As Indiana Senate begins redistricting turn, some Republicans keep mum

Indiana Statehouse (IL file photo)

About a quarter of Indiana Republican senators have not yet said how they’ll vote on a sweeping partisan redraw of the state’s congressional maps, teeing up an uncertain week for the proposal’s future.

The Senate will reconvene Monday afternoon to begin consideration of House Bill 1032, after reversing an earlier decision not to meet.

The redesign would likely eliminate Indiana’s two Democratic-held congressional districts to create a 9-0 Republican map ahead of the 2026 midterm election, as sought by President Donald Trump.

The House approved the redistricting bill Friday, as expected, on a vote of 57-41. Twelve Republicans joined all Democrats present in opposition.

But Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray has warned there are “not enough votes to move that idea forward.” He didn’t return multiple interview requests on how the proposal’s prospects may have changed in recent weeks.

Indiana’s Constitution requires a majority of the 50-member Senate to approve legislation. That means the 40-strong Republican supermajority must muster at least 26 votes to pass the bill if all 10 Democrats oppose. GOP Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith can break a 25-25 tie.

Sixteen Senate Republicans have publicly come out in favor of a redraw — some more enthusiastically than others. Another 14 are against.

The latest senator to indicate firm opposition is Sen. Mike Crider, R-Greenfield.

“I think the maps are pretty alarming, actually. So I was a no before, and I’m for sure a no now,” he told the Capital Chronicle. “I mean, I just think that if those maps pass, there’s a good possibility that three or four millionaires from Indianapolis will represent a third of the state, so I don’t know that that serves us well.”

In the current congressional maps, drawn in 2021, Republicans maintained a 7-2 GOP advantage. Democratic Rep. Frank Mrvan holds the 1st District in northwest Indiana, while Democratic Rep. André Carson holds the 7th District in Indianapolis.

The House Republican proposal would break up the Lake Michigan shoreline area into two districts and splinter Indianapolis across four far-reaching districts — three of which hit borders with other states.

“I can tell you, from experience, it’s kind of difficult to have totally urban areas and totally rural areas where the constituents are thinking and talking about completely different things,” Crider said.

“For instance, in Hancock County and Shelby County, they never talked about mass transit, and that’s what they wanted to talk about in Irvington. And so, I mean, it’s a stretch,” he said. “And then, if you take that stretch and magnify it from, you know, the south side of Indianapolis to the Ohio River, I’m not sure how that’s even workable. I guess I don’t know how you come up with the map that does that.”

The positions of 10 others remain unknown, even though the first Senate-side votes could be cast as early as Monday afternoon.

That’s when the Elections Committee is scheduled to hear the proposal — and from constituents.

Committee math

Sen. Mike Gaskill, R-Pendleton, promised to “foster a civil debate as we review this bill,” in a Friday statement. He chairs the nine-member committee and is the Senate sponsor of the House-originated legislation.

Gaskill, plus GOP Sens. Tyler Johnson of Leo and Daryl Schmitt of Jasper, support redistricting. But fellow Sen. Greg Walker of Columbus, who isn’t running for reelection, has come out against the idea.

Two committee Democrats are expected to vote in opposition, while three other Republicans are undecided or have declined to comment.

“I will be in the elections committee, so until I at least hear all the testimony I don’t like to have made my decision,” Rogers told the Capital Chronicle. She noted “there are so many ramifications on both sides.”

Sen. Greg Goode, R-Terre Haute, previously said he wanted to see the maps — which have since been released — before making a decision. Goode didn’t reply to multiple requests for comment on his stance.

Sen. Stacey Donato, R-Logansport, said, “I don’t have any comment for you at this time,” when reached by phone Wednesday.

If the redistricting bill advances from first reading in committee, it would head to the chamber floor for amendments on Wednesday. After it’s engrossed, the proposal would go up for a full Senate vote on Thursday.

‘Whatever happens, happens’

It’s unclear how the bill will fare outside the committee room, too.

Sen. Aaron Freeman, R-Indianapolis, said Wednesday that he had seen the maps but hadn’t yet read the details of the bill: “You’re not going to get me to commit to something that I haven’t read.”

But, he noted, the legislation goes beyond redrawing boundaries.

“I understand there’s, you know, dates in there and all the things of, you know, people can’t sue. I mean, there’s all kinds of things in there that are unrelated to a map that I have to review,” said Freeman, who is also an attorney. “So I’ll do so, and I’ll be ready to go.”

House Bill 1032 would prohibit seeking or granting temporary injunctions against it, and gives the Indiana Supreme Court “exclusive” jurisdiction over any appeal of an order promoting an injunction.

“That part, in particular, might be a little flag for them in terms of how (unsure senators) view this,” said Laura Merrifield Wilson, a political science professor at the University of Indianapolis.

Sen. Brian Buchanan — who spoke to the Capital Chronicle during a brief dally on the sidelines of a pro-redistricting rally at the Statehouse on Friday — declined to comment on his stance or announcement timeline.

Others didn’t reply to requests for comment, including:

• Republican Sens. Dan Dernulc of Highland and Rick Niemeyer of Lowell told the Capital Chronicle last month, during the ceremonial first day of the legislative session, that they wanted to see the maps before deciding. It’s unclear what they think of the released draft.
• Sen. Cyndi Carrasco, R-Indianapolis, said last month that she’d made a decision. When asked to share it, she replied, “Maybe later.”
• Sens. Ed Charbonneau of Valparaiso and Ryan Mishler of Mishawaka have been publicly noncommittal.

“We also, to my knowledge, have not heard more statements from some of the ‘question-mark’ senators,” Wilson, the professor, observed.

“I kind of wonder if … there’s been movement that we don’t know,” she said, like if senators are “not being forthright with the information of whether or not they have changed or made a decision.”

Wilson said that silence could set up a shock result, if “enough people silently vote in support, having never gone on the record … before.”

Or, it could go the other way. When asked Friday what’s next if the Senate rejects the redistricting bill, Huston told reporters: “Look, it’s been a long week. We’ll deal with it. Whatever happens, happens.”

Cranking up the pressure

Indiana Gov. Mike Braun, who appeared at the pro-redistricting rally on Friday, was more aggressive. He again threatened to support primary competition for fellow Republicans who oppose redistricting.

The bill’s failure in the Senate, he said, “means you’re gonna have to clean house to get real conservatives in.”

Braun first echoed Trump’s primary ultimatum last month, after the president posted that Braun “perhaps, is not working the way he should to get the necessary Votes” — and later, that he “must produce” on redistricting.

Rally attendees were repeatedly encouraged to contact their senators — including at stations upstairs by the Senate’s Republican and Democratic entrances. Constituents could leave handwritten messages there.

“I’m down here to break the one-party rule in Marion County,” said Lawrence Township resident Adam Harvey. “Currently, André Carson’s my congressman, and he doesn’t represent me at all.”

The rally drew a crowd of a couple hundred. Some traveled from further afield.

“The state is 60% Republican. We’ve got 80% of the House and the Senate. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t do this,” said Robert Hall, who drove about 90 miles from Mitchell.

Some redistricting opponents argue all-GOP congressional representation isn’t fair when Indiana has typically voted for Trump and others on a 60-40 split. But, Hall said, “What if each of those nine districts were 60-40? That’s what the state is.”

He, like numerous others, cited partisan redistricting efforts in Democratic-controlled states.

The pro-redistricting rally came days after hundreds of Hoosiers packed the Statehouse’s third floor to protest the redistricting plan. Their chants echoed throughout the building, audible even through the doors into the House chamber, as lawmakers plodded through proceedings.

Linda Butler of Lawrence in northeastern Marion County was among the protesters.

“They’re doing it so that they can win elections,” Butler said then, about Indiana Republicans. “It is terrible. I think it’s terrible. That’s an illustration for me that this is wrong.”

State police adjust Statehouse security

At least a dozen legislators, largely Senate Republicans, have publicly disclosed being targeted in swatting attempts, bomb threats and more — prompting an ongoing investigation now led by the Indiana State Police.

That number doesn’t include similar incidents involving local officials, such as Indianapolis City-County Councilor Nick Roberts, according to ISP spokesman Ron Galaviz.

The threats have varied but appear to share a common aim: triggering significant law enforcement responses.

In mid-November, GOP Sen. Andy Zay reported that a bomb threat was emailed to his family’s Huntington vehicle rental business, prompting officers to temporarily block off the area while they investigated.

The threat came shortly after a procedural vote on when the Senate would reconvene. Zay had voted to keep the chamber in session instead of returning in January, which was widely interpreted as support for coming back and addressing redistricting sooner.

“At this point, I’m voting for it,” he told the Capital Chronicle on Wednesday. But, he said, “I would like to see the maps change. … I’m hoping we can make them better” in the Senate.

Asked what edits he’d like to make, Zay quipped, “We don’t have enough time on this phone call.” He said the maps “changed a lot more dramatically than I thought they would.”

Several other lawmakers have also disclosed fake reports had been made to police about violent incidents at their homes — including what officials described as attempts at “swatting.”

Swatting typically involves someone falsely reporting an emergency, such as a shooting or hostage situation, in an effort to prompt an armed law enforcement response to an unsuspecting person’s home.

Although some incidents prompted only small responses — “maybe about a handful of officers,” Galaviz said of the first Terre Haute call to Goode’s residence — officials have stressed that the intent behind the calls appears consistent with swatting.

Galaviz said none of the recent episodes resulted in what police would consider a “large police response.” He emphasized that local agencies “are responding seriously,” while also taking “an extra moment of pause” because they know similar hoaxes are occurring across the state.

State police are routing all reports through the Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center as part of one overarching investigation.

Galaviz said ISP has not made any arrests and declined to discuss investigative specifics. But the work “can take some time.”

The “volume of reports” and the high-profile nature of the alleged targets require “thorough, accurate, deep-diving investigations” that could ultimately result in state or federal prosecutions, per Galaviz.

Security protocols at the Statehouse have been adjusted, too, although Galaviz declined to provide details. He said ISP is “well aware” of the ongoing threats and has updated plans ahead of lawmakers’ return to Indianapolis. Local law enforcement agencies may also have their own protective measures in place for targeted officials.

Galaviz urged the public to continue sending any relevant information to the Fusion Center and said ISP will release updates — particularly if an arrest is made — but won’t disclose details prematurely.

“We’re not going to jeopardize our case just because one of your subscribers wants to know,” he said. “It’ll come out sooner or later. We just want it to come out at the appropriate time.”

The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, nonprofit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.