The Redistricting Story Nashville Isn't Telling You
Both sides are arguing about lines on a map. Almost no one is asking the question underneath them.
Their argument, fairly: Tennessee Republicans called a special session to redraw congressional lines mid-decade, splitting Memphis to dilute Black voting power and lock in another GOP seat — a power grab that goes beyond normal partisan map-drawing into a deliberate erasure of competitive elections.
Phillips writes well. Her core complaint — that mid-decade redistricting in a state that just ran a clean census-cycle map looks opportunistic — lands a punch that anyone honest has to absorb. Mid-cycle map fights are rare for a reason: they invite exactly the kind of cynicism she's expressing.
But somewhere between her lede and her conclusion, the column quietly substitutes a slogan for an argument. "All-red at any cost" is a great headline. It's also a thesis that requires you not to look at the boring parts of the story — the parts where this gets more complicated than the morality play the Scene is staging for its readers this week.
Questions to ask yourself
- If a Democratic supermajority redrew lines mid-decade in Illinois or New York to pick up a seat — and they have — would the Scene call it "at any cost"? (Illinois Democrats did it in 2021. The Scene didn't run an op-ed about it.)
- What does Tennessee's congressional delegation look like compared to its statewide vote share? In the last cycle, Republicans won roughly 64% of the statewide congressional vote. They currently hold 8 of 9 seats — already 89%. Is "more lopsided" really the most pressing problem here?
- Memphis has been carved up before — most recently in 2022 — without a Voting Rights Act case successfully overturning the result. What changed legally that makes this map different from the last one?
- If competitive districts are the goal, who in Nashville is actually proposing them? Independent commissions exist in 8 states. Tennessee Democrats have not introduced legislation to create one. Why not?
What's correct, and what isn't
Mid-decade redistricting is unusual, and the optics are bad. Phillips is right that calling lawmakers back specifically to redraw a map already in use invites suspicion about motive. That's a fair criticism that deserves a fair answer from the legislature — and the GOP's "we're just rebalancing population" line doesn't fully provide one.
She is also right that splitting a majority-minority city's voting bloc raises legitimate Voting Rights Act questions. Those questions belong in court, and they will get there.
The piece treats Tennessee's situation as singular. It isn't. Mid-decade redraws have happened in blue states and red states alike over the past five years — Illinois, New York, North Carolina, Ohio. The Scene's coverage rarely mentions this, which leaves Nashville readers thinking Tennessee is uniquely cynical rather than participating in a national arms race that started long before this special session.
The column also doesn't engage with the actual statewide vote share, which is the data point that determines whether a map is "fair." You can call a 9-0 map gerrymandered. You cannot call it disproportionate to how Tennesseans vote.
"The honest argument isn't that Republicans are uniquely cynical. It's that the whole system is."
The counterpoint
Here is the version of this story that doesn't fit on a protest sign: redistricting is broken in every state where one party has total control, and that includes states the Scene admires. The reform that would actually fix it — independent commissions, like California and Michigan have — is not on the table in Nashville because neither party wants to give up the pen when they hold it. Democrats want it taken away from Republicans. Republicans want to keep it. Almost nobody is fighting to take it away from whoever holds it next.
That's the story Phillips' column doesn't tell. Not because she doesn't know it — she's a smart writer who's been on this beat for years — but because writing it would require treating her own side's redistricting habits as part of the same problem. The Scene's editorial voice has been remarkably consistent: when red states gerrymander, it is a crisis of democracy. When blue states do it, it is, at most, a strategic miscalculation.
A reader who only reads the Scene comes away thinking Tennessee Republicans invented partisan redistricting last week. A reader who reads more broadly knows this is a bipartisan racket that both sides defend when they're winning and condemn when they're losing. The middle-right view isn't that the GOP is right to redraw Memphis. It's that the outrage only shows up when the lines move in one direction, and that selective outrage is precisely what convinces voters that nothing in this fight is being argued in good faith.
If you're a Nashville voter who looks at this map and feels uneasy — good. You should. But the question to take into the next election isn't "which party will redraw the lines fairly." Neither will. The question is whether you'll vote for the handful of legislators in either party who are actually willing to give up that power, or whether you'll keep rewarding the ones who promise to use it on your behalf.
Ask your state rep one specific question
Whether you live in a Republican or Democratic district, email your state representative and ask: "Will you co-sponsor legislation creating an independent redistricting commission for Tennessee, modeled on Michigan's or California's?" If they say yes, hold them to it. If they say no, ask them to explain on the record why. Their answer tells you more about how seriously they take redistricting reform than any op-ed will. Find your rep at wapp.capitol.tn.gov/apps/findmylegislator.