When Randi Buerlein arrived to vote early in Hanover County, she said she was struck by a campaign display that used an image of Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger next to the words “Don’t be fooled.” “She’s on TV every day saying, ‘Vote yes,'” Buerlein said. “But they’re making it look like she’s saying, ‘Vote no.'”
Virginia is holding a contentious referendum on whether to let the General Assembly adopt a new congressional map mid-decade. The proposed map would give Democrats an advantage in all but one of the state’s 11 U.S. House seats and could net them four seats. Democrats swept the 2025 statewide races, but Virginia remains competitive, and the referendum has appeared closely contested even as the pro-redistricting side has vastly outspent opponents.
Voters and analysts say campaign tactics have muddled the issue. Opposing groups have used contradictory mail, newspaper-style publications, recycled footage and similar-sounding committee names. That has left some Virginians unsure what a yes or no vote actually means.
Both sides have used high-profile images and videos. Former President Barack Obama has appeared in new ads urging a yes vote, while an anti-redistricting spot used a 2017 video of Obama criticizing gerrymandering. The campaigns have also repurposed past comments from Gov. Spanberger, who in 2019 said “gerrymandering is detrimental to our democracy,” even though she now supports a mid-decade redistricting to advantage Democrats.
The names of the referendum committees have added to confusion: Virginians for Fair Elections is the group backing the yes vote, while Virginians for Fair Maps is the organized no campaign. TV ads and mailers sometimes suggest the opposite or present ambiguous endorsements. The pro-yes campaign ran a billboard in Page County featuring an image of Donald Trump and the line, “President Trump says, ‘Take over the voting,'” urging people to vote yes — a tactic designed to tie the issue to national messaging.
“Any confusion was created by defying court orders, misleading ballot language and the hypocrisy of politicians,” said Finn Lee, campaign manager for Virginians for Fair Maps, in an email defending his group’s ads as “educating voters.”
Communications consultant and Virginia Tech professor J. Andrew Kuypers warned that the jumble of messaging can cause decision fatigue and suppress turnout, benefitting the better-funded side. Still, early voting totals compiled by the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project show turnout so far roughly comparable to last year’s statewide election when Spanberger was on the ballot.
Dark money and nonprofit spending are central to the dispute. Much of the campaign cash comes through 501(c)(4) “social welfare” groups that do not have to disclose donors. Virginians for Fair Elections has reported more than $64 million in contributions, primarily from organizations that do not disclose donors, according to VPAP data. Major funders include the Fairness Project, a 501(c)(4), and House Majority Forward, a nonprofit tied to House Democratic leadership.
On the other side, Virginians for Fair Maps has received about $19 million from its own affiliated 501(c)(4). Another group, Justice for Democracy PAC, mailed material that juxtaposed images of the Ku Klux Klan with the text “They want to silence your voice.” That PAC has taken nearly $10 million from Per Aspera Policy Incorporated, a 501(c)(4) whose spending surged during the redistricting campaign, prompting questions about its donors.
Campaign mailers that mimic newspapers have also proliferated. The Virginia Independent — a glossy, free, election-related publication tied to American Independent Media, a 501(c)(4) — has printed recipes, health articles and pieces favorable to the pro-redistricting side. Critics, including The Federalist, called the mailers “campaign mailers masquerading as ‘newspapers.'” Editor Joe Conason defended the publication, saying the site has published since 2021 and that stories are fact-checked and reviewed by counsel to avoid violating nonprofit rules, while acknowledging the outlet has a perspective.
A major source of frustration is the ballot question itself. It asks: “Should the Constitution of Virginia be amended to allow the General Assembly to temporarily adopt new congressional districts to restore fairness in the upcoming elections, while ensuring Virginia’s standard redistricting process resumes for all future redistricting after the 2030 census?”
Republicans and some voters say the wording is slanted. “Promising to ‘restore fairness’ is not neutral framing,” Virginia House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore said in a statement. Voter Casey Czajkowski of Goochland County called the question misleading: “This is going to lead people to vote yes, 100%, just by reading the question.”
Campaign operatives on both sides have seized on past statements by national and state figures to bolster their cases. Virginians for Fair Maps’ ads have reused Obama’s older remarks against gerrymandering to argue against the mid-decade change, while the pro-yes side has highlighted national Republicans’ recent encouragement of redrawing maps to benefit their party in other states to frame the vote as a defensive move.
Amid the competing messages, some voters say they feel manipulated. Buerlein’s experience at her polling place — where a display suggested the governor opposed the referendum — is one example of the confusion voters report across the state. With large sums of undisclosed money behind both campaigns and mixed messaging in mail, on television and in the ballot language itself, many Virginians say they are unclear about what a yes or no vote will actually do.