2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[S019]

Looks impressive, better than my attempt at drawing an R gerry for sure, just a few issues, Austin basically needs its own seat, splitting it is asking for disaster. The current fajitas are around 80% Hispanic, so maybe make the fajitas more Hispanic. Also did you eliminate a minority seat connecting San Antonio to Austin? Also, I doubt Hurd's seat is Hispanic enough under that map.

[S019]

Looks impressive, better than my attempt at drawing an R gerry for sure, just a few issues, Austin basically needs its own seat, splitting it is asking for disaster. The current fajitas are around 80% Hispanic, so maybe make the fajitas more Hispanic. Also did you eliminate a minority seat connecting San Antonio to Austin? Also, I doubt Hurd's seat is Hispanic enough under that map.

70% is enough considering the whites are liberal, Austin whites will vote for he hispanic choice candidate.  Hispanics have the numbers to elect their candidate of choice in the primary.  Austin doesn't need its own seat, this map has much more of travis county in blue districts than it is now.

This isn't a valid argument in court, liberal whites will just vote for the white Austin-area Dem in the primary. Also, packing Austin is about packing those liberal whites who you irrationally placed in a Hispanic VRA seat.

[S019]

I drew a 25-14 map: https://davesredistricting.org/join/8b348bcc-99ee-45b9-bae2-8e708f147019, the only GOP seats where Clinton broke 40% were TX-02 (where she got 40.4%) (Crenshaw), TX-03 (where she got 40.5%) (Van Taylor), and TX-24 (where she got 41.6%) (probably Valenzuela is the incumbent, but she'll have little chance here in a Biden midterm). This map cedes the 7th (which now also takes in the Dem parts of Fort Bend, as well, as downtown Houston) and the 32nd (which becomes the new Dallas Hispanic seat as Veasey's 33rd is pushed almost entirely into Fort Worth), and the 37th (a New Democratic Austin sink, that becomes Wendy Davis' likely seat, if she wins the 21st this fall). The 3rd (54.2%) and 24th (53.3%) are also the only GOP seats where Trump didn't break 55%, as Van Taylor takes in a lot of the Democratic parts of northern Dallas County, which were previously in Allred's seat, he could be vulnerable in a wave, but at the very worst for Republicans (i.e. a huge Democratic wave) , this is a 22-17 map. On the other hand, the 23rd now becomes very vulnerable, having only voted for Clinton by less than a point, and becomes a plausible pickup in a GOP wave, the 35th(56.4%) and 15th (59.4%) are the only other Dem seats, where Clinton got under 60% of the vote, but Trump got under 40% in both seats, so they're safely Democratic. So, in a GOP wave, this could become a 26-13 map. Overall, this map, to me, does a really good job of packing Democrats and I think it's an effective gerrymander, It also has a competitiveness rating of 6 on the analytics, which indicates there aren't many swing seats, which is true, as there are really four possibly competitive seats (TX-02 (this one is a real stretch), TX-03, TX-23, and TX-24), and of the three most competitive seats (TX-03, TX-23, and TX-24), the one that was the closest in 2016 is a Democratic seat, and the more vulnerable of the two GOP seats will likely have a Democratic incumbent when these maps are drawn.

Houston:



Dallas:



Austin/San Antonio

[S019]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/1c8bc548-612f-4f68-9789-961c6f5f335c
Here is a good starting point for Texas redistricting. To be clear, I do not support this map it is too risky but this is the maximum Republicans could draw and still have hold up in court. The current Voting Rights Act seats are maintained but no additional democrat-leaning seats are drawn. Fletcher and Aldred's seats are cut up and made safe R.  I also found a way to make TX-23 lean a lot more Republican without making it any less Hispanic.  I removed a lot of the San Antonio suburbs, and included more rural whites and West Texas conservative Hispanics. Now the district went for Trump by 6 points, likely for Cruz as well. I believe it would hold up in court, since the current one did and this district is no less Hispanic. 69% total and 62% citizen VAP.  Another crucial change I made is sending the fajita strips into Austin instead of rural white areas.  They are all 82-83% Hispanic, so shouldn't count as packs, that are Hispanic enough so Austin white libs won't control the primaries.  I also increased the Hispanic percentage and Lloyd Doggett's seat so it should actually perform as a vra seat.  Overall I tried to get most Republican seats to around Trump+25.  My Waco based seat Trump+13, but that should be pretty safe given that the district does not include any suburbs.  It actually trended slightly red from 2008.  The remainder of the Republican seats range from Trump+20 to 30.  Also, suburban-rural combos should hold up better over the decade.  This map is 27R-1LR-11D.  

If I were the Texas Republicans, I'd make it 24R-1LR-14D, with the additional vote sinks in Austin, Dallas, and Houston.  If you do that, you can get the suburban Trump districts to Trump+30, and have more minority seats, which helps the map survive court challenges.

Is that even legal?

I don't think so, given that there really should be 4 majority-minority seats between Harris and Fort Bend counties. Given such a seat would come naturally and even exists in the current map, in the form of TX-22, it's easy to argue that minority votes will split and diluted too much in this map. Even putting that aside, this map is dead on arrival, since there is no consideration for incumbent residencies. Also taking the fajitas into Austin is probably a non starter and there's no good reason to do that. There are also some contiguity issues here that need to be fixed.

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

What you are saying is completely irrelevant.  This isn't about Hispanics in particular, this is about the issue of whether to district based on total population or eligible voters.  Also, if the districts are drawn based on eligible voters, the districts in Houston grow, I did it.  The 3 sinks take in around 2.6 million people if you draw based on eligible voters. Try it on DRA.  Also, the VRAs could take in some white areas, as long as those areas don't outvote the minorities.

Did you use 39 districts? Also if you want equal population then you do it based on total population if that is what you are asking, and if they do take in white areas, where do you plan to put the other minorities? Also keep in mind the map is being drawn for the whole decade, not just this election or next election.

[S019]

will republicans draw based on eligible voters?  That really makes it easier to draw the RGV and take back TX-7

TX Hispanics are counted by Spanish Surname Registration, so no. Also TX-07 will be ceded, there is no way that TX-02 lasts the decade if you try to draw away TX-07, TX-07 is sinked to make TX-02 Safe R, and if possible you might want to send some of 7 into Fort Bend actually, to shore up the 22nd. My map (which isn't probably secure enough) turns into a Clinton 60-40 sink or something like that, and has it join the bluest white parts of Houston with the bluest white parts of Fort Bend

Texas Hispanics are counted no different than any other race.  The question is whether districts are drawn based on population or eligible voters.  If by eligible voters, Hispanic districts will grow and whiter districts will shrink.  As for TX-7, I agree if drawn based on population it needs to be conceded, but if by eligible voters, the 3 VRA districts balloon, taking in more blue leaning suburbs.  They can definitely make TX-7 at least lean R if they do that.

Spanish Surname Voter Registration is how TX counts Hispanics. Also there are enough white Democratic parts in Houston that the VRA seats cannot take in, also these seats won't expand, they need to shrink, TX is gaining, not losing seats.

What you are saying is completely irrelevant.  This isn't about Hispanics in particular, this is about the issue of whether to district based on total population or eligible voters.  Also, if the districts are drawn based on eligible voters, the districts in Houston grow, I did it.  The 3 sinks take in around 2.6 million people if you draw based on eligible voters. Try it on DRA.  Also, the VRAs could take in some white areas, as long as those areas don't outvote the minorities.

Did you use 39 districts? Also if you want equal population then you do it based on total population if that is what you are asking, and if they do take in white areas, where do you plan to put the other minorities? Also keep in mind the map is being drawn for the whole decade, not just this election or next election.

Districts can be drawn with equal voter population rather than equal population.  I did use 39.  And when you use CVAP instead of total pop, the Houston VRAs grow by a lot.

District drawing is traditionally done with total population, while VAP is used for minority seats to determine whether or not they will actually perform (especially with low turnout minorities such as Hispanics), these are two totally different things that they are used for.

[S019]

Tack the way you split the Austin metro makes little sense. I tried to give Killeen its own district with Waco rather than shove it in.



Here's a better way to split the metro that gives minorities in Austin influence at atleast one district. The few rural counties added to the Williamson district aren't ideal but extra pop growth should cut that down by 2020. Im not a super huge fan of going full out for minority/VRA districts but the pink district does give Austin minorities a slight amount of influence rather than splitting them with 2 certain white liberal districts in a logical and compact manner.

if you want an Austin minority seat just copy Doggett's current seat, this one looks like it will be more dominated by white people. Also the Williamson seat is clearly dominated by whites and looks like something that a Republican dummymander would draw.

[S019]

I was dissatisfied with my Pubmander in the Metroplex, and reworked it. This map, unless the Rio Grande Hispanics snap back to the Dems, should without any material VRA risk at all, give the Pubs 4 new seats that should hold, while the Dems lose one seat for some time. Poor Tarrant County. It is chopped seven times. One oddity is that my TX-13 now has two thirds of its population in Tarrant County.

I share that one image of that district, where the one third of the TX-13 in the vast open spaces, joins a densely populated urban area. It will be interesting to me how closely this map matches what the Pubs enact into law.



https://davesredistricting.org/join/b9bb0297-8932-4e5f-b3ac-d82cfd30f83e


This map would also give Republican incumbents lots of new rural territory and people who don't know them, which could lead to primary challenges.

[S019]

"suburban reps aren't RINO's lol"

The most moderate Republican state senator comes from the district that covers most of TX 13th congressionally.

The point is they can be accused of being them, said accusations don't have to be true. Anyways any new turf that an incumbent isn't known in can be dangerous, which is why you never see insane spiralmanders in congressional maps. The districts usually retain some resemblance to their old versions. As for Austin, you can tinker with the seats slightly to pull them all out of Travis without them needing to pick up tons of brand new voters.

[S019]

The TX GOP has a massive problem in this state. The DFW metroplex is zooming left and leaving aside the fact that they need to keep either 1 of 24/6 competitive or add a new Dallas tossup-ish seat to save 24/6, you also have the issue of Collin and Denton having massive swings to the left, which provides another major issue, the only way I see around that is pairing each with multiple Red River Counties with would of course anger neighboring incumbents, who'd not only lose turf, but also likely be forced to pick up turf to account for the fact that such seats would be overpopulated if Collin/Denton were kept whole.

[S019]

The TX GOP has a massive problem in this state. The DFW metroplex is zooming left and leaving aside the fact that they need to keep either 1 of 24/6 competitive or add a new Dallas tossup-ish seat to save 24/6, you also have the issue of Collin and Denton having massive swings to the left, which provides another major issue, the only way I see around that is pairing each with multiple Red River Counties with would of course anger neighboring incumbents, who'd not only lose turf, but also likely be forced to pick up turf to account for the fact that such seats would be overpopulated if Collin/Denton were kept whole.

I'm not convinced they keep "zooming" because we don't know what will happen in the post-Trump era. I doubt they go back to 2012 margins, but a change in issues may stop the bleeding for Rs.

The trend of suburbs swinging Dem precedes Trump, Collin County is very educated and affluent, two demographics that are swinging hard towards Democrats. Besides the GOP banking on "2020 was a fluke," when Trump has seized full control of the GOP seems very unwise, this is a gross exaggeration, but it reminds me of how the AR Dems got obsessed with power and drew perhaps the worst gerrymander in history, obviously TX isn't anywhere near deep blue, so that won't happen, but the GOP would be wise to recognize the issues it faces in the DFW metro.

[S019]

I'm playing around with two configuration for 38 seat Texas:

The first one adds new seats in Dallas and Austin, the second adds them in Dallas and Houston. I had two goals for these maps: 1. shore up as many incumbents as possible to survive the decade, 2. create a map that is an aggressive gerrymander but avoids issues of racial gerrymandering and should be protected from a court challenge

First map (new seats Dallas and Austin): https://davesredistricting.org/join/d971787d-2cf3-499a-bac8-3d86769e2c32
Second map (new seats Dallas and Houston): https://davesredistricting.org/join/b2735b10-a885-4451-aaa1-fe4e73442540

So, some interesting observations: 1. It is fully possible to draw a competitive fajita without creating Hispanic packs or adding way too many white voters into the seat, 2. it is very difficult to shore up the Collin County seat due to its large size and also its rapid Dem trends, 3. Not adding one of the two new seats in Austin spells disaster for several GOP incumbents and further shows why there needs to be not just 1 Austin sink, but 1.5 (new seat+Doggett), 4. even in the the first map, some Austin area incumbents could become vulnerable simply due to the broad spread of Dem votes in Austin and it isn't an easy problem to fix, but much better than the alternative.

Interested to hear feedback on this, I spent around 5-6 hours working on these two maps.

I chose not to do an Austin and Houston new seat map because seeing the rate of bluing in the DFW Metroplex, the GOP would be braindead not to add a new seat there and looking at the results from the 2nd map, it's pretty clear that it'd be some version of a dummymander.

[S019]

Britain33, you need to have two Democratic performing Hispanic CD's contained entirely in Bexar County to be safe under the VRA in my opinion.

Ok. Apologies if you covered this in a past map, but what do you propose happens to TX-23 in this scenario? Does it become one of the two performing CDs (an unlikely move for a Republican map) or does it take up the 20% of the county that is most Anglo with approx. 400,000 people, with TX-21 moving out completely? Also, since the RGV doesn't have sufficient population for 3 full Hispanic districts, where do you connect the leftovers to since fajita strips are now out, too? I would like to see the whole that is made from the sum of the parts of your proposition.

Britain33, here is the design of the RGV area I have in mind more or less. Tragically, TX-11 is about 3 points short of 50%+ HCVAP due to the districts having higher population with only 38 districts, and that I think is an important goal for the Pubs to create such a safe Pub district that meets that metric for a host of reasons. It is possible it can be achieved by transferring some of the “excess” Hispanics from TX-15 to TX-11, but how to do that depends on the design of the slice and dice of Williamson and Travis County outside the Austin Dem vote sink, while still keeping TX-23 say 52% HCVAP and safely Pub, without looking ridiculous. VRA sensitive districts need to look reasonable. The uber erose stuff should not be VRA sensitive. The image of the map has in white the real estate where the populations of the CD’s is way off. The underpopulated northern plains white zone (plus whatever TX-11 releases in population if it moves down the RGV more to meet the 50%+ HCVAP threshold (while TX-23 moves down the RGV exclusive of the counties directly appending the river), will be used to “attack” the Metroplex and the Austin area, along with TX-25, whose boundaries will be changed to join the slice and dice party. So a lot more work needs to be done.

In that regard, Victoria County is a pain in the ass for the Hispanic shift referred to above because it is reasonably high population and very Pub and needs to be retained if possible in the CD that joins the Austin area slice and dice, rather than be "wasted" in TX-15. That I find quite annoying, and means TX-15 needs to go father up the coast, which then affects the Houston area slice and dice. One things leads to another.

TX is fun to Pubmander because of the VRA issues and its complexity as to that issue and the wildly diverse trends which one must ponder as to whether they are a precursor for more of the same or more in the nature of a blip.





https://davesredistricting.org/join/b705aabf-808a-4f6b-b837-844af931ad79

I see several issues with this, first McCaul lives in Austin, on the other end of the 10th, so a north south configuration between Harris and Montgomery won't work with that seat. Second, the 9th can remain performing and still take in more of Fort Bend, this makes it necessary not to split the county in half and leaves Nehls' home base intact. Third, TX-34 is 90% Hispanic, no court is going to let that stand, especially since Democrats have already been preparing for multiple VRA lawsuits in many different states, not that hard for them to add TX to that list. Fourth, TX-11 was a leftovers district last time and probably should remain one, this current configuration eats into a lot of the 19th, which is going to cause problems for several rural incumbents who are going to lose large parts of their district. Fifth, Denton County cannot sustain itself anymore, not with the swings it's undergoing, it should be split and part of it paired with the Red River Counties. Sixth, 15 and 23 are in all likelihood not Hispanic enough, you need around 60% for a Hispanic performing seat, in general, and it needs to be more like 70% in the RGV (the probably illegal pack of 28 is probably partially responsible for this). Seventh, the elimination of Doggett's seat is unwise as it serves as a convenient D pack and with 25 being used up and 17 needing to go to Waco to grab Sessions' home, I don't think that Carter is going to be too happy with the 31 that results. One thing that I do like in this map is the carve up of Montgomery, with Brady gone, the GOP should have free reign to slice and dice the county at will. Also the Collin seat isn't going to safe, but I have yet to see a map that successfully pulls that off, Van Taylor is just going to have hope he's strong enough to brave the trends, given we've seen strong incumbents survive in districts zooming away from their party, he should have a chance of pulling it off for sure, unless a Democratic favored year occurs.

[S019]

If McCaul lives in Austin, isn't that his problem if he wants to remain an R in Congress?

Well yes, but there's a balance that can be struck here. Even pulling the seat out of Travis, but keeping some part of it in that general Austin area like WilCo, Bastrop, or Lee would allow him to keep some of his geographic base. Moving his seat to Houston is going to invite a primary challenge from a Houston area Republican, who very well could win that primary challenge, as that isn't McCaul's base. Losing his residency might not be a deal breaker, but moving his district to the other side of the state far away from his home base, absolutely could be.

[S019]

What is the DRA extender? Sounds interesting.

It gives you O'Rourke/Cruz data, but it doesn't work with 2020 precincts afaik

[S019]

What is the DRA extender? Sounds interesting.

It gives you O'Rourke/Cruz data, but it doesn't work with 2020 precincts afaik

The new one works with 2020

Link please?

I have a 2020 map that I want to test

[S019]

What is the DRA extender? Sounds interesting.

It gives you O'Rourke/Cruz data, but it doesn't work with 2020 precincts afaik

The new one works with 2020

Link please?

I have a 2020 map that I want to test

Does this work? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VW6D7rLQ6YQEoeDXollMKjGwZDUTAE7kBLYdJ3Xvcas/edit#gid=281065170

It says I need access

[S019]

What is the DRA extender? Sounds interesting.

It gives you O'Rourke/Cruz data, but it doesn't work with 2020 precincts afaik

The new one works with 2020

Link please?

I have a 2020 map that I want to test

Does this work? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VW6D7rLQ6YQEoeDXollMKjGwZDUTAE7kBLYdJ3Xvcas/edit#gid=281065170

It says I need access

You can't download it or make a copy

Nope, I need access to see it

[S019]

What is the DRA extender? Sounds interesting.

It gives you O'Rourke/Cruz data, but it doesn't work with 2020 precincts afaik

The new one works with 2020

Link please?

I have a 2020 map that I want to test

Does this work? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VW6D7rLQ6YQEoeDXollMKjGwZDUTAE7kBLYdJ3Xvcas/edit#gid=281065170

It says I need access

You can't download it or make a copy

Nope, I need access to see it

Try this: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1smZ-DZc4u5cgjX_X_Rc07XB3m8J3LhhIcA9kvSk_bdw/edit#gid=281065170

Yeah this works, thanks

[S019]

Is it easy to create two fairly compact 50+% Hispanic CVAP districts in Houston?

Possibly, but they probably wouldn't perform, you need that weird shape to make a performing seat

[S019]

Thanks to TPH, I was able to run 2020/2018 numbers on a slightly modified version of my map (removed precinct splits), the results shocked me:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1hUAd0YVAqLwOWTwaroaZmKtOpAeQZXCp0wI0KiEF2ZQ/edit?usp=sharing

Williams and Roy go to basically tossups, McCaul and Van Taylor probably become mid decade victims.

[S019]

In other news, the yellow rabbit has now turned into a yellow chicken. I think I have now managed to break every Muon2 rule that exists, as well as a couple of my own codicils thereto and now accept my accolades. The only rules obeyed are legal ones - you know like that darn VRA. Usually it favors the Pubs, but not in Harris County!





And here is something far less insane looking where the Pubs draw TX-07 as lean Dem, but potentially competitive if higher SES urban educated white voters snap back to the GOP, and recover from their Trump low with them. Gingles triggering a need for an additional performing Hispanic CD in Harris County really hurts them this time. Alternatively they could take the risk of losing a VRA lawsuit to see what the reconstituted SCOTUS does, and redraw if they lose. Another potentiality is that if the CVAP figures which the Courts decide to use in various cases have higher percentage numbers for HCVAP's, it may allow them to draw two performing Hispanic CD's with more favorable lines for them than what the DRA figures currently use make possible.

Brian Babin lives in Tyler County, both of these maps draw him out. Also Crenshaw is going to be very vulnerable to a primary given basically all of his seat is new territory. Also I'm pretty sure that the 9th is protected, since AA punch above their weight in primaries, but it doesn't look like it was preserved in a way that would ensure VRA compliance.

[S019]

I attempted a TX map on 2020 data and found it harder than expected, I was also basically forced to cede the two new seats to Democrats. Lastly, I ended up with a map where I am 100% certain that several seats will flip before 2030, though I think all of them should survive 2022, maybe TX-23 doesn't

Anyways:

https://davesredistricting.org/join/18b8f365-ba5f-4902-8dc4-cf84c83d7857