known as OneVirginia2021 is spearheading the charge for redistricting, convinced that 11 of the 100 districts in the House of Delegates are unconstitutionally drawn in favor of one political party.

This process, known as gerrymandering, ignores the size and shape requirements of the districts, and the group says both major parties are to blame. Brian Cannon, executive director of OneVirginia2021, said the current lines are a way for politicians to create an advantage rather than playing fair.

"They're really able to have politicians pick their voters instead of having voters actually pick their politicians,” Cannon said. “We're trying to take the redistricting process out of the hands of politicians, have rules that respect communities, and make political gerrymandering illegal."

He said the group is backing Senate Bill 106, which establishes the criteria for the next redistricting process after the 2020 census. The bill would require that equal population, racial and ethnic fairness and compactness all be taken into account when districts are drawn.

Last month, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled the state's congressional districts had been drawn with partisan intent and ordered they be redrawn. A new congressional map could swing some districts toward Democrats in a Republican-controlled Congress.

After the 2011 election, Cannon said, both parties in Virginia took advantage of the gerrymandering process, with Democrats controlling the state Senate and the Republicans on top in the House.

"So, we are under a bipartisan gerrymander, and I think that acutely points out the problem,” he said. “This isn't a partisan issue - this is not a 'left-right,' this is 'right-wrong' - and that bipartisan gerrymander points it out really clearly."

He said OneVirginia2021 hopes for a decision on the legislation in a few months. The group also filed the state's first bipartisan lawsuit over the 11 Senate and House districts that it said were gerrymandered - six of which were drawn by Democrats and five by Republicans.


get more stories like this via email

A coalition of rural, progressive Democratic organizations is urging the new chair of the national party to invest more in rural and working-class communities in Nevada and around the country.

Anthony Flaccavento, executive director of the Rural Urban Bridge Initiative, said it's time for the party to start prioritizing these often forgotten groups, especially after the party's lackluster performance in November in which large portions of these groups rejected Democrats.

"If we don't begin to win back a significant part of these rural and working-class people, then Trump will more than likely survive these four years intact in the sense of getting his policies enacted," he said.

Flaccavento called the opposition reignited by Trump being back in the White House "promising," but adds it has to reach beyond highly educated, liberal folks. Nevada's rural voters make up a small fraction of the state's electorate, the majority being held within Clark and Washoe counties. That's where Democrats have focused their efforts and have stayed competitive. But Flaccavento pointed out that now more than ever, his party needs to regroup, restrategize and reinvest in rural, working-class America.

The new DNC chair, Ken Martin, the longtime leader of Minnesota's Democratic Party organization, recently wrapped up a multi-state tour in which he aimed to appeal to the working class. He has publicly acknowledged that the party has lost ground with working-class and rural voters. Flaccavento said time is of the essence which is why his coalition of groups is urging action now.

"How about we start with a focus on the DNC, with new leadership coming up, and try to get them on board with this and then work with the DNC to work with Democratic donors and the party in general to shift the focus and start investing in these two communities," he continued.

Flaccavento said many Democrats need to make long-term investments in "abandoned" counties where party leaders feel alone and locals feel like their requests and priorities are falling on deaf ears.

"We will not see results in one or two election cycles, but we might see results in a decade. And then in the battleground states do the same thing, but with more expectation that it'll actually yield election results in 2026 and in 2028," he concluded.

A South Dakota Senate committee considers several bills today to overhaul rules for getting citizen-led measures on the ballot.

The proposals are drawing sharp debate about the future of direct democracy. Republican lawmakers want stricter requirements for ballot questions when South Dakota residents or affiliated organizations seek things like a constitutional amendment. One bill calls for raising the approval threshold to 60% of the vote when a measure gets onto the ballot.

Stacy Roberts, board co-chair for the advocacy group Dakota Rural Action, said the attempt appears to undermine voters' intelligence.

"They're basically telling the population of South Dakota that they don't know what they're voting for, and I think that's very untrue," Roberts asserted.

Whether it is signing a petition or deciding a ballot measure on Election Day, Roberts feels voters are well-informed. She likens the bills to "sour grapes" following the success of recent initiatives, like Medicaid expansion. Bill sponsors said the ballots have been cluttered with too many citizen-led initiatives and higher standards are needed for constitutional changes.

Roberts countered the process has enough safeguards to ensure the integrity of South Dakota's Constitution. Bill sponsors argued some measures are driven by well-funded, out-of-state groups. But Roberts contended making it harder to approve them actually puts more power in the hands of wealthy influencers, not the people.

"Large funders get a more disproportionate voice and a seat at the table when you make these changes," Roberts emphasized.

She pointed to a grassroots-led ballot question last fall, when South Dakota voters overturned a controversial law dealing with carbon pipeline projects.

Historians noted South Dakota has been a trailblazer, as the first state to embrace this form of democracy. Roberts added the ballot initiative process has benefited both sides of the political aisle and those unhappy with recent results should take it up with the voters, not change the rules.

"We all can work on it and change it," Roberts underscored. "That makes for a much more engaged general population."

The measures have already cleared the House. If the Senate advances them, the two proposals would go on the 2026 ballot, with voters having the final say on updating requirements.

Legislative bills on housing have seen mixed results in Montana so far this session.

A state nonprofit group held an online training on how to provide public comment about those bills - aimed at young people, for whom affordable housing is a major challenge.

Montana's population grew by over 36,000 people between 2020 and early 2024, creating massive housing shortages and skyrocketing prices.

Sage Bennett, housing organizer with the advocacy group Forward Montana, said providing written comments on bills or verbal comments during hearings can help expand others' worldviews.

"You don't have to be a policy expert to share testimony," said Bennett. "That's what our elected officials are there to understand. And we are there to provide comment, to be able to have them understand the real world impacts that these policies have on us."

Housing-related bills working their way through the Legislature include one to amend zoning laws to allow taller buildings, and another to establish a grant program to create permanent supportive housing for people dealing with homelessness.

A bill to provide some renters the first right to buy a property if their landlord intends to sell was tabled last week.

Those who want to comment online must create an account and register for a bill hearing at least two hours in advance.

Forward Montana's State Legislative Coordinator John Bazant said commenters should come prepared, but be flexible, as time allotments for comments may change.

"This one-minute warning beep can be pretty jarring and it will probably interrupt you," said Bazant. "And then because it can depend on how long they give you for your testimony, having a long version and a short version is a ton of help."

According to the Montana Budget and Policy Center, workers paid the state's $10.55 minimum wage would have to work 80 to 90 hours per week to afford fair-market rent for a two-bedroom apartment in Flathead, Gallatin, Missoula, and three other counties.