Jefferson City, MO – In 2022, Senate Democrats secured a congressional redistricting map that protected both of their incumbent seats—despite the fact that Republicans controlled every statewide office and held super majorities in both chambers of the Missouri Legislature. This move followed a nationwide trend of Democrat-led gerrymandering aimed at maximizing their share of seats in Congress.
Senator Curtis Trent, then a State Representative for the 133rd District, stood firmly against the 6-2 map, calling it “ridiculous” and “a betrayal of the voters.”
“Missourians deserve better than to be used as bargaining chips to serve the political ambitions in this building,” Senator Trent said in a powerful May 2022 floor speech.
Trent was one of only 23 House Republicans who voted for an alternative map that would have likely sent 7 Republicans to Washington, D.C.
Standing with Trump: Time for a Special Session
President Donald Trump has recently called on red states like Missouri to redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 elections to better reflect conservative majorities. Senator Trent would fully support Governor Kehoe calling legislators back for a special session in 2025 to adopt a new 7-1 map.
“This is our chance to right the wrong of 2022 and deliver the map Missouri voters deserve,” said Trent. “I’m ready to lead that fight.”
Democrat States Are Playing Hardball—Missouri Must Respond
Across the country, Democrat-controlled states like California and Illinois have aggressively gerrymandered their congressional districts to eliminate Republican seats—often drawing maps that span multiple counties just to dilute GOP influence. Worse, these states inflate their population numbers using non-citizens, giving them disproportionate power in Congress.
“Democrats have spent decades rigging the map in their favor—even when it violates the spirit of fair representation,” said Trent. “Missouri doesn’t need to follow their example—but we should stop rewarding their tactics by voluntarily underrepresenting our own voters.”
Curtis Trent’s Leadership on Redistricting
- Voted YES on HCS HB 2117 (2022), a proposed 7-1 congressional map.
- Voted NO on the final 6-2 map.
- Delivered a House floor speech condemning the political games behind the 6-2 map.
- Continues to advocate for a special session to redraw Missouri’s map fairly and lawfully.
For reference, the 3:33 video of Senator Trent’s full May 2022 House floor speech can be viewed here. The transcript is included below.
About Senator Curtis Trent
Senator Curtis Trent, a Republican, serves as the Assistant Majority Floor Leader in the Missouri Senate, representing Barton, Dade, Webster, and part of Greene County (20th Senatorial District). He previously served six years in the Missouri House of Representatives and as Deputy Chief of Staff to Congressman Billy Long of Missouri’s 7th Congressional District. An attorney by profession, Senator Trent practices law in the areas of probate and estate planning.
In the Senate, he has made it his mission to limit the growth of government, support small businesses, and defend traditional family values. He is widely recognized as one of the most effective conservative voices in the Missouri Senate.
Raised on a small farm in southwest Missouri, Senator Trent graduated summa cum laude from Missouri State University with a degree in political science and a minor in history. He later earned his law degree from Saint Louis University School of Law and was admitted to the Missouri State Bar.
Senator Trent is an active member of the Church of Christ, where he has served as a song leader, prayer leader, and Bible teacher. He is also a member of the Sons of the American Revolution and participates in several community and civic organizations.
Transcript: Senator Trent’s 2022 Speech Against the 6-2 Redistricting Map
Speaker- “Gentleman from Greene.”
Representative Trent- “To speak on an amendment.”
Speaker- “Proceed.”
Representative Trent- “Thank you. Mr. Speaker, it’s been a very disappointing day here today. I suspect that this amendment will be the bill that we send across the rotunda. And Mr. Speaker, while it does make the bill slightly better, it’s still a far cry from where we should be.
Article Three, section 45 the Missouri Constitution states that the General Assembly shall, by law, divide the state into districts corresponding with the number of representatives to which it is entitled. Which districts shall be composed of contiguous territory, as compact and as nearly equal in population, as it may be three simple requirements, compact, contiguous, equal in population. Those aren’t political criteria, Mr. Speaker, they don’t say anything about which populations make it into a district. They don’t say anything about which person’s residence makes it into a district. They don’t say anything about which person’s political constituency makes it into a district. These should be pretty simple rules to follow, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, we didn’t get it right on the first try, or the second, or even the third.
I voted against the map that left this chamber months ago because of its obvious flaws, and I hear people wish that we had that map back, because the maps that have followed afterwards made that first terrible map look great in comparison. Unfortunately, we’re here now, Mr. Speaker, with this ridiculous and likely unconstitutional map the product of a series of Milan back-room deals performed outside of the regular order, because everyone controlling this process seems to be afraid of going to conference and losing control. And I say seems to be because I can’t read minds, Mr. Speaker, but I can observe actions. And let’s recount the actions that we have observed here.
I’ve observed counties which it makes no sense to divide be divided. I’ve observed counties that should have been split, kept whole. I’ve observed population centers important to people with control of the process be protected and placed into specific districts. And most indignant, most loathsome Mr. Speaker, I’ve observed individual people have been targeted, and the people who should have protected them should have protected the process, should have upheld the Constitution instead, Mr. Speaker, decided to look the other way because it served their own interests. I’ve spoken to many of my neighbors, the people who live in Webster County, people who have served Webster County faithfully for decades. They did not want their county split into pieces. They do not want it moved out of a seventh district entirely. Several of them came up and testified on the map last week. Mr. Speaker, as we discussed earlier, and they pointed out all the many ways in which those citizens are integrally connected to the rest of the seventh district and to Green County, both economic and personal. They deserve better than to be treated as bargaining chips in this process. Mr. Speaker.
We owe a duty of service to the people of the state and to the future generations to protect the integrity of the institutions of this republic. And instead, the people in Webster County and many other areas across the state are being used as sacrifices for the political ambitions in this building. Each member of this chamber is going to have to decide here in a few minutes, whether or not they want to be a part of that unchecked ambition. But my vote, Mr. Speaker, is going to be no.”
