# Voter turnout for the Virginia redistricting referendum? the 2026 Virginia redistricting amendment Updated: April 28, 2026 Category: Elections HTML: /markets/elections/voter-turnout-for-the-virginia-redistricting-referendum/ ## Short Answer **Key takeaway.** Both the **model** and the **market** expect voter turnout for the Virginia redistricting referendum to be Above 2.6M, with no compelling evidence of mispricing. ## Key Claims (January 2026) **- - April 2026 redistricting amendment vote has dedicated, significant GOTV spending.** - A November referendum would likely lack comparable dedicated support and attention. - Virginia's November 2026 election primarily features key federal races. - Amendment turnout in Virginia non-presidential elections is historically similar. - Organized opposition to the amendment emerged from grassroots factions. - Northern Virginia localities previously led turnout for redistricting amendments. ### Why This Matters (GEO) - AI agents extract claims, not arguments. - Improves citation probability in summaries and answer cards. - Enables fact stitching across multiple sources. ## Executive Verdict **Key takeaway.** **Market** at 93c overvalues the **88%** **model** estimate, given GOTV funding targets an April vote. ### Who Wins and Why | Outcome | Market | Model | Why | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Above 3.0M | 90.0% | 82.0% | Market higher by 8.0pp | | Above 2.6M | 93.0% | 88.0% | Market higher by 5.0pp | | Above 2.8M | 89.0% | 84.0% | Market higher by 5.0pp | ## Model vs Market | Outcome | Market Probability | Octagon Model Probability | | --- | --- | --- | | Above 3.0M | 90.0% | 82.0% | | Above 2.6M | 93.0% | 88.0% | | Above 2.8M | 89.0% | 84.0% | | Above 3.1M | 91.0% | 80.0% | | Above 3.4M | 0.1% | 0.4% | | Above 3.2M | 2.8% | 1.6% | | Above 3.8M | 0.7% | 0.2% | | Above 3.6M | 0.6% | 0.3% | - Expiration: April 1, 2027 ## Market Behavior & Price Dynamics This market opened with extremely high confidence, starting at a 99.0% probability for a "YES" outcome. However, the price has followed a consistent downward trend since its inception. The most significant movement was a drop from its starting point to the current price and historical low of 93.0% over a relatively short period. This six-point decline represents a notable decrease in certainty among traders. Lacking any specific news or contextual developments, the cause for this downward price action cannot be attributed to a particular external event. Instead, the drop appears to reflect an internal shift in market sentiment or the re-evaluation of the initial high probability by participants. The total volume of 161,659 contracts traded indicates a substantial level of interest and financial commitment in this market. However, the provided sample data points show zero volume during the period of the price decline, which suggests that the trading activity driving the price down may have occurred on other days or in smaller increments. In terms of key price levels, the market is currently testing its all-time low of 93.0%, which is now acting as a critical support level. The previous high of 99.6% serves as the main resistance. Overall, the price action suggests a clear, albeit modest, erosion of confidence. While the market still overwhelmingly anticipates a "YES" resolution, with a probability of 93.0%, the sentiment has shifted from near-certainty to strong conviction with a newly introduced element of doubt. The downward trajectory indicates that traders are pricing in a slightly higher chance of a "NO" outcome than they were when the market first opened. The market will need to hold at the 93.0% support level to prevent a further decline in confidence. ## Significant Price Movements ### Outcome: Above 3.1M #### 📈 April 22, 2026: 27.0pp spike Price increased from 69.0% to 96.0% **What happened:** No supporting research available for this anomaly. ### Outcome: Above 3.2M #### 📉 April 21, 2026: 37.0pp drop Price decreased from 57.0% to 20.0% **What happened:** No supporting research available for this anomaly. #### 📉 April 15, 2026: 10.0pp drop Price decreased from 62.0% to 52.0% **What happened:** No supporting research available for this anomaly. ### Outcome: Above 2.8M #### 📈 April 17, 2026: 23.0pp spike Price increased from 71.0% to 94.0% **What happened:** No supporting research available for this anomaly. #### 📉 April 16, 2026: 20.8pp drop Price decreased from 91.8% to 71.0% **What happened:** No supporting research available for this anomaly. ## Contract Snapshot This market resolves to "Yes" if the total certified vote count for all participants in the 2026 Virginia redistricting amendment is above 3,100,000. It resolves to "No" if the vote count is 3,100,000 or less, or if the election is postponed beyond one year or canceled. The outcome is verified by the Virginia State Board of Elections (SBE), using officially certified results regardless of appeals, and provisional, absentee, early, mail-in, or electronic ballots are included only if reflected in this certification. The market opened on April 21, 2026, at 1:00 PM EDT, and will close early if official vote counts are certified, otherwise by April 1, 2027, at 10:00 AM EDT. Payout is projected 30 minutes after closing. Persons employed by any Source Agencies are prohibited from trading this contract. ## Market Discussion Traders generally hold high confidence (around 90-91%) that voter turnout for the Virginia redistricting referendum will exceed 3.1 million. The primary argument for "Yes" is that a significant number of provisional and post-election ballots are expected to be counted, historically at over 90% acceptance, pushing the total past this threshold. Counterarguments suggest current counts are just below 3.1 million, and some traders have highlighted an unusual market disparity between the 3.0M and 3.1M thresholds, or the potential for a court ruling to nullify the election. ## Market Data | Contract | Yes Bid | Yes Ask | Last Price | Volume | Open Interest | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Above 2.6M | 75% | 94.8% | 93% | $166,302.76 | $146,329.9 | | Above 2.8M | 85% | 94% | 89% | $135,997.56 | $129,152.18 | | Above 3.0M | 90% | 94.2% | 90% | $167,459.3 | $131,367.97 | | Above 3.1M | 90% | 93% | 91% | $61,354.54 | $15,398.65 | | Above 3.2M | 0.2% | 2.8% | 2.8% | $39,494.69 | $12,298.11 | | Above 3.4M | 0% | 1% | 0.1% | $45,216.89 | $17,727.93 | | Above 3.6M | 0.6% | 0.7% | 0.6% | $6,012.25 | $5,112.87 | | Above 3.8M | 0.2% | 0.4% | 0.7% | $6,303.29 | $5,398.04 | ## What Elections Are On Virginia's November 2026 Ballot? US House Seats | All 11 seats [[^]](https://www.ballotpedia.org/Virginia_elections,_2026) | US Senate Seats | One Class 1 seat [[^]](https://www.ballotpedia.org/Virginia_elections,_2026) | Gubernatorial Election | None (next in 2025) [[^]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Virginia_gubernatorial_election) | **Virginia's November 2026 election will feature key federal races** Virginia's November 2026 election will feature key federal races. The general election, scheduled for November 3, 2026, will primarily include federal contests [[^]](https://www.ballotpedia.org/Virginia_elections,_2026). Voters will select representatives for all 11 of Virginia's seats in the U.S. House of Representatives [[^]](https://www.ballotpedia.org/Virginia_elections,_2026). Additionally, one of Virginia's two U.S. Senate seats, specifically the Class 1 seat, will be up for election [[^]](https://www.ballotpedia.org/Virginia_elections,_2026). This election cycle is characterized as a midterm election [[^]](https://www.ballotpedia.org/Virginia_elections,_2026). No statewide or legislative elections are scheduled for Virginia in 2026. A gubernatorial election will not occur, as Virginia's next one is set for 2025 [[^]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Virginia_gubernatorial_election). Similarly, elections for Lieutenant Governor or Attorney General are not planned for 2026 [[^]](https://www.thegreenpapers.com/G26/VA). Furthermore, there will be no state legislative elections, including those for the Virginia House of Delegates or State Senate, during this cycle [[^]](https://www.thegreenpapers.com/G26/VA). Consequently, the primary determinant of baseline turnout in Virginia for November 2026 will be the federal midterm elections for the U.S. House and Senate. ## What are the Virginia Redistricting Amendment GOTV Spending Plans? Key Groups Involved | Virginians for Fair Maps, FairMapsVirginia, Stop the Gerrymander [[^]](https://stopthegerrymander.com/) | Current Collective Spending | Over $3.5 million (Virginians for Fair Maps and FairMapsVirginia) [[^]](https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pacs-spending-millions-campaign-virginia-225100617.html) | Projected Collective Spending | Exceed $10 million (Virginians for Fair Maps and FairMapsVirginia) [[^]](https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pacs-spending-millions-campaign-virginia-225100617.html) | **Several groups are funding large-scale GOTV campaigns for the redistricting amendment** Several groups are funding large-scale GOTV campaigns for the redistricting amendment. For the Virginia redistricting amendment scheduled for April 2026, two primary political action committees (PACs) are leading opposing large-scale 'Get Out The Vote' (GOTV) campaigns [[^]](https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pacs-spending-millions-campaign-virginia-225100617.html). Virginians for Fair Maps, a coalition of liberal and left-of-center groups, supports the amendment [[^]](https://www.influencewatch.org/organization/virginians-for-fair-maps/). Conversely, FairMapsVirginia is a conservative-aligned advocacy group opposing it [[^]](https://influencewatch.org/organization/fair-maps-virginia). Additionally, former Republican Delegate Steve Cline has formed 'Stop the Gerrymander,' a new group also committed to organizing a GOTV effort against the amendment, pledging to 'spend what it takes' to ensure its defeat [[^]](https://cardinalnews.org/2026/03/04/cline-forms-group-to-organize-get-out-the-vote-against-redistricting-amendment-vows-to-spend-what-it-takes/). Opposing groups have committed millions to advertising and voter mobilization. These organizations are actively engaged in campaigning through diverse methods, including voter outreach, education campaigns, and field operations. Collectively, Virginians for Fair Maps and FairMapsVirginia have already spent over **$3.5** million on advertising and voter mobilization efforts [[^]](https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pacs-spending-millions-campaign-virginia-225100617.html). Projections indicate that their combined expenditures could exceed **$10** million as the April 2026 referendum approaches [[^]](https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/pacs-spending-millions-campaign-virginia-225100617.html). FairMapsVirginia, for instance, has developed a 'Volunteer Toolkit,' which suggests organized grassroots initiatives likely to encompass GOTV activities [[^]](https://fairmapsva.org/volunteer-toolkit/). Historical budget and success rate data for these groups are not available. Despite their clear commitments to substantial spending and robust GOTV campaigns, available sources do not provide specific historical budgets or success rates for these particular groups in mobilizing voters for ballot measures compared to candidate races. Some groups, such as 'Stop the Gerrymander,' are newly formed specifically for this amendment, precluding a historical record [[^]](https://cardinalnews.org/2026/03/04/cline-forms-group-to-organize-get-out-the-vote-against-redistricting-amendment-vows-to-spend-what-it-takes/). While financial data for FairMapsVirginia and Virginians for Fair Maps is accessible through platforms like VPAP and InfluenceWatch, it lacks a breakdown of spending specifically for historical GOTV efforts on ballot measures versus candidate races, and it does not quantify their success rates in these distinct contexts [[^]](https://www.influencewatch.org/organization/virginians-for-fair-maps/). ## Which Virginia localities lead in voter engagement and growth? Highest 2020 Amendment Turnout | ~88.5% (City of Falls Church) [[^]](https://historical.elections.virginia.gov/contest/161108) | Highest 2025 New Registrants | ~35,000 (Fairfax County) [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/media/registration-statistics/2025/10/pdf/Monthly_New_Registrant_By_Locality_2025_11_01_053754.pdf) | 2nd Highest 2020 Amendment Turnout | ~84.3% (City of Alexandria) [[^]](https://historical.elections.virginia.gov/contest/161108) | **Northern Virginia localities led turnout for the 2020 redistricting amendment** Northern Virginia localities led turnout for the 2020 redistricting amendment. Constitutional Amendment 1, establishing a redistricting commission, saw its highest voter participation in Northern Virginia and several urban independent cities. The highest percentages of registered voters participating in this amendment vote included the City of Falls Church (~**88.5%**), the City of Alexandria (~**84.3%**), Arlington County (~**83.9%**), and Loudoun County (~**82.7%**) [[^]](https://historical.elections.virginia.gov/contest/161108). Fairfax County also demonstrated strong engagement with approximately **80.9%** turnout for the amendment [[^]](https://historical.elections.virginia.gov/contest/161108). These figures significantly exceeded the overall state turnout of approximately **74.4%** for the 2020 general election [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/media/formswarehouse/maintenance-reports/PostElectionReport_FinalRevised_211001.pdf). High 2020 amendment turnout correlates with recent voter registration growth. A clear geographic pattern links the high engagement in the 2020 amendment with current voter registration growth rates. Several of the same Northern Virginia localities that exhibited high participation in 2020 are now leading in new voter registrations. As of November 2025, Fairfax County recorded the highest number of new registrants, approximately 35,000, followed by Prince William County with around 20,000, and Loudoun County with approximately 18,000 new registrants [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/media/registration-statistics/2025/10/pdf/Monthly_New_Registrant_By_Locality_2025_11_01_053754.pdf). This pattern indicates a persistent trend of elevated voter engagement and civic participation in these populous Northern Virginia jurisdictions. ## Did Virginia Anti-Redistricting Factions Plan Ballot Roll-off or Confusion? Primary Opponents | Local Republican factions and "Stop the Gerrymander" advocacy group [[^]](https://stopthegerrymander.com/)[[^]](https://www.thecentralvirginian.com/news/republicans-rally-against-proposed-redistricting-amendment/article_f8c07633-fe94-45ab-81ff-44d600ffd9a9.html) | Anti-Amendment Stance | Amendment "does nothing to stop partisan gerrymandering" [[^]](https://stopthegerrymander.com/) | Voter Confusion Cause | Ballot question phrasing and voter fatigue (not deliberate anti-amendment efforts) [[^]](https://www.wvtf.org/news/2026-04-28/political-analysts-voter-confusion-may-have-contributed-to-lower-referendum-turnout-and-a-narrower-margin) | **Organized opposition to the Virginia redistricting amendment emerged from grassroots factions, particularly within the Republican party, and from advocacy groups like "Stop the Gerrymander" [[^]](https://stopthegerrymander.com/)[[^]](https://www.thecentralvirginian.com/news/republicans-rally-against-proposed-redistricting-amendment/article_f8c07633-fe94-45ab-81ff-44d600ffd9a9.html)** Organized opposition to the Virginia redistricting amendment emerged from grassroots factions, particularly within the Republican party, and from advocacy groups like "Stop the Gerrymander" [[^]](https://stopthegerrymander.com/)[[^]](https://www.thecentralvirginian.com/news/republicans-rally-against-proposed-redistricting-amendment/article_f8c07633-fe94-45ab-81ff-44d600ffd9a9.html). These groups rallied against the proposal, arguing it would disenfranchise voters by removing their ability to influence district line drawing and replace partisan gerrymandering with an unaccountable process [[^]](https://stopthegerrymander.com/)[[^]](https://www.thecentralvirginian.com/news/republicans-rally-against-proposed-redistricting-amendment/article_f8c07633-fe94-45ab-81ff-44d600ffd9a9.html). Anti-amendment groups did not plan specific confusion tactics. Research does not indicate that these anti-amendment grassroots factions explicitly planned tactics such as encouraging ballot roll-off or intentionally sowing confusion beyond advocating for a 'No' vote. While voter confusion may have contributed to lower referendum turnout, political analysts attributed this phenomenon to factors like how the question was posed on the ballot and general voter fatigue, rather than any deliberate efforts by anti-amendment groups to create confusion [[^]](https://www.wvtf.org/news/2026-04-28/political-analysts-voter-confusion-may-have-contributed-to-lower-referendum-turnout-and-a-narrower-margin). Reports indicate that mailers criticized for being deceptive, misleading, and creating voter confusion were actually sent by a pro-amendment group, "Virginians for an Independent Redistricting Commission" [[^]](https://virginiamercury.com/2026/03/09/civil-rights-imagery-in-anti-redistricting-mailers-draws-outrage-in-virginia/). ## What Is Virginia's Voter Turnout for Constitutional Amendments? Average Off-Year Election Turnout | Approximately 44.70% [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/) | Average Federal Midterm Election Turnout | Approximately 45.48% [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/) | Lowest Off-Year Election Turnout | 28.69% (2011 general election) [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/) | **Virginia amendment turnout in non-presidential elections is notably similar** Virginia amendment turnout in non-presidential elections is notably similar. Virginia's historical voter turnout for constitutional amendments between 2004 and 2023 indicates comparable average participation for amendments on federal midterm election ballots and off-year (gubernatorial) election ballots. Amendments during off-year state elections have averaged approximately **44.70%** of registered voters [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/), while those during federal midterm elections have averaged about **45.48%** [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/). Both categories show significantly lower turnout compared to amendments appearing on presidential election ballots, which have averaged around **72.80%** [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/). Turnout ranges vary, yet off-year elections can exhibit lower participation. For standalone ballot questions in off-year or special elections, which typically align with state legislative and gubernatorial races, turnout has ranged from **28.69%** to **55.23%**. The lowest turnout in this category was **28.69%** during the 2011 general election, which included a constitutional amendment [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/). Conversely, the 2021 general election, featuring the redistricting commission amendment, achieved the highest turnout in this group at **55.23%** [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/). Constitutional amendments placed on the ballot during federal midterm elections, occurring in even-numbered years without a presidential contest, exhibit a slightly narrower turnout range of **37.95%** to **55.76%**. The 2014 general election, which included one constitutional amendment, saw the lowest participation at **37.95%** [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/). The 2018 general election recorded the highest turnout in this group, with **55.76%** of registered voters participating when a constitutional amendment was present [[^]](https://www.elections.virginia.gov/resultsreports/registrationturnout-statistics/). While average turnouts for these non-presidential election types are comparable, off-year elections have shown instances of lower overall participation for constitutional amendments. ## What Could Change the Odds **Key takeaway.** Catalyst analysis unavailable. ## Key Dates & Catalysts - **Expiration:** April 01, 2027 - **Closes:** April 01, 2027 ## Decision-Flipping Events - Catalyst analysis unavailable. ## Related Research Reports - [EU loses a member before 2030?](/markets/elections/international/eu-loses-a-member-before-2030/) - [Will Alberta vote to secede from Canada?](/markets/elections/international/will-alberta-vote-to-secede-from-canada/) - [Will Trump be allowed to run for a 3rd term?](/markets/elections/trump/will-trump-be-allowed-to-run-for-a-3rd-term/) - [2026 2026 Midterms: Congress Balance of Power?](/markets/elections/us-elections/2026-2026-midterms-congress-balance-of-power/) ## Historical Resolutions No historical resolution data available for this series. ## Disclaimer This content is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, legal, or trading advice. Prediction markets involve risk of loss. Past performance does not guarantee future results. We are not affiliated with Kalshi or any prediction market platform. Market data may be delayed or incomplete. ### Data Sources & Model Transparency **Data Sources:** Octagon Deep Research aggregates information from multiple sources including news, filings, and market data. **Freshness:** Analysis is generated periodically and may not reflect the latest developments. Verify critical information from primary sources.