Category: Politics

New York’s mayor-elect, Zohran Mamdani, campaigned on a promise to raise the city’s income tax on its richest residents from 3.9% to 5.9%. Combined with the state income tax, which is 10.9% for the top bracket, the increase would cement the city’s position as having the highest taxes on top earners in the country.

It set off a chorus of warnings about the tax flight of the city’s wealthiest residents.

Hedge fund billionaire Bill Ackman claimed that both the city’s businesses and wealthy residents “have already started making arrangements for the exits.”

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul echoed the concern, opposing the proposal “because we cannot have them leave the state.” Before the election, Mamdani’s opponent, former New York governor Andrew Cuomo, joked that if Mamdani won, “even I will move to Florida.”

I research whether high earners actually move when their taxes go up. My colleagues and I have analyzed millionaire taxes in New Jersey and California, the migration of Forbes billionaires globally and decades of IRS data tracing where Americans with million-dollar incomes live.

Top earners are often thought of as “mobile millionaires” who are ever searching for lower-tax places to live. In reality, they’re often reluctant to leave the places where they built their careers and raised their families.

At the same time, there are grains of truth in the tax migration arguments, so it’s important to carefully parse the evidence.

A small fraction of a small fraction

The first fact is simple: Millionaires have low migration rates.

Mobility in America is highest among people who are still searching for their economic place in life. Workers who earn the lowest wages move across state lines at relatively high rates, about 4.5% per year, often in search of more affordable housing. People making $1 million-plus a year move only half as often: Just 2.4% of them pack up each year.

When millionaires do move, it rarely appears to be for tax reasons. For example, Florida is the top destination for New York movers in general. But among the richest 1% of New Yorkers, the top destination is Connecticut, followed by New Jersey and California, all three of which levy a millionaire tax.

Some millionaires certainly do favor lower-tax destinations. But many moves to low-tax states are offset by moves in the opposite direction to higher-tax states, and many other moves take place between states that have the same tax rate.

Overall, only about 15% of millionaires who move end up with a lower tax bill. That shows the rich are willing and able to move for tax reasons. But because only about 2.4% of millionaires move each year – and only a fraction of those moves reduce their taxes – overall tax migration ends up being a small fraction of a small fraction. Not never, but not often.

Some benefits don’t have a dollar sign

Migration is mostly a young person’s game.

The most mobile Americans are recent college graduates who are brimming with potential, searching for work and unburdened by major responsibilities. Their rate of migration from one state to another is over 12%, more than four times the rate of millionaires.

The typical adult mover is about 30 years old, while the highest income earners are typically about 50. People choose where to build their careers and families decades before they reach their peak earnings phase.

By the time someone earns enough to be taxed in the highest brackets, they’re usually late into their careers. They are almost always married, often have children at home, own their homes and, in many cases, own a business. Their social lives and their economic success are linked to local networks of colleagues, clients and connections built up over a long career. Moving away from those networks means giving up a great deal of social capital and starting over somewhere new.

Top earners know that some states have lower taxes, but for most, tax flight is simply a bad deal. The social and economic costs of uprooting are bigger than the tax savings.

When your social world collapses

Two recent events showed why the rich generally stay where they are – and what it takes to move them.

The first was the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law in late 2017. The tax reform package capped the federal deduction for state and local taxes and raised taxes on high earners in states like New York, New Jersey and California. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed titled “So Long, California. Sayonara, New York,” economists Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore predicted that 800,000 people a year would flee those states.

They didn’t. A colleague and I studied every millionaire tax return in the country for two years before and after the reform. Nothing happened. There was no increase in migration out of the states where tax burdens rose. The predicted exodus simply did not occur.

We were about to wrap up the study and call it case closed. Then something unexpected did happen: In early 2020, millionaires began leaving high-tax states in large numbers. Low-tax states saw no comparable outflows. The pattern matched those tax-flight predictions from just a few years earlier.

It was the COVID-19 pandemic, and it brought a profound shock to the social lives of city residents.

Offices emptied out, with entry swipes in major cities dropping by nearly 90%. Time spent at work fell sharply, local amenities were shuttered, and time spent alone grew as in-person contact became a health risk. K–12 schools closed, disrupting children’s relationships with teachers and classmates.

For many households, this was also a strange form of freedom, and a chance to rethink the geography of work and life, especially for top earners who could work remotely from anywhere. Disconnected from the bonds of place, top earners moved and clearly favored low-tax destinations.

The lesson is that social lives and economic policies are deeply intertwined. The 2017 tax reform had no effect on migration because the social cost of moving is high – especially for people at the peak of their careers who are enjoying the many social benefits of economic success. As long as those connections to others are strong, they outweigh the appeal of moving to lower-tax states.

When the pandemic broke apart so much of social life, the ledger shifted. If your office, school, friendships and daily routines no longer anchor you in place, what is keeping you in a high-tax place?

But by early 2023, as social and economic life returned to normal, we found that millionaire migration patterns mostly reverted to their prepandemic baselines.

In other words, the surge in tax flight was temporary.

If you want the rich, appeal to the young

There is a big lesson here for state and city policies.

Every place wants to attract high-income earners and the spending power and tax dollars that accompany their salaries. Many policymakers think that tax cuts will lure them in, but this is mostly a fool’s errand. In normal times, the rich are deeply rooted and not movable.

The real opportunity lies in attracting and retaining the next generation of top earners – young people who are unattached to place and looking for opportunities to build their careers and their lives. Places that draw young professionals build the pipeline of future top earners.

Those early-career folks are mobile, but they are not thinking about the top tax rate. Their salaries are low. They are trying to find good jobs, pay the rent, form relationships and start families. They hope to be successful enough to one day be paying Mamdani’s millionaire tax. For the time being, though, they need the basic costs of living to be manageable. Soon they will need affordable child care and good public schools for their kids.

If the city helps them that far along, many of them would gladly pay a millionaire tax when and if the time comes. In this light, the Mamdani plan is simply practical: Higher taxes at the top support the services and quality of life that keep the next generation in the city.

Cristobal Young received funding from the Russell Sage Foundation and the Washington Center for Equitable Growth in support of this research project.

​Politics + Society – The Conversation

Indiana state House Republicans have released a draft congressional map that would give the GOP an edge in all nine of the state’s congressional districts — potentially netting the party two seats in the Hoosier State — though the map’s passage is still far from certain.

The biggest changes in the proposed map come in the state’s two Democratic-leaning districts, held by Reps. Frank Mrvan and André Carson. Mapmakers split Marion County — home to Indianapolis — into four different districts, essentially diluting the Democrats’ strength in the area.

While the map is in line with President Donald Trump’s request for a GOP sweep, it still faces a number of obstacles in order to pass.

State House Speaker Todd Huston has consistently said his caucus could pass the new map, and Speaker Mike Johnson huddled with lawmakers this weekend in what was described by one person briefed on the call as very “rah rah” ahead of them convening.

The map’s fate in the state Senate, where President Pro Tem Rodric Bray remains opposed, is still uncertain. The White House and other outside groups continue to ramp up pressure on lawmakers resistant to redistricting, and one even faced threats of a pipe bomb over the weekend.

Republicans who oppose redrawing have said its best to focus the GOP’s energy on flipping a district outright instead of changing the playing field.

“It seems like the public is talking about this in terms of a binary choice: either 7-2 or redistricting and get 9-0,” Bray told POLITICO last month, explaining his reluctance to take on a redraw. “That is not clear at all to me, because we don’t know who’s going to run.”

The draft map’s release comes after months of back and forth between the White House and Indiana lawmakers, including two visits to the state from Vice President JD Vance.

The state House is expected to vote on the map this week, and the state Senate is meeting next week to weigh the version passed by the House. Turning Point USA, one of the GOP groups pushing for a new map, is planning a rally at the statehouse Friday.

If state lawmakers approve the map, Indiana would become the fourth GOP-led state to redraw ahead of the midterms. So far, Republicans have drawn districts that could net nine seats across Texas, North Carolina, Ohio and Missouri, though legal challenges remain.

A panel of federal judges blocked Texas’ gerrymander last month, but the Supreme Court has allowed it to stay in place for now as it continues to consider the case ahead of the state’s filing deadline next week.

Democrats have found redistricting success, too, through California’s Proposition 50 — which could capture the party five seats of their own — as well as a court-ordered redraw in Utah. Utah’s GOP-controlled legislature plans to appeal the court’s decision.

In Virginia, Democrats took their first steps to redraw and will continue the process early next year. Maryland and Illinois continue to face pressure from within the party to pursue their own gerrymanders, but similar dynamics to Indiana have left some state lawmakers unwilling to get on board.

Republicans still have their own potential states on the board. Florida is expected to start discussing the issue later this month, and Kansas and Kentucky could join in January. Other GOP efforts in Nebraska and New Hampshire have faltered.

​Politics

A top consultant to Rep. Nancy Mace’s campaign for South Carolina governor announced his resignation Monday, saying the gubernatorial hopeful has “decided to turn her back on MAGA.”

Austin McCubbin, a longtime Republican operative, bashed Mace in a post on X and accused her of trying to “hug the political cactus that is the Rand Paul [and] Thomas Massie wing of the Party” and questioned the third-term member of Congress’ ties to the Protect Freedom PAC — a Paul-aligned committee.

In his post, McCubbin claimed Mace told him she directed a friend to steer a “7-figure check” to the PAC, calling her “wittingly or unwittingly a proxy for Rand Paul’s 2028 presidential campaign.”

That conversation, he said, was the catalyzing moment behind his decision to leave the campaign. POLITICO has not independently verified the claim.

“My name has been used publicly, while going back on her word to pay me, to trade on my Team Trump status and to work on her behalf with the White House, and I am 100% breaking with her campaign out of loyalty to the President,” he wrote.

A spokesperson for Mace, in a statement in response to McCubbin’s post, said: “Mr. McCubbin didn’t raise a dime for the campaign or better yet, never even bothered showing up. When he demanded $10,000 a month for ‘services’ and was told no, he ran straight to X. Good luck with that.”

President Donald Trump’s endorsement is all but certain to help propel his preferred candidate into Columbia’s top post. Mace — like the other candidates in the crowded field — has been angling for the president’s endorsement since her entry to the race in August.

“My advice to the President, my friends in the White House, and South Carolina Trump voters: scratch her name from the list,” McCubbin wrote.

Mace’s campaign for governor announced McCubbin’s hire as one of the campaign’s “lead consultants” in a press release earlier this year, touting his close ties to the successful Trump campaign operations in the Palmetto State during the 2024 election. The two had also worked together previously: McCubbin managed Mace’s first reelection bid in 2022.

“This is about loyalty,” McCubbin wrote, calling current Gov. Henry McMaster a “great governor” who has been “very loyal” to Trump. “South Carolina needs someone cut from the same cloth, where you know their word is their bond,” he added.

​Politics

When Wes Moore and Bill Ferguson stood together in a Baltimore bar on a sweltering Saturday afternoon in the summer of 2022, the two political figures projected a promising vision of power for Democrats in a blue-leaning state where they stood on the cusp of fully controlling government.

Moore was a former Rhodes Scholar and decorated combat veteran who was running for governor with Oprah Winfrey’s blessing but no experience in public office. Ferguson was a tactful consensus-builder who arrived in Annapolis with the moniker of “baby senator” before rising to become the chamber president a decade later.

“I’m a Baltimorean,” Moore told the campaign volunteers gathered in the Federal Hill neighborhood that Ferguson had represented since first being elected in 2010 at the age of 27. “Who’s making these decisions matters.”

Three years later, Maryland’s two top Democrats find themselves unable to agree on a big one. Moore has become a champion of redrawing his state’s U.S. congressional lines to generate an additional seat for his party in next year’s midterm elections. Ferguson, scarred by an earlier experience in which he helped deliver such an extreme map only to see it struck down by courts, is refusing to commit to even allowing a vote on a new redistricting measure.

The new rupture highlights a fault line emerging within both parties as Democrats and Republicans scour the national map for opportunities to improve their congressional positions via gerrymandering — between the short-term priorities of their respective national parties and the often longer-range yet parochial concerns of state legislative leaders.

For Democrats, the most immediate obstacle to further gains is Ferguson, whose defiance has made him a villain to party officials nationwide. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries spoke with Ferguson in October ensuring he “understands the assignment,” as Jeffries put it. “We need the state of Maryland,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom said upon redrawing his state’s maps via passage of Proposition 50 to give his party five Democrat-leaning seats in the state. “Grow a pair” and stand up to President Donald Trump, a top Virginia lawmaker bluntly instructed Ferguson the next day.

The stand-off will likely come to a head in the coming weeks, as Moore faces an imminent choice: Call a special session and rely on Ferguson to deliver a majority for a gerrymandered map, or wait for the General Assembly to return in January for a regular session to allow more time for negotiations. Either way, the governor will have to convince 24 of the 34 Democratic senators to buck a respected leader whose control of campaign funds could help determine the fate of their reelection bids.

The view from outside Maryland may have Moore, a likely 2028 presidential contender, towering over Ferguson. But in Annapolis, many think it is the Senate president who has made the better case for how Democrats should move forward.

Ferguson “holds the cards” on redistricting, says former state Sen. Jill Carter, who served under both men. “Moore is very popular and charismatic, but Bill is very politically savvy.”

William Claiborne Ferguson IV was born in Silver Spring, just outside of Washington, to a conservative-leaning father who worked in commercial real estate and a labor union-supporting mother who adored former President Bill Clinton. Ferguson attended Georgetown Preparatory School — the elite, all-boys Jesuit academy that also produced conservative Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh — and Davidson College in North Carolina, where he studied politics and economics with sights on a business career. 

But a post-collegiate stint with Teach for America at one of Baltimore’s toughest schools veered Ferguson away from his father’s career and towards one in left-leaning politics. While serving as an aide to local-government officials, Ferguson pursued a law degree at the University of Maryland and prepared to seek office. In 2010 he challenged Democratic state Sen. George W. Della Jr., who had been first elected in the year before Ferguson was born. As the primary devolved into mudslinging, Ferguson tried to keep the choice simple for voters: stick with the status quo or march with him into the future.

Ferguson came to a chamber dominated by Maryland Senate President Mike Miller, known for deploying hardball tactics to keep his caucus in line over what became a 33-year tenure in the role. As the chamber’s youngest senator, Ferguson won a reputation as a mild-mannered nerd who mastered education policy and the state budget while being teased by his staff for not knowing classic rock tunes.

When Miller prepared to retire in 2020, senate Democrats turned to the then-36-year-old Ferguson, unanimously voting him the next senate president. Many in the party cheered his ascension as a generational and philosophical pivot to a new progressive era in the state capital.

“Bill Ferguson is more collaborative. He listens. He is open to changing his mind when … arguments are effectively made,” said state Sen. Cheryl Kagan, a Democrat who served under both Miller and Ferguson. “He’s less of a king and more of a leader among equals.”

Ferguson, now 42, spent much of his first few sessions as the Senate’s top Democrat in trying to reel in then-Gov. Larry Hogan’s Republican agenda. In the final two years of Hogan’s second term, Maryland Democrats overrode the governor’s vetoes more than two dozen times. Ferguson also scored some bipartisan wins, too, helping Hogan deliver on a campaign promise by passing the largest tax cut in state history.

But it was a standoff with Hogan following the 2020 Census that left an indelible mark on Ferguson.

Maryland had gained a half-million people over the previous decade, even as its largest city, Baltimore, suffered a steep population drop. Hogan saw the churn as an opening to target a Democrat-held congressional district — the 6th, stretching north from the Washington, D.C. suburbs to the Pennsylvania border and west to the West Virginia line — often described as one of the nation’s most gerrymandered. Hogan established a nonpartisan redistricting commission, which returned a map that had two of Maryland’s eight seats leaning Republican.

When Hogan called a special legislative session in December 2021 to approve the map, Democrats rebelled. With supermajorities in both chambers, they instead passed their own over Hogan’s opposition, turning seven districts into safe Democratic seats and the long Republican-dominated 1st district — represented by House Freedom Caucus chair Andy Harris — into toss-up territory.

“I felt a little bit uncomfortable, I’ll be totally candid, with the first map we passed,” Ferguson recalled recently to The Bulwark. “I thought, I’m willing to help facilitate this process.”

After Republicans sued, astate court ruled in March 2022 that the Democrats’ map amounted to an “extreme partisan gerrymander” that violated the state Constitution. Already well into an election year, senior Judge Lynne Battaglia gave lawmakers just days to pass a new map. Democratic lawmakers had little choice but to pass a revised map that would win Hogan’s signature. Republicans kept their hold on the 1st district and Democrats have not since mounted a serious challenge to Harris there.

Ferguson, who declined repeated requests to be interviewed for this article, now says he made a misjudgment in acquiescing to more seasoned leaders who convinced him a maximalist strategy would stand up to legal scrutiny. Seeing it shot down by the courts gives him a “different calculus of the risk,” as he told the Bulwark, about any attempt at a nakedly partisan gerrymander.

“Experience does matter. What you’ve seen and gone through in the past does matter,” said Malcolm Augustine, the second-highest ranking Democrat in the Maryland Senate. “That’s the bottom line. He was there.”

On an unseasonably warm afternoon in January 2023, Ferguson stood at the state house to welcome Moore — a well-reviewed author and former college football player, Army officer, investment banker and nonprofit executive — to Annapolis. The ceremony dripped with nods to Moore’s status as Maryland’s first African-American governor. Ferguson, who is white, stood less than three feet away as Moore placed his hand on a Bible belonging to abolitionist Fredrick Douglass during the swearing-in, which was held in a private event in the Senate chamber.

Moments later, at the public outdoor ceremony before a crowd that included actor Chris Tucker and presidential daughter Chelsea Clinton, the new governor name-checked Ferguson in the second line of his inaugural address. “It’s an honor to be your partner,” Moore said.

After years of playing defense against a Republican executive, Ferguson now had an ally who could allow legislative Democrats to define a proactive agenda. Many wanted to use the state’s structural surplus to fund mortgage assistance programs for first-time homebuyers and cancel parole debt for long-serving inmates.

Early optimism about what the state’s Democratic trifecta could deliver evaporated. Economic downturns ballooned the state deficit, as the Trump’s administration’s dismantling of the federal workforce and government contracts hit Maryland especially hard. Earlier this year, legislators resorted to raising taxes and fees by $1.6 billion — and have braced for lingering effects from the longest federal government shutdown in U.S. history. The Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore last year that left six people dead has become an unending catastrophe: A state agency last month estimated bridge-repair costs have doubled while the expected reopening has been delayed by years.

This year, Maryland’s two top Democrats have found themselves frequently at odds. In April, Moore was unable to pass a bill expanding the state’s reliance on nuclear power, reclassifying it to count towards clean-energy goals. Ferguson’s critics haveaccused the Senate president of killing the bill to benefit the Baltimore solar-panel company where he works as an executive. (Officials in Maryland’s part-time legislature are permitted to maintain outside employment.)

When Ferguson the next month helped deliver a bill forming a commission to study reparations for descendants of slavery, Moore vetoed it. The surprising rebuff was viewed by many Senate Democrats, including those in the General Assembly’s Black Caucus, as motivated by Moore’s desire to demonstrate to a national audience that he was willing to buck his own party. “I strongly believe now is not the time for another study,” Moore wrote to Ferguson in a May 16 veto letter.

But it was a national movement on redistricting that did most to fracture Ferguson and Moore’s relationship. In June, Republicans in Texas — under public pressure from the White House — first entertained the possibility of redrawing their U.S. House maps to produce more Republican-friendly seats. Democrats looked for states where they could offset Texas’s moves with partisan gerrymanders of their own.

Maryland appeared a natural candidate to join the growing Democratic counteroffensive. While California, Colorado and Virginia would have to amend their state constitutions for politicians to redraw lines mid-decade — and in New York a lawsuit to upend the status quo — pulling off such a move in Maryland would require only simple legislation. In August, Democratic state Sen. Clarence Lam introduced a bill that would place more liberal-leaning voters in the Republican-held 1st district.

Moore soon embraced the idea of moving forward with such plans. In September, he accused Trump of “attempting to gerrymander Black leaders out of office” and called the actions of Republican legislatures akin to “political redlining” in a speech at a Congressional Black Caucus dinner.

“It’s time for Maryland to have a conversation about whether we have a fair map or not,” he told reporters then.

Ferguson, too, expressed openness to the redistricting idea, telling POLITICO earlier that month that a mid-decade gerrymander was “the last possible option that we should explore, but we won’t sit by idly and watch democracy get undermined.”

But as the pressure nationally ramped up, the more his ambivalence began to surface. He reminded colleagues of a 2002 state-court decision in which judges redrew Baltimore-area state senate districts upon ruling that a map drawn by Democrats violated constitutional requirements for Maryland’s districts to be “compact in form” around county lines and bodies of water. Ferguson also likes to point out that since the more recent smackdown of the 2021 gerrymander, Maryland’s Supreme Court still does not favor Democrats: five of the seven judges now on the court were appointed by Hogan.

That make-up, Ferguson suggests, could mean if the courts throw out any newly passed map, reverting to congressional boundaries with the current 7-1 advantage is not a foregone conclusion — and a replacement could end up a lot worse for Democrats.

Other Democrats who participated in the 2021 redistricting case see the legal issues differently. “There’s no binding precedent in Maryland that would impact congressional redistricting in the way that I think Senator Ferguson fears,” former Attorney General Brian Frosh said in an interview last month.

Amid the uproar, congressional Democrats set their sights on Ferguson. Jeffries, who would become speaker if his party retakes the House, called Ferguson multiple times to make the case that the time was right for a partisan gerrymander. Days later, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released a poll showing a majority of Maryland voters did not just support redistricting, but “are likely to support primary candidates that support Maryland redistricting by wide margins,” according to an accompanying memo from Change Research. Former Majority Leader Rep. Steny Hoyer and Judiciary Committee ranking member Rep. Jamie Raskin — a former state senator who served alongside Ferguson for six years — issued a public letter on Nov. 10 calling it an “ethical moral and political imperative” that state lawmakers break with the Senate president.

Moore, too, began ramping up pressure on Ferguson. He formed a Governor’s Redistricting Advisory Commission that holds virtual meetings with residents to solicit recommendations to the governor and the General Assembly on whether to move forward with redistricting. At the first meeting, Ferguson — the only member of the panel who has publicly opposed Moore’s plan — was seen nodding in solidarity with members of the public imploring the commission to stand down on redrawing lines.

Moore also launched a “Leave No One Behind” legislative slate, something akin to a political action committee that those around the governor suggest he may use to launch primary challenges to incumbent Democratic lawmakers. (Moore’s office declined a request to interview him for this article.)

If anything, the public pressure seems to be hardening Ferguson’s hesitation about redistricting into full-blown resistance. In late October, a week after speaking with Jeffries, Ferguson issued a memo to his Senate caucus laying out his biggest fear about moving forward: that his party could end up losing up to two seats if more aggressive maps were struck down and ordered redrawn by the courts. The “certainty” of the current map, he wrote, “evaporates the moment we start down the path or redistricting mid-cycle.”

“The legal risks are too high, the timeline for action is dangerous and the downside risk to Democrats is catastrophic,” Ferguson wrote.

Some of the Democrats in Ferguson’s caucus have begun to internalize his arguments. Nick Charles, whose senate district covers Prince George’s County, a wealthy majority Black suburb outside of Washington, said his constituents want lawmakers to join the national fight, but soften when they learn of the potential risks.

“What happens if we take that position?” asked Charles. “On the surface, it looks good, like ‘Man, we look like we’re fighting.’ But it’s like bringing a knife to a gunfight.”

Still other Democrats are growing more confident in their depictions of Ferguson as timid and naïve.

“I think President Ferguson … is an awesome public servant, very thoughtful guy, and certainly intends well,” said Baltimore city Councilman Mark Conway, who last month announced he would challenge Rep. Kweisi Mfume for not doing enough to confront Trump. Conway sides with Moore on redistricting and is disappointed by Ferguson for not jumping into the brawl. “I just think we’re looking at a new day and maybe some of the toughest times we’ve ever had as a country in light of the willingness of Republicans to do whatever it takes to secure power.”

Ferguson has already drawn his own primary challenge from social-media influencer Bobby LaPin — a charter-boat captain and political novice known to 90,000 followers on Instagram as the “Sail Local Guy” — who has said the Senate president’s resistance to redrawing maps pushed him to run.

Those close to Ferguson say he knows the intricacies of keeping his caucus together and brushes off the outside pressure campaign as political distractions. Ferguson had closely watched developments in Indiana, where Republican legislative leaders for weeks held off pressure from the White House and the state’s governor to take up redistricting, and had taken solace in their successful defiance. But those leaders reversed course and will begin a special session this week.

Maryland’s commission will end its work in December, which Moore could use as a basis to call a special session to take on the redistricting question. Otherwise, Moore could hold off until mid-January, when lawmakers return for their regular 90-day session. That would leave little wiggle room to move maps through the legislature, and limited time to survive likely legal challenges before the state’s all-important June primaries.

Each option carries political risks for Moore. Ferguson has the power to essentially ignore the governor’s desires by convening a special session and then quickly adjourning before a vote on redistricting. If Moore waits to focus his pressure campaign in January, Ferguson could respond by otherwise working to stymie the governor’s agenda at a moment he is hoping to elevate his national profile, including by overriding Moore’s veto of the reparations bill.

“It’s not going to be a good session for him, at least not starting,” a legislative aide, granted anonymity to speak candidly of Ferguson’s calculations, said of the governor. “He’s not going to get shit through — not a confirmation, not a thing.”

While Moore may feel urgency to join Democrats’ redistricting bonanza in time to shape the midterm elections, that time crunch is of little relevance to Ferguson. The Senate president is half a decade into his role leading the Maryland Senate — a blip compared to a predecessor who held it for more than three decades — and Ferguson expects to be still toiling away in Annapolis well beyond 2028.

Moore’s “only way out of the box that he’s built for himself is to either change Bill’s mind, which doesn’t seem likely … or it’s doing something that Wes has never done before in his life, and literally take out another politician — a sitting Maryland Senate president,” said Doug Mayer, a Republican strategist who worked for Hogan. “Bill Ferguson lives here, Wes Moore is just staying here. That’s why Bill Ferguson is saying no to this.”

​Politics

Former Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes launched his bid to replace retiring Gov. Tony Evers on Tuesday, joining an already crowded and competitive Democratic primary.

Barnes, who lost a 2022 Senate race against Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), focused on affordability and attacked Republicans in his launch video, arguing that it “seems like the harder you work, the more Washington looks the other way — lower taxes for billionaires, higher prices for working people.”

“Under Trump, the name of the game has been distraction and chaos to avoid accountability,” Barnes said. “It isn’t about left or right, it isn’t about who can yell the loudest. It’s about whether people can afford to live in the state they call home.”

But Barnes’ entrance is not expected to clear the primary field, like it did in his 2022 Senate primary, several Wisconsin Democrats said. A half-dozen Democrats are already vying to replace Evers, including Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley, Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez, state Rep. Francesca Hong, state Sen. Kelda Roys and attorney Missy Hughes. Evers over the summer announced he wouldn’t run for a third term.

A Marquette University poll, conducted in October, showed a wide-open race with 81 percent of Democrats who hadn’t decided who to back in the August primary. Crowley clocked in with the most name recognition, with 26 percent, followed by Rodriguez at 25 percent and Hong at 22 percent. The poll didn’t survey Barnes’ name, as he hadn’t entered the race yet.

Republicans also face a primary, where President Donald Trump has not weighed in yet with an endorsement. Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wis.) and Washington County Executive Josh Schoemann, are both running.

​Politics

Democrats are charting a path back to power in the House as Republicans falter heading into the midterms. But first they have to contend with more than a dozen primaries across the country that are exposing deep ideological divisions within their ranks.

Democrats will undergo grueling intraparty battles across the country, from purple seats with retiring incumbents to battleground districts where they hope to go on offense to safe blue seats where the primary will all but decide the eventual winner. In one case, interest groups are squaring off against each other in a central California district amplifying party divides.

Animating these races are factional, ideological and demographic divides that have been brewing for years in a party that’s become more of a vehicle for opposition than one with a proactive message. Now the splits are peaking just as Democrats, buoyed by this month’s off-cycle election sweep, feel more optimistic about regaining control over the House, which would require a net gain of three seats. They also see a path — albeit much steeper — to retake the Senate.

Republicans — who have a long history of intense House primaries — face a far more relaxed environment next year, allowing their candidates to stockpile cash while hotly contested Democratic races consume valuable resources.

Democrats have long been grappling with a younger faction hankering to take on the establishment that is pushing policies and tactics that agitate mainstream politicians who believe their methods will yield general election victories. And the generational divides opened by Joe Biden’s decision to step off the presidential ticket in the face of immense internal pressure last year still ripple throughout the party.

Some Democrats are already growing concerned about the number of primaries their party is contending with.

“The beauty of a democracy is that anyone can run. But sometimes the disaster of a democracy is, they do,” said Rep. Mike Thompson, who faces a primary from a younger Democrat for his California seat. “We need to be focused. We need to be making sure that we’re looking at taking back the majority, not fighting amongst ourselves.”

Some Democrats say the growing enthusiasm among newcomers to run for office signals a positive future for the party as it continues to grapple with its vast losses last year.

“No matter the primary dynamic, Democrats are united in our common mission to get a Congress that stops catering to the billionaires, and instead focuses on the needs of hardworking families struggling to get by under Republican rule,” Viet Shelton, spokesperson for House Democrats’ campaign arm, said in a statement.

Others believe that contested primaries will help rebuild the party’s frayed relationship with its voters.  

“We have a trust problem,” said Rep. Becca Balint (D-Vt.). “We have to make the case to people that we are not just fighting for them for the sake of fighting, but we’re fighting for them because we have the empathy to understand the real day-to-day struggles.”

Here’s a look at some of the hottest primaries unfolding around the country:

The open seats 

Arizona’s 1st District was a top target for Democrats even before Republican incumbent David Schweikert decided to run for governor. Now a pair of repeat candidates are splitting groups that spend heavily in primaries.

Marlene Galan-Woods has the backing of EMILYs List and BOLD PAC, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus’ campaign arm, while Amish Shah has support from AAPI Victory Fund and ASPIRE PAC, which both support Asian-American candidates. Democratic groups continue to recruit more candidates for the race, according to two people granted anonymity to discuss private plans.

A similar dynamic is playing out in Nebraska’s blue-leaning 2nd District, where GOP Rep. Don Bacon has decided not to run for reelection. BOLD PAC and EMILYs List have lined up behind Denise Powell, while the Congressional Progressive Caucus is with state Sen. John Cavanaugh for the Omaha seat.

The mudslinging has begun between the opposing camps, with some corners of the party privately expressing concerns about Cavanaugh’s fundraising and that his voting record and fundraising could make him vulnerable to GOP attacks in a general election.

After Rep. Jared Golden (D-Maine) abruptly retired earlier this month, Democrats have been quickly forced to regroup in a district President Donald Trump carried by 9 points last year.

Former Gov. Paul LePage has staved off any serious primary on the Republican side, while Democrats are contending with a fight between one-time Golden challenger Matt Dunlap and former Senate candidate Jordan Wood, who switched to the open district following Golden’s announcement.

Democrats in the area are still recruiting, but it’s an uphill fight. One gubernatorial candidate, former state Senate President Troy Jackson had expressed interest in a bid but ultimately decided against it. Penobscot Nation Chief Kirk Francis is also considering a run, according to an ally, but Francis has not spoken publicly about the race.

Whoever enters the race needs to act quickly. Wood has carried over cash from his well-funded Senate bid, and Dunlap has a head start over others in the progressive lane thinking about jumping in.

The pickup opportunities 

Democrats angling to pick off Rep. Ryan Mackenzie in Pennsylvania’s 7th District are working against each other in a messy five-way primary. The Lehigh Valley seat has flipped between parties four times in the past two decades and was one of the closest House races in the country last year when Mackenzie won it for the GOP.

Firefighter union head Bob Brooks has earned a raft of endorsements from across the party spectrum — from progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) to Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. Austin Davis and a host of unions. Carol Obando-Derstine has the backing of the district’s last Democratic representative, moderate Susan Wild, whom Mackenzie unseated in 2024, as well as EMILYs List and BOLD PAC.

They’ve both been outraised by Ryan Crosswell, a former Republican who resigned from the Department of Justice following Trump’s demand that the agency drop its corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. He’s drawn support from VoteVets and New Politics, which back veterans running for office.

Gov. Josh Shapiro could tip the scales — the popular Democratic governor is expected to follow Davis in backing Brooks.

Democrats also face a primary headache in California’s San Joaquin Valley for the seat held by GOP Rep. David Valadao. The seat became bluer under the state’s new voter-approved map, but it has still swung between the parties in recent years. Visalia school board trustee Randy Villegas has backing from the party’s left wing, including from Sanders, the Progressive Caucus PAC and BOLD PAC. But Assemblywoman Jasmeet Bains has rolled out a large slate of endorsements from sitting state and federal lawmakers as well as organized labor and groups like EMILYs List.

“Election Night 2025 was a clean sweep for EMILYs List women and made clear that the path to flipping the House in 2026 runs through electing bold women leaders,” EMILYs List President Jessica Mackler said in a statement.

There’s even quiet handwringing happening in western Montana over a brewing primary for the seat held by GOP Rep Ryan Zinke. Democrats are bullish on flipping a seat Trump won by nearly a dozen points last year, but party leaders are raising private concerns about the past lobbying work on sanctuary cities and transgender issues done by smoke jumper Sam Forstag, who is considering whether to enter the three-person race.

The comeback bid 

If the national redistricting fight continues, it could further shake up at least one primary field.

Virginia’s 2nd Congressional District has flipped between parties four times over the past two decades and could be made bluer by Virginia Democrats in a redraw. Former Rep. Elaine Luria is trying to mount a comeback bid, but Navy reservist James Osyf is already in the race and has posted healthy fundraising totals.

“We’re in the process of redistricting, and everyone expects the 2nd to be significantly different,” said Rep. Bobby Scott (D-Va.), who represents a neighboring district.

​Politics

Donald Trump is going to war with Democrats over the military. It could backfire on him.

The president’s attacks on six Democrats who recorded a video encouraging military members to buck unlawful orders are elevating members of a faction that just delivered big off-year wins for their party. Most hail from swing states or districts, identify as centrists and are leveraging their national security backgrounds to argue that Democrats can retake the patriotic lane.

Trump is also boosting some potential 2028 presidential hopefuls, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly and Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin, while further undercutting the GOP’s attempts to make New York progressives like Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez the face of the Democratic Party.

“Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump are providing Mark Kelly with the kind of visibility that almost no amount of money could buy,” said Barrett Marson, an Arizona-based Republican strategist, referring to the Defense secretary who ordered an investigation of Kelly. “Every 2028 contender wishes they could be attacked like this by the Trump administration.”

Since Trump accused the six of “sedition” and even suggested they could be executed, they’ve racked up millions of views on social media, done the cable news circuit and blasted out fundraising appeals highlighting the attacks.

It’s heightened the stature of even those who have already been the subject of speculation about their 2028 aspirations. Kelly, who was on the short list to be Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate last year, has already visited a raft of early primary and general-election battleground states this year. But only after Trump’s attack was he invited on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” this week.

In recent months, Slotkin has been testing what she calls a “war plan” to “contain and defeat Donald Trump” in speeches outside of her state, meeting with low-propensity voters and theorizing about what she calls “Project 2029.” Now she’s brought those themes to a series of interviews and public appearances over the past week.

As Democrats debate how far to lean into themes of patriotism more often claimed by conservatives, a group of lawmakers organized by Slotkin released a video with anti-authoritarian themes ahead of the “No Kings” protests last month. A follow-up video last week called on troops not to obey unlawful orders, prompting Trump’s explosion.

The president posted on social media they were committing “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL” by suggesting military members ignore their chain of command and shared a post calling for traitors to be hanged. The White House later denied Trump was threatening the lawmakers with death. Since then, the Pentagon has opened an investigation into Kelly, who is a retired Navy captain, and the six lawmakers claim the FBI has made inquiries through congressional authorities.

Democrats, particularly those with military backgrounds, have leapt to their colleagues’ defense, echoing their message about following the law and accusing Trump of weaponizing the government against his political opponents.

“Trump knows that we’re a threat” to Republicans’ grip on Washington, said Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.), a military veteran whose Serve America PAC supports several of the Democrats in the video. “These are great leaders who can take the fight to Trump and MAGA.”

“It’s classic Trump — he ratchets everything up to an 11 and it blows up in his face,” said Austin Cook, a Democratic strategist and former Slotkin spokesperson. “Not only did it reinforce everything swing voters have always hated about him, but it’s also given this group the biggest megaphone they’ve ever had.”

But Tim Edson, a GOP strategist and former political director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, said the video will only confirm the GOP base’s preconceived, negative views of Democratic officials.

“Republicans believe these Democrats are deranged with hatred of Trump, and it’s just their latest attempt to undermine lawful policies simply because they’re Trump’s policies,” Edson said. “These embarrassing antics only rally Republicans to the president.”

Some Democrats think it’s too early to tell how things will shake out for the “seditious six,” as some Trump officials are calling the lawmakers.

“Whether it works or not will depend on what comes next, if an illegal order actually does come down they get to be leaders saying ‘I told you so,’” texted one strategist who has consulted for Democratic veterans and was granted anonymity to speak candidly. “If one doesn’t, they’ve simply made themselves victims to Trump’s latest attacks. Most Democrats fail at playing on his turf.”

Kelly doubled down on the video’s message during his talk-show appearance Tuesday night and noted some of his Republican colleagues are expressing support: “People are starting to take a look at this and saying, ‘Wow, this is just nuts that he’s going after U.S. senators and members of the House for something they said.’”

​Politics

Speaker Mike Johnson is expected to huddle via conference call with Indiana House Republicans this weekend ahead of their upcoming state House session to redraw congressional maps, according to two people familiar with the planning and an invitation viewed by POLITICO.

The meeting, ahead of next week’s session, represents an escalation of Johnson’s involvement in mid-cycle redistricting, a process driven by the White House: He has routinely said it’s an issue for individual states and one in which he has no direct involvement.

House Republicans are expected to talk with Johnson on a conference call at 1 p.m. Saturday before convening on Dec. 1.

A spokesperson for Johnson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

POLITICO reported last week that Johnson called GOP Indiana Senate President Pro Tempore Rodric Bray last Wednesday, after Bray, whose caucus has largely resisted redistricting, said Senate Republicans would not convene to advance new maps.

In the call, Johnson expressed the importance of holding Republicans’ thin majority in the House ahead of the midterms, according to Bray. Indiana Republicans are weighing redrawing the 1st and 7th congressional districts, potentially yielding Johnson two additional seats.

But earlier this week, Bray reversed course, saying his caucus would make a final decision on redistricting when they are expected to reconvene on Dec. 8.

Multiple Indiana Republicans close to the process, and granted anonymity by POLITICO to discuss a matter that has resulted in personal threats to their safety, said they believe the Senate is still a handful of votes away from having support for the matter.

​Politics