This article is part of TPM Cafe, TPM’s home for opinion and news analysis.
When Texas Republicans announced plans for a mid-decade gerrymander to net them at least five more U.S. House seats, it set off a chain reaction. Texas Democrats left the state to break quorum. Democratic governors began discussing countermeasures. And former Attorney General Eric Holder, chair of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, reversed course after a decade of vocal opposition to partisan redistricting and called for Democrats to embrace gerrymandering in blue states, at least temporarily.
The immediate headline is about redistricting. But the more significant story is the growing willingness of blue states to use power more forcefully in an era of declining federal reliability and rising authoritarian threat. If gerrymandering is now back on the table, then the real opportunity lies in something broader: a more serious and strategic approach to wielding blue state power.
Gerrymandering is one tool — controversial, and of uncertain consequence — but it points to a larger truth: states are powerful. For decades, progressive politics has been ambivalent, even resistant, to using that power assertively. But if state leaders are finally ready to wield it, we need more than tactical redistricting. We need a deliberate and coordinated strategy to use state authority to defend democracy, shift national dynamics, serve communities, and re-engage the electorate.
In the aftermath of the 2024 election, a consistent theme that emerged was that too many voters on the left sat out. Fear and warnings weren’t enough. What’s needed now is a clear, values-driven demonstration of public interest governance — of leaders fighting visibly and unapologetically for us and for democracy.
This is a break-the-glass moment. So let’s talk about all the glass available, not just congressional maps.
State governments possess an extraordinary range of tools that can be deployed in bold, coordinated ways. And power can be pooled across states for even greater impact. Conservatives are masterful at this. Just recently, 26 right-wing state financial officers signed a joint letter to BlackRock, urging the firm to abandon environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing principles or risk losing state business. And following Trump’s Executive Order last week directing banking regulators to stop “debanking” conservative-led or aligned firms or industries like crypto, the same group issued coordinated support. Such coordinated actions are routine in the tightly-knit conservative governance ecosystem.
Progressive state leaders can also coordinate responses — not as retaliation, but as a legitimate exercise of public power in response to federal dysfunction. The purpose should not be to punish the people living in red states, but to protect democratic institutions, safeguard communities, and improve people’s lives. In the short term, states can do much to counter the unraveling of protective federal programs and unchecked federal overreach. Many of these tools are already in use, though rarely presented as part of a broader strategic vision.
For instance, states can enter into memoranda of understanding and interstate compacts to harmonize policy, share resources, and strengthen their collective power. Although interstate compacts may seem obscure, they’re commonplace: more than 250 exist today, and states participate in an average of 25 each. States can also use their collective purchasing power to influence corporate behavior and shift markets. And large states like California — the world’s fourth-largest economy — can enter international agreements on climate, trade, and human rights, forging alliances that bypass federal paralysis.
States can go further. Maryland and New York are proposing legislation to withhold federal taxes remittances from state employees while the federal government remains in arrears on pledged funding. New York legislators are considering revoking state tax credits for Avelo Airlines, which contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation flights — offering a model for leveraging state incentives to pressure federal contractors that defy public values. State attorneys general investigate extremist networks operating within their jurisdictions, and coordinate with counterparts in other states to scale those efforts.
Legislatures also have powerful oversight functions that can surface abuses and create visibility. Even in red states, lawmakers can demand access to detention facilities and sue when denied, as Florida lawmakers did after Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration blocked their oversight of Alligator Alcatraz. Legislators in multiple states could organize joint hearings to investigate federal overreach and misconduct, as well as right-wing influence operations.
Some states are also refusing to cooperate with ICE, as Delaware did when it became the seventh state to pass legislation prohibiting local collaboration with federal immigration enforcement. Others, including California, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New York, and Michigan, are advancing “No Secret Police” bills to unmask federal agents operating anonymously in communities. In Boston this week, more than 20 state legislators from across the country held a joint press conference to highlight these efforts.
States can also limit military cooperation. Vermont’s Republican governor recently declined a federal request for National Guard deployment. Washington has barred out-of-state Guard units from entering without explicit permission. States can reject politically-motivated Justice Department requests for voter data and protect sensitive state-held records from federal misuse. Illinois is protecting autism-related health data, while New Mexico and Washington are refusing to share SNAP benefit records.
These actions are already underway, but often in isolation, with little coordination or public visibility. That’s a missed opportunity. These efforts rarely make national news or come together into a story the public can recognize: a story of state leaders using every tool at their disposal to protect rights, lives, and the future we all deserve.
Wielding state power in a sophisticated, multi-pronged response to federal disintegration and anti-democratic threat may not flip the House map before 2026. But it does something equally important — it creates a visible, coherent story of urgency and public leadership. It demonstrates capability, and a willingness to act. It helps rebuild trust and energy among voters who have grown disillusioned or disengaged. It builds capacity and strengthens the collective muscle of state-level governance. And it inspires civic engagement, from neighborhood organizing to voter turnout.
If we’re serious about confronting the threats facing American democracy, then it’s time to fully embrace blue state power. Not as a fallback, not to punish the people of red states, but as the confident exercise of power in the public interest — to make people’s lives better. Now is not the time to shy away from the power we have. Now is the time to wring it dry.
Gaby Goldstein is Founder + President of State Futures, which supports communities of practice for state policymakers. Through working groups, policy research, and strategic support, State Futures empowers state leaders to learn from each other, innovate together, and take coordinated action across states.
