Here Are Some Ballot Measures to Watch on Tuesday

You’re reading The TNR Blue Book. Get daily scoops, strategy, and developments inside the liberal ideas factory delivered right to your inbox. Sign up for free.

Inside Washington

As votes roll in throughout Election Day, most eyes will be on the balance of the House and Senate. But in some states, voters will be directly deciding on some of the biggest political questions of the decade—including how to run a modern democracy. Ballot initiatives in some states could reduce voters’ rights and power. In others, voters have the chance to enshrine those rights and reject partisan gerrymandering.

“Amid rising authoritarianism, the fight for democracy is also happening through ballot initiatives,” said Chris Melody Fields Figueredo, the executive director of the Ballot Initiative Strategy Center. “This year, we’re seeing more attacks from politicians on voters’ rights,” agreed Hannah Ledford, the deputy executive director at the Fairness Project. “And voters are having to defend those rights at the ballot box more than ever really, in an election.”

Six states are considering voter ID rules, some of which mirror President Donald Trump’s SAVE America Act. Ohio and North Carolina already require identification at the polls, but ballot measures would put that in the states’ constitutions. Nevada, too, is trying to amend its constitution to require photo ID to vote. Arizona has a measure requiring those voting by mail-in ballot to somehow show ID. Even in blue California and Colorado, voters will consider similar measures. Experts say that voter ID laws end up suppressing the votes of Black voters, students, and Native voters, while failing to actually address election fraud (which is exceedingly rare).

In North Dakota, South Dakota, and Utah, voters will decide on measures that would make it harder to pass constitutional amendments in the future. Experts say that could remove a key source of power for voters by making it harder for them to practice direct democracy. In recent years, voters have used ballot initiatives to enact progressive policies like raising the minimum wage or protecting abortion rights—to the chagrin of conservative legislators. “Politicians that are really upset with the progress that voters have made in their backyard, trying to take direct democracy back, they are trying to make it harder to use and harder to pass things at the ballot box,” Ledford said.

Some ballot initiatives, though, give voters the opportunity to enshrine their rights. Missouri’s Amendment 6 would require 80 percent support in both legislative chambers and another statewide vote to change laws approved by voters or enact laws that voters rejected by referendum. That’s crucially important in a state where voters have approved progressive multiple ballot initiatives that the Republican legislature has then altered or outright reversed. “Voters in Missouri just two years ago passed the right to reproductive freedom at the ballot box. The legislature is trying to take it away and install a near-total abortion ban in the state, and voters are going to decide tomorrow whether or not politicians overreached,” Ledford said. Similar things have happened with paid sick leave and raising the minimum wage.

Missouri will also be voting on gerrymandering—specifically, via Proposition A, the redrawn 2025 map that the Supreme Court blocked for this election. “Voters in Missouri, it feels like we are in a battle with our elected officials to have our voices heard, and it’s really frustrating,” said Richard von Glahn, the executive director of People Not Politicians, about the gerrymandered maps. He’s hopeful that voters will reject the Republican maps and, through Amendment 6, will block Republican legislators from reconsidering the maps next year. “Missourians were so angry about seeing our elections really just rigged like this,” he said, “that we actually gathered about three times as many signatures as was needed” to get Prop A on the ballot. “Voters are really indicating that they should be the central focus of our democracy and the ultimate power brokers.”

These battles, which could shape the state of U.S. politics for years to come, will be playing out not just through voting rights and gerrymandering measures, but also through ballot initiatives that address abortion and trans rights. Fields suggests watching these initiatives to get a preview of future strategies to restrict bodily autonomy for women and LGBTQ individuals. “I do think ’26 is a testing ground,” she said, “for what conservatives may go full throttle [on] in 2028.”

—Emma Janssen

Outside Washington

Democrat Josh Turek’s race against Republican Ashley Hinson in Iowa could decide the balance of the Senate. On Monday, the Des Moines Register’s Stephen Gruber-Miller reported on the Republican National Committee’s self-described all-out attempt to sway the outcome. Among the efforts: The RNC and the Hinson campaign have executed the first “coordinated ad buy”—which a Supreme Court ruling made possible this summer—worth $5 million. It’s not the only last-ditch Republican attempt to win the state, but this one sounds a little more organized than President Donald Trump’s off-script remarks at a rally in Dubuque over the weekend, wherein he inexplicably went on a tangent about Hinson’s weight loss. The last New York Times/Siena poll had Turek up by one point, which was well within the margin of error.

Elsewhere:

On Monday, supermarket chains in multiple European countries reported that their cold storage systems had been targeted in a cyberattack overnight, with temps rising as high as 122 degrees, rendering the food unusable. A similar attack occurred in France last month, and the latest cold storage failure in Europe arrived days after Reuters reported, based on anonymous sources, that the Pentagon is treating cold storage failures that happened on military bases in August as a cyberattack, as well. It’s hard to overstate how crucial networks of cold storage facilities (known as the “cold chain”) are to both food and medicine supply chains in the present world—both domestically and for international trade.

Media outlets and experts alike were already facing a difficult balancing act on the topic of threat preparedness. But then last week, news on three separate but related fronts raised further alarms: Pete Hegseth’s “FORTRESS America” initiative instructing U.S. military bases to prepare for 90 days without grid power, former Trump FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino’s call for nationwide household prepping, and the British government’s new “Be Ready” campaign urging people to stock up on canned goods and emergency radios. Combined, those caused a fair amount of anxiety in certain circles. “The line between giving people solid, grounded, actionable information and stirring panic is incredibly fine,” Texas A&M professor Angela Clendenin told Fox Baltimore when asked about Bongino’s remarks in particular. But, properly executed, “preparedness avoids panic,” she added. Several experts, both in the Fox Baltimore piece and in a Guardian piece published on Monday, noted that the U.S. has long recommended that people keep several days’ worth of supplies on hand—and that Trump-era cuts to federal emergency management, along with everything else, have made this an even better idea. 

—Heather Souvaine Horn

The Ideas Factory

In a new report titled “Tracking the Return on Investment of Trump’s Backers,” the Center for American Progress’s Devon Ombers, Ryan Koronowski, and Will Ragland estimate that more than 75 “individuals and entities” have donated almost $1.7 billion to Trump’s pet projects, and in return, they “have reaped or will reap benefits conservatively estimated at approximately $183 billion.”

A new report from Arnav Rao at Open Markets Institute warns that robotaxis could “extend Big Tech’s monopoly power from the digital world into the physical world, putting the future of American transportation under the control of just a few, already-dominant corporations.” Instead of fixating on whether driverless cars are safe, Rao argues, policymakers should be looking at, for example, breaking up vertically integrated monopolies and ensuring that regulators have the tools that they need for this new landscape.

—Heather Souvaine Horn

In Closing

Four Questions For: Tim Grieve, editor in chief of The Washington Sun 

Q: Who are you, and what are you working on right now? 

A: I’m the editor in chief of The Washington Sun, the news publication formerly known as NOTUS. And here’s a sentence you won’t hear a lot in journalism: I spend most of my time hiring. We dove in when The Washington Post pulled back—expanding our coverage of political Washington and adding coverage of local news and sports. We’re the fastest-growing newsroom in D.C., and maybe the world: We started 2026 with 45 journalists. We’re at 110 today, and we’re just getting started. 

Q: The Washington Sun is launching at a time of layoffs, consolidation, and growing billionaire control of the media. What does a news organization have to do differently to build something durable in this environment? 

A: Hire the best people, be disciplined about what you do, and find a revenue model to support it. No problem, right? 

Q: Washington reporting can be a breed of its own, with its fixation on access, insiders, and the daily churn of politics. What does the D.C. press corps understand well, and where does it still have blind spots? 

A: Not surprisingly, the D.C. press corp understands … D.C. We’ll find out this week how well we understand the rest of the country. 

Q: What do people outside Washington misunderstand about the way journalism works here? 

A: Way too many people think that journalists just make stuff up. There have definitely been a few famous fabulists in journalism history. But I’ve worked in this business off and on for more than 40 years, and I can’t think of a single time one of my colleagues made up a story or fabricated a quote, a source, or a fact. Do we get things wrong sometimes? Sure. But journalists at reputable news organizations try very, very hard to get it right.

Interview by Indigo Olivier

Political Trivia Question of the Day  

You’ve undoubtedly heard over the course of the campaign that Kansas last elected a Democrat to the Senate in 1932. But how many Democrats has the state sent to the Senate in its entire history, going back to 1861? (Sign up for The TNR Blue Book to find the answer in tomorrow’s newsletter.)

—Michael Tomasky

You’re reading The TNR Blue Book. Get daily scoops, strategy, and developments inside the liberal ideas factory delivered right to your inbox. Sign up for free.

Inside Washington

What if the polls are wrong?

With four days until the election, Democrats terrified of another disappointment are focused on one big question: Are the polls right?  

Most polls show Democrats winning the House and, potentially, the Senate—a possibility that seemed improbable even a few months ago. A new CNN poll on Thursday, for example, showed Abdul El-Sayed and James Talarico in strong positions. But the most critical toss-up Senate races are so tight that even a polling error of a few percentage points could shift the outcome from Democratic control to two more years of Republican leadership. FiftyPlusOne modeled how the election would look if polling misses matched those in the 2018 and 2022 midterms, or instead matched 2016, 2020, and 2024—presidential election years when Trump was on the ballot. “The polling errors have been much larger in presidential years than non-presidential years,” explained Guy Molyneux, a Democratic pollster and partner at Hart Research. 

If polling averages are off by roughly the same margins that they were in the Trump election years, seats like Michigan and Ohio—critical pickups for Democrats this year—could fall to Republicans. Senator Susan Collins could win Maine by nearly four points, and Senator Dan Sullivan could take Alaska by five. In that case, Republicans could keep the Senate. But if this midterm looks more like other midterms in terms of poll error, Democrats might even be able to pick up seats in red states like Iowa and Kansas.

Molyneux says he’s inclined to believe that this year’s polls will be closer in accuracy to the 2018 and 2022 polls, which would be good news for Democrats’ prospects. Most election-watchers predict that Democrats will take the House, but nobody is sure whether it will be a blue wave or a blue tsunami. If polling is roughly correct, Democrats could take 238 seats (218 seats is a majority), NBC News estimates. But Dems could potentially pick up some 260 seats or win as few as 220. That’s a majority, but a narrow one.

Polls aren’t the only data points people can use to understand the election, stressed Simon Rosenberg, a Democratic strategist. He sees hints of a Democratic advantage everywhere: “We’ve seen it in the candidate fundraising data, where our candidates have raised way more money than their candidates have, which is a far better indication of intensity than the checkbooks of ten oligarchs,” he said—referring to Democrats’ advantage with grassroots donors and Republicans’ advantage with super PAC money funneled from ultrawealthy donors like Elon Musk. Rosenberg also pointed to the fact that Republicans are campaigning in states like Mississippi, South Carolina, Kansas, and Nebraska—areas that ordinarily shouldn’t pose a problem for Republicans. “There’s a lot of inputs here. It’s not just, you know, a handful of New York Times polls in the last few weeks,” he said. 

Early voting data also suggests that Democrats are in a strong position. As of Thursday, 43 million Americans have already voted, according to the University of Florida’s Election Lab. Hispanic voters have turned out in higher numbers than they did at the same times in 2022 and 2024, which could be a promising trend for Democrats and help candidates like James Talarico in Texas. (Though Hispanic and Latino voters helped Trump win in 2024, some polls have found that only 24 percent of Latino registered voters approve of Trump’s handling of his job, down from 38 percent at the start of his second term.)

In the final stretch before Election Day, experts stress that voters should view polls as part of a larger picture, rather than overinterpreting any one number (remember J Ann Selzer’s Iowa poll in 2024, which predicted that Vice President Kamala Harris could win Iowa but was 16 points off?). “Both for accuracy and emotional health, I would urge people to focus mainly on the averages, and not the either scary or hopeful news of the day,” said Molyneux. 

Though Rosenberg doesn’t like polling averages, he also recommends looking at multiple polls instead of just one, and trying to find a way to live in the uncertainty. “There’s far less certainty in the data that [voters are] being presented than you assume based on how certain it looks when on television you see a graph that has two numbers,” he said. “It’s only a snapshot in time.”

—Emma Janssen

Outside Washington

Last-minute polls are rolling in, along with last-minute attack ads. CNN’s latest poll, published on Thursday, has James Talarico leading Ken Paxton in Texas (49–43), Abdul El-Sayed leading Mike Rogers in Michigan (49–42), and neck-and-neck races in Maine and Kansas. While Troy Jackson and Adam Hamilton appear to be leading their Republican opponents 49–45 on paper, there’s a margin of error of 4.5 percentage points. 

Attack ads in Maine—as in other states—are getting increasingly ugly in the final stretch. Republican Senator Susan Collins last week disavowed a new Republican super PAC ad featuring a song about Jackson that goes: “If he’ll screw his own family, he’ll screw yours too.” But as Jackson’s campaign has pointed out, Politico’s Jonathan Martin asked Collins in a video interview last month whether Jackson’s personal life was “fair game,” and she replied, “Well, I’m not going to bring up the fact that the mother of his two children is his second cousin. I don’t know whether people know that or not.” 

Meanwhile, in Texas, a super PAC largely funded by Elon Musk recently ran an ad with evangelical influencer Miriam Evans, saying, “Every mom in Texas should be concerned about James Talarico.” The ad (falsely) claims Talarico supports gender-affirming surgeries for minors and jail time for parents who object. In another one of the group’s ads, Tarrant County Sheriff Bill Waybourn opens: “Folks, I’m going to ask you: Where has James Talarico been?” After a pause in which viewers may wonder whether Waybourn’s about to bust the candidate’s alibi in a multiple homicide investigation on Law and Order, Waybourn proceeds to say that Talarico has “been in Austin standing with and donating to a radical group that wants to defund the police”—an apparent reference to Talarico appearing on a video call organized by Texas progressive youth group Texas Rising six years ago. In his own last election in 2024, Waybourn drew scrutiny for the number of people who had died in county custody since he took office in 2017—65 deaths, as compared to 25 in the prior eight-year period—along with a lack of independent investigations as required by law. As of October 18, the number of deaths in Tarrant County Jail during Waybourn’s tenure has increased to 79.

Elsewhere:

• Is it time for Democrats to forgive Ralph Nader for the 2000 election and recognize that he was right about a lot of stuff? The Guardian’s Heather Timmons examines the case, speaking not just with Nader but a variety of think tankers and others on the left, including Robert Weissman of Public Citizen (which Nader co-founded), Lindsay Owens of Groundwork Collaborative, Barry Lynn of Open Markets Institute, and—surprise?—Matt Bennett of the moderate Dem group Third Way. Nader, Timmons reports, has recently “been dialing progressive candidates including Michigan’s Abdul El-Sayed and Maine’s Troy Jackson directly, to present his policy plan he thinks would guarantee their midterm success.”

—Heather Souvaine Horn

The Ideas Factory

Alasdair Phillips-Robins, Teddy Tawil, and Sam Winter-Levy penned an interesting report for the Carnegie Endowment of International Peace this week about “how middle powers can survive the AI race.” The fundamental problem, they write, is that the U.S. and China control most of the resources. Other countries, “fearful of missing out on the benefits of advanced AI while still bearing the brunt of its harms, are scrambling to respond.” The right strategy for those governments will depend on both the speed of innovation and “the gap between the best systems and open-source or other cheap alternatives.” But “finding sources of leverage at supply chain chokepoints is valuable in almost every technological future.” Sounds … fun. (Warning: This report is unlikely to make you feel better about the AI-riddled future. But there are fancy graphics, if that’s your jam.)

The Natural Resources Defense Council has issued a statement on the Trump administration’s proposed rollback of methane leak rules. “Methane leaks are the dumbest kind of pollution because the industry is losing the very product it is selling,” David Doniger, a senior attorney and strategist at the NRDC, said in the organization’s press release. “These leaks are not just bad for the climate, they result in more smog and cancer-causing pollution for nearby communities.”

—Heather Souvaine Horn

In Closing

Good Week: Barack Obama

The former president has been making campaign stops as he does for Democrats every election—and is in fine form. His zingers and humor have gotten under Trump’s skin, galvanized Democrats, and made news in the usually slow days right before the end of the campaign. 

Bad Week: Darline Graham

Graham, who was appointed to be South Carolina’s senator earlier this year after her brother Lindsey—who previously held the seat—passed, has become the poster child for bad candidates. Other Republicans are blasting her as unqualified and such a terrible campaigner that she’s making it possible for Democrats to potentially win in a state where they almost never do. 

—Perry Bacon

Political Trivia Question of the Day  

When was the last time Louisiana was represented by two Democratic senators, and who were they? (Sign up for The TNR Blue Book to find the answer in tomorrow’s newsletter.)

—Michael Tomasky

You’re reading The TNR Blue Book. Get daily scoops, strategy, and developments inside the liberal ideas factory delivered right to your inbox. Sign up for free.

Inside Washington

Republican Mike Lawler and Democrat Cait Conley are in a dead heat for the race in New York’s 17th congressional district. Lawler is painting Conley as a radical socialist, while Conley is tying Lawler to President Donald Trump and MAGA. Only one of those strategies is rooted in fact, but either could wind up deciding a race that could, in turn, determine what the next Congress looks like. If Lawler wins, it could also set him up for a higher office, experts say.

Polls show a tight race, and the Cook Political Report lists the 17th as a “toss-up.” The district is one of the most centrist in the country—one of just three, nationwide, that voted for a Republican congressperson while also voting for Vice President Kamala Harris in 2024. The district’s Democratic lean has decreased over time, Lawler is quick to point out: President Joe Biden won it by 10 points in 2020, while Harris won it by less than one point.

“There’s not a minute in this campaign that we’ve ever thought that he would be easy to beat,” said Jennifer Colamonico, the chair of the Putnam County Democratic Party, about Lawler. In Putnam County, volunteers have knocked on four times the amount of doors than they knocked on in 2024, and Colamonico says that Republicans and independents have been more receptive than they were last cycle. She attributes that in part to Lawler’s association with Trump, who is deeply unpopular in the district and the country.

Experts agree that Lawler’s closeness to Trump—the president visited the district in May—could cost him the seat. “Lawler was originally able to wear the mantle of change when he beat the incumbent in 2022, but he now has been in office and is tied to an extremely unpopular president in a district that the president lost,” said Laura Tamman, a professor of political science at Pace University.

As Conley attempts to tie Lawler to Trump, especially by emphasizing his vote for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Lawler and his allies have tried to tie Conley to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

“There’s not a ton of evidence that Cait Conley, who served in the military and in the Biden administration, is super tight with Mamdani,” said Tamman. “Like, she’s not in the same city. She shares the same party, but she doesn’t have Mamdani out campaigning for her.”

The fact that neither Conley’s platform nor her past fit with the radical socialist attack makes no difference, Colamonico explained. “It doesn’t matter who we run,” she said. “They were going to come at us as being socialists and aligned with DSA and Mamdani.”

This narrative about Conley being a secret socialist has been boosted by money from Elon Musk’s super PAC, America PAC. Through that group, Musk has spent more than half a million dollars to boost Lawler. Colamonico has seen the influence of that money firsthand, describing floods of mailers that call Conley a socialist and canvassers dropping off door hangers with the same message.

While the narrative about Conley appears to be baseless, it could hurt her with the district’s Jewish population, experts said. Some of those voters are frustrated with the DSA’s position on Israel and could be inclined to vote for Lawler because of it, despite the fact that Conley doesn’t share the DSA’s positions on Israel. In Rockland County, specifically, there’s a large Orthodox Jewish population that experts say Lawler needs to back him. “It would be very difficult for him to win without them showing up enthusiastically for him,” Tamman said.

Despite the unfavorable environment for Republicans, Lawler could still pull off a win. If he does, then it could have even bigger implications in 2028 or beyond. “If Mike Lawler does survive this year, I think you’ll have a lot of talk of him being a statewide candidate in the future,” said Shawn Donahue, a professor of political science at the University at Buffalo who pointed to the potential for Lawler to run for Senator Chuck Schumer’s seat. Tamman suggested that he could seek the governorship. House Speaker Mike Johnson may have said it best on Tuesday while campaigning in the district with Lawler: “Everybody around America is watching this election. Everybody.”

—Emma Janssen

Outside Washington

Another thing potentially hinging on the outcome of next week’s elections: whether fire survivors are able to rebuild their homes. CalMatters’s Levi Sumagaysay this week reports on the status of survivors of the Los Angeles fires, an estimated 28 percent of whom have run out of so-called displacement coverage. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding for renters ran out on October 9, and the Trump administration so far hasn’t supported further FEMA funds being directed to California. “People are wondering if they have to live out of their cars and pull their kids out of school,” Altadena Tenants Union co-founder Katie Clark tells Sumagaysay. Democratic Representatives Norma Torres and Judy Chu tell Sumagaysay they’re hoping that if Democrats win big in the midterms, a newly Democratic House could help get money moving.

The Guardian’s Oliver Milman talks to residents of Southaven, Mississippi, who say that Elon Musk’s AI company xAI, which is currently constructing a massive data center complex with an on-site power plant, has offered to buy their homes “as the owners agree to not join a lawsuit against the company over the power plant’s noise.” Come for the window into data center politics, stay for the spicy quotes from a paramedic, a piano teacher, and other residents who are more or less telling the company to take their offer and shove it.

—Heather Souvaine Horn

The Ideas Factory

On Thursday at 1 p.m., the Urban Institute will host a “virtual workshop exploring how local leaders can foster dignity and belonging in their communities—and why these conditions are essential to advancing upward mobility.” Speakers will include the institute’s Myriam Hernandez Jennings and Isabella Remor, as well as Ricki Ellison of the Greater Wichita Partnership and Marshall Ogier of Seeding Success.

On Thursday at 3 p.m., the Brookings Institution and the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) will co-host an event on how to modernize the Current Population Survey (CPS), which is the basis for calculating the unemployment rate. One possible reform to be discussed: a way to add an online component instead of relying on in-person and phone interviews, which are increasingly struggling with non-response rates. Speakers will include the Census Bureau’s CPS Director Kyra Linse, Nicholas Johnson from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Tom Evans from the U.K.’s Office for National Statistics, New York Fed economic research advisor Wilbert van der Klaauw, Michigan Federal Statistical Research Data Center co-director Joelle Abramowitz, OpenAI economics researcher Alex Martin Richmond, University of Maryland professor Katharine Abraham, and Georgetown University professor Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach. Brookings’s David S. Johnson and John Sabelhaus and AEI’s Michael R. Strain will moderate.

—Heather Souvaine Horn

In Closing

Here’s Why That’s B.S.

TNR’s Edie Olmsted reviews the troubling allegation in House Dems’ new report: former Miss Switzerland Beatrice Keul saying Donald Trump raped her in 1993 when she was a contestant at his American Dream Pageant in New York.

Political Trivia Question of the Day  

Though it’s been Republican for many years now, when Alaska became a state in 1959, its first two senators were both Democrats. The name of one is mostly lost to history. The other, however, made a name for himself as an early and vocal opponent of the Vietnam War and was one of only two Democrats to vote against the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which the Johnson administration pushed to authorize U.S. intervention. Can you name either man? (Sign up for The TNR Blue Book to find the answer in tomorrow’s newsletter.)

—Michael Tomasky

You’re reading The TNR Blue Book. Get daily scoops, strategy, and developments inside the liberal ideas factory delivered right to your inbox. Sign up for free.

Inside Washington

When Republicans set out to redistrict in the middle of the decade, they thought they were all but ensuring more seats in the House. But, one week before the midterm elections, many of Republicans’ tailor-made districts are looking vulnerable.

Texas was the first state to redistrict in 2025 under pressure from the White House, kicking off a nationwide flurry of gerrymandering in red and blue states alike. Across the country in the past year, Republican-controlled state legislatures have drawn maps that increased their advantage in 16 districts, with five of those districts in Texas and four in Florida. Those two states are epicenters of the Republican gerrymandering effort. But, according to polling and ratings from the Cook Political Report, only one of those nine districts is projected to be a sure Republican win next week, and the others will be competitive.

When Florida and Texas first unveiled their new maps, critics immediately noted that the districts appeared to be drawn based on race. They argued that Republicans carved up Black and Latino districts to dilute the political power of those voters. A federal court ruled that Texas’s gerrymandering was, in fact, illegally racially based, but the Supreme Court sided with the state and allowed the new maps to stand.

This race-based gerrymandering now appears to be backfiring. Republicans, explained Tom Bonier, senior adviser at political data firm TargetSmart, were “counting on levels of support from Hispanic voters that at least came close to Trump’s 2024 levels of support.” But now it appears “that calculation is going to be very much incorrect.”

Early voting numbers and polling suggest that Latino voters are reversing their 2024 support for Republicans and turning out to vote for Democrats, at least in part because of the Trump administration’s devastating crackdown on immigrants. Gerrymandering may have exacerbated the problem. “It should have been expected that people are going to be very unhappy with the Republican strategy of undermining political power of African Americans and Latinos,” said Kareem Crayton, vice president of the Brennan Center’s Washington, D.C., office.

In addition to nationwide trends favoring Democrats this year—frustration with the president and Republicans broadly, as well as affordability concerns—young professionals are moving to states like Texas and Florida from more expensive areas, like California. The newcomers are subtly shifting districts’ demographics.

“Some people have looked at this and they’ve used the term ‘dummymander’ to suggest that Republicans have really shot themselves in the foot with these maps,” Bonier said. “I think that misses the truth, at least somewhat.” Even though these districts are more competitive than Republicans originally hoped, the new maps ultimately still make races easier for them to win and have forced Democrats to spend more than they might have to defend their incumbents.

Here are nine districts to watch on election night to gauge the success of gerrymandering in Florida and Texas:

FL-9
In this Central Florida district, Democratic Representative Darren Soto is running against Navy reservist Dan Green. Polling shows an even race, and the Cook Political Report rates the race as “likely D.”

FL-14
Trump won this Tampa Bay-area district by 11 points in 2024, but the race is now rated as a “toss-up” by the Cook Political Report. Democratic Representative Kathy Castor, who is leading in polls, is hoping to defend her seat from Republican Mike Beltran.

FL-25
Democratic Representative Jared Moskowitz is facing Republican Scott Singer in this South Florida district. Polls give mixed messages, but the Cook Political Report moved the race from “toss-up” to “lean D” in mid-October.

FL-22
Democrat Pia Dandiya is up against Republican Casey Askar. Limited polling shows a tight race, with a small advantage for Dandiya. The race is considered a “toss-up.”

TX-32
A lack of polling makes this race hard to judge, but a Harvard-ElectIt forecast gives Democrat Dan Barrios only a 20 percent chance of beating Republican Jace Yarbrough.

TX-9
The Cook Political Report considers this race “likely R” after a leftward shift from “solid R” in late September. Polls show Republican Alex Mealer ahead of Democrat Leticia Gutierrez.

TX-35
Another toss-up race, and this one could be anyone’s game. Polls show Democrat Johnny Garcia neck-and-neck with his GOP opponent, Carlos De La Cruz.

TX-28
Democratic Representative Henry Cuellar has held this seat for 11 terms, and recent polls suggest he’ll win another against Republican Tano Tijerina. Last week, the Cook Political Report shifted the race from “lean D” to “likely D.”

TX-34
Democratic Representative Vicente Gonzales is facing former federal prosecutor Eric Flores in this race, which recently moved left from “toss-up” to “lean D.” Polls suggest Gonzalez is in the lead.

—Emma Janssen

Outside Washington

A quarter of American adults experienced medical debt last year, either for themselves or a family member, the Ohio Capital Journal reports this week, based on a study from the Urban Institute. Hospital visits were the biggest reported source of that debt, closely followed by bills to specialist doctors (41.5 percent).

This finding comes as medical debt—and medical debt to specialists in particular—continues to roil the unexpectedly competitive Kansas Senate race between Republican incumbent Roger Marshall and Democrat Adam Hamilton. A quick recap: The New York Times reported last month that Marshall, formerly an ob-gyn, sued more than 700 of his patients over past-due medical bills, and, per the Times story, “routinely charged patients an 18 percent annual interest rate.” Hamilton’s campaign subsequently ran an ad featuring a woman who said she was eight months pregnant when she was arrested in front of her two-year-old daughter for missing a $50 payment to Marshall’s office. Marshall’s lawyers then sent a cease-and-desist letter to the Hamilton campaign, alleging defamation, and during a debate last week, Marshall called the allegations “blatant lies”: “This particular patient actually had legal issues in three different counties, she had missed 16 court dates, and I’m sorry about that. We did everything possible to keep them from going to collections. It was a very, very rare situation, but once it was turned over, it was the same process that KU Med Center would do, Via Christi in Wichita. Once we turned them into collections, it was out of our hands.” Hamilton’s camp stood by the ad and has run additional ads featuring doctors and another former patient attacking Marshall over the issue.

A GOP PAC returned fire last week by running an ad accusing the church that Hamilton leads of covering up child sex abuse allegations at a church camp. Kansas City Star reporter Matthew Kelly, reviewing court records, dubbed the claim “misleading,” noting that the church “conducted an internal investigation that court records show was inconclusive” and then reported the issue to local law enforcement after another accuser came forward.

Elsewhere:

• Against the backdrop of this year’s cyclospora outbreak, a Washington Post investigation finds that the Food and Drug Administration “rarely inspects the foreign facilities exporting the vast majority of fresh produce to the United States” and has only inspected 7.6 percent of all facilities exporting to the United States since 2009. The past two decades have seen a huge growth in the percentage of American-consumed produce sourced from abroad, the Post’s Caitlin Gilbert and Rachel Roubein report. Meanwhile, “though foreign food inspection numbers were already low, they dipped even further in early 2025. Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency cut FDA coordinators who arranged investigators’ foreign travel, though some were later rehired.”

—Heather Souvaine Horn

The Ideas Factory

At noon on Wednesday, New America will host a conversation between Peter Bergen and security and foreign policy researcher Amy J. Nelson about Nelson’s new book, The Arms Control Paradox: Managing Uncertainty in an Insecure World.

In case you missed it: Data for Progress this week published poll results in which significantly more voters identifying as disabled (45 percent) reported being “very stressed financially” than voters who did not identify as disabled (25 percent). Thirty-two percent of disabled voters “rate[d] their community’s economic conditions as poor,” while only 19 percent of nondisabled voters said the same.

—Heather Souvaine Horn

In Closing

Book of the Week: The Rush: California Gold, the Civil War, and the Making of the Modern World
By Nathaniel Philbrick

THE GIST: Philbrick, the author of Mayflower and In the Heart of the Sea, explains how the California Gold Rush helped lead to the Civil War and how its culture of opportunity and greed—and history of booms and busts—is still felt in today’s Silicon Valley.

PRAISE: Popular historian deans Jon Meacham, Doris Kearns Goodwin, and Ken Burns have all penned blurbs praising this book. But Erik Larson captured it best: “In The Rush, Nathaniel Philbrick takes the old maxim ‘follow the money’ to an engaging and revelatory extreme,” the author of Devil in the White City writes. “Through an intricate skein of little-known stories, he shows how the discovery of gold in California drove tectonic shifts in the way Americans thought about wealth, and about each other—and in the process fueled the Civil War and today’s mad rush toward who knows what.”

CRUISING THE INDEX: This is a sweeping history with a colorful cast of characters both familiar (John C. Fremont, William T. Sherman) and obscure (like David C. Broderick, the sharp-elbowed anti-slavery Democrat who was killed in a duel with the scandal-plagued California Supreme Court Chief Justice David S. Terry). But its value comes from looking where others rarely do: at the discrimination and violence faced by early Chilean and Mexican miners; at the machinations of pro-slavery Southerners who went West; and at how the possibility of extraordinary, quick wealth provoked a frenzy.

TNR’S QUICK CRITICAL ASSESSMENT: The Rush puts the Gold Rush—and with it, California—in context, which is to say into the context of American history itself. For Philbrick, the state was not some far-off place where a few men made their fortunes (and, in many cases, quickly squandered them) and many more struggled. It was a state intimately connected to the divisions—racial, ethnic, and economic—that define the United States to this day. Philbrick, the author of Mayflower and In the Heart of the Sea, explains how the California Gold Rush helped lead to the Civil War and how its culture of opportunity and greed—and history of booms and busts—is still felt in today’s Silicon Valley.

—Alex Shephard

Political Trivia Question of the Day  

What state has had the most female governors? (Sign up for The TNR Blue Book to find the answer in tomorrow’s newsletter.)

—Michael Tomasky

You’re reading The TNR Blue Book. Get daily scoops, strategy, and developments inside the liberal ideas factory delivered right to your inbox. Sign up for free.

Inside Washington

Here’s what’s missing from the affordability discussion

In a midterm season focused on affordability, one big thing is being sidelined in campaign rhetoric: actual poverty. Crushing budget cuts kicked in this month, with government numbers now showing that more than five million Americans have already lost their SNAP benefits due to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or OBBBA, changes taking effect. More could follow. But compared to fuel prices, SNAP remains a backburner issue for many Democrats. Advocates working on hunger policy say that has to change.

“It’s frankly scary to think about how bad it could get if our leaders don’t listen to constituents and take action,” said Anne Filipic, CEO of Share Our Strength, a hunger relief organization. In the country as a whole, SNAP participation has fallen by 13 percent since the OBBBA, also known as H.R. 1, was signed in July 2025. That pencils out to around 5.5 million people, including two million children, who lost their benefits. Some states have been hit harder than others. In Arizona, the number of people enrolled in SNAP was slashed in half.  

In Alabama, more than 97,000 residents lost their SNAP benefits between January 2025 and August 2026. That number, explained LaTrell Clifford Wood, a hunger policy advocate at Alabama Arise, “is enough to fill the football stadium, the Jordan-Hare Stadium, at Auburn University.” Alabama is one of many states that doesn’t have extra space in its budget to account for increased costs, and it has already had to make funding changes to keep its program up and running.

Despite the acuteness of the SNAP cuts, they’ve only become a headline issue for the 2026 midterms in a few key races. In California’s 22nd congressional district, for example, progressive Randy Villegas is challenging incumbent Republican Representative David Valadao, who voted for the OBBBA. In the Central Valley district, one in four families rely on food assistance. In the state, 300,000 people have already lost their benefits since the bill was signed. “Like so many people in the Central Valley, I grew up in a working-class family where we relied on programs like WIC, SNAP, and Medi-Cal to get by,” Villegas wrote in a statement to The New Republic. “These very same programs are now at risk because David Valadao voted to cut them to give tax breaks to billionaires.”

In Kansas last week, Senate candidates Adam Hamilton and Senator Roger Marshall sparred over SNAP cuts during their debate. “As he laments the SNAP benefits, he’s managed to cut SNAP benefits for thousands of children across the state of Kansas,” Hamilton said during the debate. “Apparently, our sitting senator is not ashamed of letting kids go hungry.”

While SNAP in particular hasn’t gotten a lot of airtime, the cost of groceries for all Americans has been a major talking point in the midterms. Lawmakers and advocates are increasingly trying to tie SNAP cuts to the broader food affordability crisis. Last week, Senator Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins outlining what she calls the “food misery index.” According to analysis from Warren’s office, the combination of inflated grocery prices and SNAP cuts has cost Americans $22 billion since OBBBA was signed. 

Meanwhile, the anti-hunger community is looking ahead to the day after the election, and setting demands for lawmakers. “Certainly, we’re aiming for a repeal of H.R. 1,” Filipic said. “But [we’re] also looking at some more immediate steps that can be taken. In particular, delaying the cost-sharing provision.”

That provision is set to start in October 2027 and would shift more SNAP costs to states based on their error rates—a measure of how accurately benefits were sent out to recipients. That change would force states to pay millions more on SNAP than they ever have, which could be downright impossible for states with the tightest budgets. This, in turn, could cause millions more to lose their benefits. The states with the highest error rates were granted a two-year delay before the cost shift kicks in, and advocates want every state to receive the same delay.

“Democratic leadership like Mr. Schumer, Mr. Jeffries, need to know that this is a priority,” said Gina Plata-Nino, SNAP director at the Food Research & Action Center. “We hear them talking quite a lot about health care, which is super important. We don’t necessarily hear them talking about SNAP.”

—Emma Janssen

Outside Washington

Last-minute get-out-and-vote operations are in full swing. Kansas Reflector reporter Tim Carpenter spoke to Becca Peck of Overland Park, Kansas, who has knocked on an astonishing 4,627 doors in Johnson County and plans to keep going in the final week before the election. “Normally in the midterms, I will get a lot of people that say, ‘I’m not voting this year.’ This year, everybody’s voting,” Peck said. Carpenter noted that the numbers somewhat support this impression. As of the end of last week, 73,000 registered Democrats, 20,000 registered independents, and 60,000 registered Republicans had voted early or by mail. The total of 154,000 early ballots cast is considerably ahead of where that number was at the same point in the 2022 (119,000) and 2018 (92,000) midterms. Kansas’s Senate race has gotten unexpectedly competitive this year, with Democrat Adam Hamilton tied with or even a couple points ahead of Republican incumbent Roger Marshall in recent polls. 

“They are not crazy. They’re not making it up,” Urban Institute fellow Gregory Acs told Stateline’s Kevin Hardy, discussing new research that suggests 49 percent of families are now struggling with basic living expenses due to price increases. The increasing gap between voters’ views of the economy and the economic indicators (GDP, unemployment) that politicians typically rely on has been the topic of a lot of debate recently—spurring the use of the rather dismissive term “vibecession” to describe consumer pessimism. But this new research, Acs said, shows that people are “not being marketed into feeling bad. They really do have struggles.”

—Heather Souvaine Horn

The Ideas Factory

On Tuesday at 10 a.m., the Brookings Institution will host an online discussion about the complexities of college pricing, specifically “how families can navigate these decisions to choose a college that is a fit not only academically but also financially, and what changes are needed to improve the process.” Speakers will include Sarah Reber, Phillip Levine, Christina Lopez, and Ron Lieber.

On Wednesday at 1 p.m., the Center for American Progress will host an online discussion about policy approaches to the challenges that small businesses are facing. In addition to the usual problems of navigating economic upheaval, or tax advantages that disproportionately accrue to larger players, “an estimated 6 million business owned by Baby Boomers are expected to need to transition ownership by 2035 as their owners retire, raising urgent questions about how to ensure successful business transitions and preserve the local businesses that communities depend on.” Speakers will include Virginia Representative Don Beyer, Terri-Nichelle Bradley, Kathleen DeLaney Thomas, Gina Schaefer, Anne Zimmerman, and Michael Negron. 

—Heather Souvaine Horn

In Closing

Four Questions For: Manny Pastreich, President of 32BJ SEIU, headquartered in New York City

Q: Who are you, and what are you working on right now?

A: I’m the president of 32BJ SEIU, the largest property service workers union in the country. Right now, we are running campaigns across the East Coast to get pro-labor candidates elected and flip the House—we have more than eight competitive House races just in our coverage areas. This past week, hundreds of 32BJ members knocked on doors and made phone calls. At the same time, we are preparing for what happens if the administration doesn’t honor the will of the voters. 

Q: What is the most difficult thing about your line of work?

A: Facing large employers and a hostile federal administration, we’ve had to look for creative solutions on the state and local level to give workers a voice on their jobs and in the ballot box. Currently, we are bargaining contracts for 70,000 Uber/Lyft drivers, thousands of security officers, and over 10,000 airport workers, who are all trying to achieve the wages and benefits they need to not just live but to thrive. The majority of our union members are immigrants, so the impacts of the administration’s cruel attacks on Temporary Protected Status designations and immigrants generally is destabilizing for our members, their families, and our communities.

Q: What was your biggest success in the last year or two?

A: In addition to the industry-leading contracts we have won for cleaners and residential workers, we have opened the door for Uber and Lyft drivers to have a union. The union of 70,000 drivers will provide a powerful voice and path forward for so many more who are deemed to be independent contractors without many of the protections so many of us take for granted.

Q: What keeps you going in these stressful times?

A: On Saturday, I was with 300 SEIU members ready to knock doors in New Jersey in D-7. The energy was amazing. Our members know we have the power to win at the bargaining table, win in politics, and work toward a vision of a better society. They motivate me every hour of every day. I am truly lucky to have that in times like these.

Interview by Monica Potts

Political Trivia Question of the Day  

You may be old enough to remember the wave elections of 2006, 2010, and 2018. But when was the biggest wave midterm election in U.S. history, when the opposition party picked up a mind-bending 110 seats? Hint: It was a very long time ago, and it was the Republican Party that gained. (Sign up for The TNR Blue Book to find the answer in tomorrow’s newsletter.)

—Michael Tomasky