There were proposals in 2026 to create new congressional district maps for 2028. Notice how the “new” CD-2 would have included Boulder and much of northwestern Colorado.

At its simplest, passing Amendment 86 (formerly known as Initiative 256) would prevent new Congressional district maps for Colorado to be implemented for the 2028 election “or thereafter,” unless they’re approved by the Colorado Independent Redistricting Commission and Colorado Supreme Court.

Amendment 86 is a proposed amendment to the Colorado Constitution, and would require 55% of the vote to pass. It’s a 14-page initiative, available to read in full at this link, but the only section that really would functionally change anything is two sentences long.

Short Story Intro

Typically, every state goes through congressional redistricting about every 10 years, usually right after the U.S. Census is done. This is very largely to attempt creating districts in very close to even population numbers, but there can also be partisan political considerations since control of the U.S. House of Representatives is at stake. Again typically, states have almost always left the new maps in place for 10 years until the next census, when population might change and states need to re-adjust districts once again.

But in mid-2025, the State of Texas decided to pursue a new “mid-decade” redistricting, with the clear intent of creating more Congressional districts likely to elect Republicans. Then, in the November 2025 election, State of California voters passed a ballot measure to allow their own redistricting, expected to be favorable to Democrats. Since then, a number of other states have considered or adopting mid-decade redistricting plans of their own.

Colorado considered entering the redistricting wars, and a nonprofit group called Coloradans for a Level Playing Field proposed a number of initiatives (#s 239, 240, 241, 242, and 328), and passing one or more of them would have probably been favorable to Democrats in 2028. These proposals included new district boundaries and map descriptions, and some people believed it would be possible under these new maps for Democrats to have advantages in up to 7 of Colorado’s 8 districts. However, the courts ruled that the proposals as written violated the state’s single-subject rule, and they were not allowed to go forward in 2026.

But before the court decisions came down, designated representatives associated with the conservative organization Advance Colorado had already submitted Initiatives 251 and 256, both of which would have prevented Colorado from doing mid-decade redistricting without approval from the commission and courts. Groups often draft multiple initiatives only to settle on just one of them, and Initiative 256 was certified for the 2026 ballot, which is now known as Amendment 86. Of all the redistricting initiatives drafted for 2026, only Amendment 86 will be on the ballot.

What Would Amendment 86 Do?

Colorado voters approved creating the Colorado Independent Redistricting Commission by passing Amendments Y and Z in 2018, in part to remove responsibility for redistricting from the state legislature. State legislatures across the nation typically have partisan majorities, and these partisan majorities quite often try to redistrict for partisan advantage. The new Colorado Commission is made up of 4 Democrats, 4 Republicans, and 4 Unaffiliated members – in theory a make-up less prone to redistricting to create partisan advantages.

There is a sort of technical and an easy way to understand exactly what Amendment 86 would do if passed. Technically, the initiative would repeal the Constitutional language voters approved in 2018, now found in Article V, Section 44, and replace this language with what’s in Amendment 86 text.

But for the easy part, almost all of what’s in Article V, Section 44 would remain unchanged if Amendment 86 passes – with one exception. (Editor’s note – I actually went through the initiative and the existing constitutional language to confirm this. It was fun.) Initiative 256 would add a new section 44-1.5, which is short enough to include in full here:

(1.5) UPON ADOPTION AND APPROVAL OF THE FINAL PLAN, NO PLAN MAY BE MODIFIED FOR THE 2028 CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION OR THEREAFTER EXCEPT WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE CONGRESSIONAL COMMISSION AND ADOPTION BY THE COLORADO SUPREME COURT. IN REVIEWING THE PLAN, THE COMMISSION MUST HOLD AT LEAST THREE PUBLIC MEETINGS AND MUST NOT ADOPT ANY PLAN THAT HAS THE EFFECT OF DIVIDING COMMUNITIES OF INTEREST OR PURPOSEFULLY FAVORING ONE POLITICAL PARTY.

In fairly plain English, this new section would prevent new district maps in 2028 or beyond unless they’re approved by the Colorado Independent Redistricting Commission and the state Supreme Court.

Amendment 86 Pro:

  • Voters passed the ballot measure to create the Independent Redistricting Commission, and that’s the mechanism Colorado should use to do redistricting.
  • Colorado might be considered a “light blue” state, not really “deep blue,” and some people don’t think it would be fair if Democrats suddenly got something like a 7-1 advantage in its House delegation.

Amendment 86 Con:

  • The U.S. House is of national interest, and passing Amendment 86 would prevent Colorado from adjusting in its own interest if national groups try to seize control of the House – like what’s clearly happening with mid-decade redistricting in other states.
  • Certain other states do have congressional delegation compositions that disproportionately favor one party or the other, relative to their actual voter registration statistics. If Colorado made new districts to favor Democrats, it might just counterbalance what’s happening in some of the other states.

Proponent Committees:

There are two formal committees established to support Amendment 86: Fair Redistricting Colorado, and A Brighter Colorado.

  • Fair Redistricting Colorado has received $252,500 in total donations, almost all of it from Alexandria, Virginia-based American Revival PAC, which per OpenSecrets.org and other sources is a leadership PAC associated with U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. Advance Colorado has also contributed $2,500.
  • A Brighter Colorado is supporting 86, but also Amendments 81, 82, and 85, and Propositions 132 and 136. It’s received $2,612,150.00 in total contributions, including a non-itemized report from Oct. 6 of $2,305,525.00, $250,000 from McLean, Virginia-based Common Sense America, and $100,000 from Colorado Dawn.

Opponent Committees:

  • As of early October, the Secretary of State’s website did not have an official committee listed in opposition to Amendment 86.

Links to More Information:

Richard’s Take

I’ll vote NO on Amendment 86 with 100% certainty, but not with 100% complete condemnation. High 90s though, probably.

I hate to frame it this way, but when kids get into a fight on the playground, one of them might tell the principal “but he started it!” And in the case of mid-decade redistricting, our current President and Republicans in the State of Texas started it. Texas redistricting was said to be an effort to get five new Republican seats in the U.S. House, at a time when the partisan balance is currently fairly close, and this balance seriously matters at this point in history.

Democrats really had no choice but to respond, and since it doesn’t seem illegal to do mid-decade redistricting, there had to be a little fighting fire with fire. California passed its ballot measure to redistrict in favor of Democrats and hopefully cancel out Texas, but a bunch of other states also put forth various measures with various levels of success.

If I had even the tiniest thought that Amendment 86 wasn’t drafted by conservatives in order to prevent Democratic-favoring redistricting in our “blue state” of Colorado, I might morally agree with it. Even as a Democrat, I don’t want a 7-1 advantage unless there’s a gigantic popular swing away from Republicans, partially because I understand the conservative partisan leanings of some other parts of the state. I will guarantee with every fiber of my being that folks in Moffat County don’t want to be in a Boulder-dominated district.

Colorado voters put the Independent Redistricting Commission in our Constitution for good reason, even if for some folks it’s too Pollyanna for their tastes. Partisan gerrymandering or mid-district redistricting is really nothing but Partisan Politicians attempting to Perpetuate or Protect their own Power (I’ll call it the PPPPP for now).

Back in around 2018, the year that our Independent Redistricting Commission came into being, both Republicans and Democrats had their own proposals to take redistricting out of the hands of partisan politicians. Chuck Berry once wrote a song called “Too Much Monkey Business,” but to keep it short, believe me when I say actual monkey business ain’t nothing compared to partisan redistricting. I’ve seen it up close and personal.

Still, it made sense for one side of the PPPPPs to propose something like Amendment 86, because in the case of today’s Colorado it would in practice prevent Democrats from fighting back when some Republicans in America are clearly playing dirty pool. And gee, I just learned that a PAC associated with Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson of Louisiana is putting money into this measure – and I can’t for the life of me imagine why! Pick your artistic license catch phrase – Democrats would have to “fight with both hands tied behind their backs” comes to mind. Just vote no. For the time being, Amendment 86 would amount to a new dirty pool rule on top of a really dirty game of dirty pool.

But beyond 2026, if at some point the nationwide redistricting dust clears, we need some real safeguards to keep our Congressional district structure even close to honest. There have been bills in Congress to prevent mid-decade redistricting, but of course they wouldn’t pass with Republican control of Congress, and we ought to assume Trump or whoever is President from 2027-29 would veto them if they didn’t favor Republicans. Some people say a new system of proportional representation might eliminate gerrymandering altogether – it’s not my preference because I appreciate representation based on unique preferences of a geographic area, but I see the point.

But this current mid-decade redistricting episode is in my opinion among the worst episodes I’ve ever seen in decades of following American politics. I’m disgusted, to put it extremely mildly, and we need honest solutions or we don’t deserve to call ourselves a republic any longer.