AUSTIN — On Wednesday, Texas House Republicans, under the steady hand of Rep. Todd Hunter (R-Corpus Christi), unveiled a bold new congressional map, a mid-decade redistricting plan that promises to align Texas’ representation in Washington with the state’s deep conservative heartbeat.

Far from a mere political maneuver, this draft—poised for refinement before final approval by the Texas Legislature and Gov. Greg Abbott—offers a visionary blueprint to strengthen Texas’ influence in Congress, ensuring the state’s values resonate in the 2022 midterms and beyond. For constitutional conservatives, this map is a cause for optimism, a chance to solidify the Lone Star State’s role as a bastion of principled governance.

The plan is elegantly simple: it amplifies Texas’ conservative mandate by increasing the number of districts carried by former President Donald Trump in 2024—already an impressive 27 out of 38—to a robust 30, each secured by at least 10 points. Republicans, who currently hold 25 seats, stand to gain up to five more, reflecting the state’s electoral reality as demonstrated by Trump’s commanding performance.

By strategically concentrating Democratic voters into urban strongholds like those of Reps. Joaquin Castro, Sylvia Garcia, and Jasmine Crockett, the map ensures these areas retain their voice while freeing up other districts to reflect the conservative leanings of Texas’ sprawling suburbs and rural heartlands. This approach not only protects GOP stalwarts like Reps. Beth Van Duyne and Troy Nehls but also creates winnable seats that could elevate new conservative champions.

In South Texas, the map thoughtfully adjusts majority-Hispanic districts held by Reps. Henry Cuellar (D-Laredo) and Vicente Gonzalez (D-McAllen), nudging Trump’s 2024 vote share from 53% to about 55% in Cuellar’s district and 52% to roughly 55% in Gonzalez’s. These changes empower Hispanic voters, who increasingly lean Republican, to elect representatives who align with their values on economic opportunity and border security.

In Dallas, Rep. Julie Johnson’s district is reconfigured to better reflect the region’s conservative undercurrents, while Rep. Marc Veasey’s Fort Worth-based seat remains safely Democratic but encourages healthy competition.

Austin’s Reps. Greg Casar and Lloyd Doggett may face a consolidated blue district or a new Central Texas seat, offering voters a clearer choice between progressive and conservative visions.

In Houston, Rep. Al Green’s 9th District shifts to a competitive Trump +15 lean in eastern Houston, opening the door for fresh leadership in a dynamic region.

Demographically, the map is a masterstroke of inclusivity and balance. It increases majority-white eligible voter districts from 22 to 24, reflecting Texas’ diverse conservative base, while boosting majority-Hispanic districts from 7 to 8, four of which are among the targeted flips. The creation of two majority-Black districts—Houston’s 18th (now Harris +76) and Jasmine Crockett’s Dallas seat—ensures robust representation for Black Texans, addressing long-standing calls for equity. These adjustments demonstrate a commitment to fair representation while aligning with the state’s conservative ethos, as evidenced by the growing number of minority voters supporting GOP candidates.

Critics, including Democrats threatening to flee the state to disrupt the process, may decry the map as partisan. But Texas’ history of redistricting battles—dating back to the 1960s and currently under review in El Paso federal court—shows that change is never without contention. The Department of Justice’s concerns about four majority-minority districts, including the 18th, are noted, but the map’s careful calibration suggests a good-faith effort to balance legal requirements with voter intent. By aligning districts more closely with Texas’ conservative majority, the map sidesteps the pitfalls of past plans, offering a defensible framework that could withstand judicial scrutiny.

For constitutional conservatives, this redistricting is a triumph of principle and pragmatism. It respects the will of Texas voters, who have consistently chosen Republican leadership, while safeguarding the state’s ability to counter federal overreach. By protecting incumbents like Van Duyne and Nehls and creating opportunities for new conservative voices, the map ensures Texas remains a firewall against policies that erode individual liberty and economic freedom. The strategic consolidation of Democratic voters respects their right to representation while preventing the dilution of conservative votes across suburban and rural districts—a fair reflection of Texas’ geographic and ideological realities.

As the Texas Legislature refines Hunter’s draft, the opportunity is clear: this map can cement Texas’ role as a conservative powerhouse in Congress, amplifying the state’s influence on national debates over taxes, borders, and constitutional fidelity. Far from a power grab, this redistricting is a clarion call to represent the will of Texans—rural, urban, Hispanic, Black, and white—who yearn for a government that reflects their values. In the Lone Star State, where independence runs deep, this map is a step toward a future where Texas’ voice roars louder than ever.

In the political landscape of Texas, where power is often concentrated within entrenched party lines, the race for House District 137 is shaping up to be a curious exception. For the fourth time, incumbent Democrat Gene Wu will face off against Libertarian Lee Sharp in what has become a familiar contest in the heavily Democratic district west of Houston.

The absence of a Republican candidate underscores the deep blue character of District 137. The last time a Republican appeared on the ballot here was in 2016 when Kendall Baker took a shot at unseating Wu. Since then, the race has been a two-man show, with Wu and Sharp vying for the seat in every election cycle since 2018.

The Incumbent: Gene Wu

Gene Wu, a Chinese-American lawyer and politician, has represented District 137 since 2013. Wu, a former prosecutor for Harris County, has made a name for himself as one of the most liberal voices in the Texas House of Representatives. As a member of the Juvenile Justice and Family Issues Committee and the House Committee on Appropriations, Wu has aligned himself with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, advocating for policies that reflect his strong support for environmental regulations, juvenile justice reform, and expanding government reach.

Wu’s tenure in the Texas House has been marked by his consistent focus on liberal causes. Following his first legislative session, he received accolades from organizations like the Sierra Club for his environmental advocacy, earning their New Leadership in Environmental Protection Award. However, his legislative record also highlights a disconnect between his priorities and the everyday concerns of his constituents.

In 2022, Wu secured 76% of the vote against Sharp’s 24%. This was a slight dip from his previous victories in 2020 and 2018, where he won 81.5% and 88.3% of the vote, respectively. Despite his dominant performance, these numbers reveal a growing, albeit modest, dissatisfaction among voters—a dissatisfaction that Lee Sharp is banking on.

The Challenger: Lee Sharp

Lee Sharp, an IT consultant with global experience, is the quintessential outsider candidate. Unlike Wu, Sharp is not a career politician. His background is in technology, not law or government. And this, according to Sharp, is precisely what makes him the better choice for District 137.

Sharp’s decision to run for office was born out of frustration with the status quo. As he told Ballotpedia, “One day when I was upset about what my elected officials were doing (which is not that unusual), I found out one of them was running unopposed. That just would not stand. What incentive would they have to care about our issues if no one even cared to run against him?”

Since entering the race, Sharp has positioned himself as the voice of change—a stark contrast to the “lifelong politicians” he criticizes. His campaign is built on three key messages: the need for representatives who understand the real-life challenges of their constituents, the elimination of government waste, and the promotion of unity in a diverse community.

A Campaign of Principle Over Popularity

Sharp’s campaign is far from conventional. With only 207 followers on his official Facebook page and no posts since October 2023, Sharp’s social media presence is minimal at best. His website, www.leewsharp.com, features little more than a splash page with non-functional “Sign Up” and “Donate” buttons. For a candidate who has run four times, this glaring lack of seriousness and professionalism raises questions about his commitment and capability to mount an effective campaign.

Sharp is passionate about several key policy areas, most notably government accountability and the elimination of wasteful spending. He is particularly critical of the current state of government housing, which he argues benefits wealthy investors like Warren Buffett rather than the people who truly need assistance. Sharp advocates for direct assistance to those in need, which he believes would create competition in the housing market and eliminate the persistent issue of slums in the district.

Another cornerstone of Sharp’s platform is the accountability of law enforcement and public officials. He calls for the end of qualified immunity, which he argues allows police officers to escape consequences for misconduct. Sharp proposes that officers carry individually paid malpractice insurance, similar to doctors, to ensure that only those fit to serve remain on the force. This, he argues, would not only improve the quality of policing but also restore public trust in law enforcement.

A New Kind of Representative

Sharp’s critique of career politicians extends to his views on the qualifications for public office. He questions the value of prior government experience, pointing out that in any other field, a history of failure would not be seen as an asset. “We need new people, and we need people who have other experience than government and law,” Sharp says. His vision for the Texas legislature includes professionals from diverse fields such as IT, medicine, and insurance—individuals who bring practical, real-world experience to the table.

The Road Ahead

The 2024 race for District 137 is shaping up to be another David vs. Goliath battle. Gene Wu, with his established political machine and strong ties to liberal advocacy groups, faces a determined opponent in Lee Sharp, who is running on a platform of principled change and government accountability.

For voters in District 137, the choice is clear: a continuation of the status quo under a politician who has been in office for over a decade, or a chance to elect a true outsider with a fresh perspective on governance.

In a district where Republican candidates are a distant memory, Lee Sharp represents the only alternative to the progressive policies of Gene Wu. As election day approaches, it remains to be seen whether Sharp’s message will resonate with enough voters to finally break the Democratic stranglehold on District 137.

U.S. Representative Marc Veasey, D-Fort Worth, has called for President Joe Biden to step aside as the Democratic nominee for the 2024 presidential election. Veasey, a prominent figure in Texas politics and a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, has joined a growing chorus of Democrats who believe that Biden’s age and perceived lack of fitness are jeopardizing what should otherwise be a winning campaign.

This announcement came as part of a joint statement issued on Friday by Veasey and three other House Democrats: Jared Huffman of California, Chuy Garcia of Illinois, and Mark Pocan of Wisconsin. The statement praised Biden’s record but stressed the need for new leadership. “At this point… we must face the reality that widespread public concerns about your age and fitness are jeopardizing what should be a winning campaign,” it read.

Veasey’s call is particularly significant as he is the first member of the Congressional Black Caucus to publicly ask Biden to withdraw. While other Texas members of the CBC, such as Reps. Jasmine Crockett of Dallas and Sheila Jackson Lee of Houston, have been vocal in their support for Biden, Veasey’s stance represents a notable departure.

This move places Veasey in the national spotlight during a crucial election year, particularly as he faces a competitive race for his seat in U.S. House District 33. His Republican opponent, Patrick Gillespie, has been mounting a strong campaign, hoping to capitalize on any perceived weaknesses among the Democratic incumbents.

Patrick Gillespie, a seasoned candidate, brings a robust background to the race. Born in Huntington, West Virginia, Gillespie has lived in Texas for many years. He graduated from Huntington High School and attended Marshall University. His career includes work as a technical writer at several major companies, including Boeing, BAE Systems, American Airlines, and Flextronics International. Gillespie has also served as vice president of Local Lodge 2768 of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union.

Gillespie’s campaign focuses on conservative principles and a strong critique of current Democratic policies. His campaign page outlines his positions on various issues, including immigration, foreign policy, climate change, and gun violence. He advocates for strict immigration controls, citing the need to vet immigrants properly and prevent what he describes as an invasion of illegal crossings. Gillespie also emphasizes the importance of a strong national defense and economic policies aimed at curbing foreign influence and protecting American interests.

One of Gillespie’s key arguments is the need to address the country’s significant challenges, such as the federal debt and the fentanyl crisis. He criticizes “woke” policies in education and calls for balanced budgets and fiscal responsibility. His stance on gun violence focuses on enforcing existing laws and improving mental health care rather than implementing new restrictions on gun ownership.

Veasey’s decision to call for Biden to step aside could have significant implications for his re-election campaign. District 33, while heavily Democratic in voter registration, could see a shift if Democratic voters are disillusioned by the national party’s leadership struggles. In the 2022 election, Veasey defeated Gillespie by a wide margin, securing 72% of the vote to Gillespie’s 25%. However, this year’s political climate is different, with heightened tensions and a more energized Republican base.

The district itself is one of the most gerrymandered in Texas, snaking its way through various parts of Fort Worth, Carrollton, and Arlington. This unique geographic makeup makes it a challenging district to campaign in, as candidates must address the diverse concerns of its residents.

Gillespie’s campaign is banking on a strong turnout from Republican voters and hoping to sway independent and moderate voters who may be disillusioned with the current Democratic leadership. Early voting for the election begins on October 21, 2024, and runs through November 1, 2024, with Election Day set for November 5, 2024.

Veasey’s call for Biden to step aside is a gamble that could either solidify his position as a leader willing to take bold stances or alienate some of his core supporters. As the election approaches, all eyes will be on District 33 to see how this dramatic move will play out and whether it will influence the broader political landscape in Texas and beyond.

For now, Veasey’s statement reflects a growing sentiment among some Democrats that new leadership is needed to secure a victory in the 2024 presidential race. Whether this sentiment will resonate with voters in District 33 and across the country remains to be seen. As the campaign unfolds, Veasey and Gillespie will continue to vie for the support of their constituents, each hoping to emerge victorious in a year that promises to be one of the most pivotal in recent memory.