2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Wisconsin

[Torie]

The WI Supreme court invalidating the WI maps under state law would be the NC SCOTUS case on steroids. There is nothing in state law on redistricting other than districts must be contiguous and compact. Zip. Nada.

The WI state constitution doesn’t even really have much of an equal protection clause. It merely states that, “All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=does+the+wisconsin+state+constitutuion+have+an+equal+protection+clause

Here is some legal chatter on the WI redistricting law, or lack thereof:

“Jeff Mandell, board president of the liberal group Law Forward and attorney at Stafford Rosenbaum in Madison, believes there are several areas of the state constitution that could be grounds for a challenge.

"There is no hard and fast plan," he said. "There is no complaint or document that is written. But there are plenty of conversations going on about what such a lawsuit would look like."
A challenge could be based on the state constitution's redistricting provisions, he said, but also on other areas related to voting.

"You could also imagine claims that maybe it violates that right to vote," he said. "Is the right to vote merely the right to stand on a line on Election Day and cast a ballot? Or is it a right to cast a meaningful ballot?"

Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, says that even if a map challenge were to be brought before the state Supreme Court, he doubts a violation of the Wisconsin Constitution could be proven.

"The problem is that there really isn't anything in the Wisconsin Constitution, other than a requirement that the maps be contiguous and compact," he said. "And the thing about the maps in Wisconsin is that they are contiguous and compact."



https://www.wpr.org/wisconsin-supreme-court-april-race-state-legislature-redistricting-maps



If the WI high court redraws the maps based on the efficiency gap theory or whatever other theory it embraces, SCOTUS will bounce it. Roberts will write the opinion.

The Dems may well take over the House due to the abortion issue and Pub fecklessness in general, but the road to control will not be through Wisconsin.  It’s a dry hole.

We shall see. Anyone want to bet the other way?  

Incidentally, drawing a WI CD map following the Muon2 rules, ends up having  WI-06 that with no county splits has a perfect population, with a zero deviation, and there was great rejoicing. This is the first time that has happened to me ever.

 

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f79942cc-46a5-4595-9f8c-f722ac98603a

[Oryxslayer]

If the WI high court redraws the maps based on the efficiency gap theory or whatever other theory it embraces, SCOTUS will bounce it. Roberts will write the opinion.

The Dems may well take over the House due to the abortion issue and Pub fecklessness in general, but the road to control will not be through Wisconsin.  It’s a dry hole.

We shall see. Anyone want to bet the other way?  

State courts ruling on state issues pertinent to things like state constitution have their own state Supreme Courts cause the national one basically cannot touch them, don't you know. Unless ISLT of course but that presently seems like a pipe dream, even with this court. So if the new majority wants to be rabid partisans just like NC judges or leading Wisconsin conservatives -including some in the former majority- they can, at least for the immensely more likely legislative redraw. Some other legislators in other states actual tried and failed to petition the national supreme court in 2021/22 in response to redistricting led by other untraditional state actors, and were ignored. The comparison to NC is good here, since these are the two states where everything has become politicized in the last 20 years, and everything is seemingly zero-sum in the pursuit of power.  

[Gass3268]

The WI Supreme court invalidating the WI maps under state law would be the NC SCOTUS case on steroids. There is nothing in state law on redistricting other than districts must be contiguous and compact. Zip. Nada.

The WI state constitution doesn’t even really have much of an equal protection clause. It merely states that, “All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=does+the+wisconsin+state+constitutuion+have+an+equal+protection+clause

Here is some legal chatter on the WI redistricting law, or lack thereof:

“Jeff Mandell, board president of the liberal group Law Forward and attorney at Stafford Rosenbaum in Madison, believes there are several areas of the state constitution that could be grounds for a challenge.

"There is no hard and fast plan," he said. "There is no complaint or document that is written. But there are plenty of conversations going on about what such a lawsuit would look like."
A challenge could be based on the state constitution's redistricting provisions, he said, but also on other areas related to voting.

"You could also imagine claims that maybe it violates that right to vote," he said. "Is the right to vote merely the right to stand on a line on Election Day and cast a ballot? Or is it a right to cast a meaningful ballot?"

Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, says that even if a map challenge were to be brought before the state Supreme Court, he doubts a violation of the Wisconsin Constitution could be proven.

"The problem is that there really isn't anything in the Wisconsin Constitution, other than a requirement that the maps be contiguous and compact," he said. "And the thing about the maps in Wisconsin is that they are contiguous and compact."



https://www.wpr.org/wisconsin-supreme-court-april-race-state-legislature-redistricting-maps



If the WI high court redraws the maps based on the efficiency gap theory or whatever other theory it embraces, SCOTUS will bounce it. Roberts will write the opinion.

The Dems may well take over the House due to the abortion issue and Pub fecklessness in general, but the road to control will not be through Wisconsin.  It’s a dry hole.

We shall see. Anyone want to bet the other way?  

Maybe for the Congressional map, but there would be no grounds for the Federal Supreme Court to interfere itself on issues related to the Wisconsin Constitution, how the Wisconsin Supreme Court interprets said Constitution or state level maps. It would be a complete overstepping of their authority, which means they'll probably do it.

[Nyvin]

Also it's not like the court overturning the map would be taking power away from the state legislature since the legislature never passed any maps.  The court just made least change maps on it's own accord.

It would be a very simple argument to make that the court shouldn't have gone with a least change approach in 2021 and should've hired a special master to start from scratch instead.   That's what the 3 liberals voted for originally but the 4 conservatives wanted least change to preserve the 2011 GOP gerrymander.

I don't see any argument to SCOTUS that would work to stop the WISC from redoing the state legislative maps.  They would need a VERY stretched version of ISLT to say that a court can't redo it's own map, especially for the state legislative maps.

[GALeftist]

If the WI high court redraws the maps based on the efficiency gap theory or whatever other theory it embraces, SCOTUS will bounce it. Roberts will write the opinion.

The Dems may well take over the House due to the abortion issue and Pub fecklessness in general, but the road to control will not be through Wisconsin.  It’s a dry hole.

We shall see. Anyone want to bet the other way?  

Yeah, I'd bet the other way. Protasiewicz explicitly ran on overturning the maps, and the other three liberal judges are Madison liberals who can and have signed onto liberal (heh) interpretations of the law to achieve certain outcomes. You don't have to like it, but the legislative maps are dead and the congressional map probably is too.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Arguing that through ISL the Elections and Electors clauses somehow apply to state legislative districts would be a rather astounding leap of logic.

[Mr.Phips]

The WI Supreme court invalidating the WI maps under state law would be the NC SCOTUS case on steroids. There is nothing in state law on redistricting other than districts must be contiguous and compact. Zip. Nada.

The WI state constitution doesn’t even really have much of an equal protection clause. It merely states that, “All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=does+the+wisconsin+state+constitutuion+have+an+equal+protection+clause

Here is some legal chatter on the WI redistricting law, or lack thereof:

“Jeff Mandell, board president of the liberal group Law Forward and attorney at Stafford Rosenbaum in Madison, believes there are several areas of the state constitution that could be grounds for a challenge.

"There is no hard and fast plan," he said. "There is no complaint or document that is written. But there are plenty of conversations going on about what such a lawsuit would look like."
A challenge could be based on the state constitution's redistricting provisions, he said, but also on other areas related to voting.

"You could also imagine claims that maybe it violates that right to vote," he said. "Is the right to vote merely the right to stand on a line on Election Day and cast a ballot? Or is it a right to cast a meaningful ballot?"

Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, says that even if a map challenge were to be brought before the state Supreme Court, he doubts a violation of the Wisconsin Constitution could be proven.

"The problem is that there really isn't anything in the Wisconsin Constitution, other than a requirement that the maps be contiguous and compact," he said. "And the thing about the maps in Wisconsin is that they are contiguous and compact."



https://www.wpr.org/wisconsin-supreme-court-april-race-state-legislature-redistricting-maps



If the WI high court redraws the maps based on the efficiency gap theory or whatever other theory it embraces, SCOTUS will bounce it. Roberts will write the opinion.

The Dems may well take over the House due to the abortion issue and Pub fecklessness in general, but the road to control will not be through Wisconsin.  It’s a dry hole.

We shall see. Anyone want to bet the other way?  

Incidentally, drawing a WI CD map following the Muon2 rules, ends up having  WI-06 that with no county splits has a perfect population, with a zero deviation, and there was great rejoicing. This is the first time that has happened to me ever.

 

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f79942cc-46a5-4595-9f8c-f722ac98603a

I assume you are speaking only in the context of the congressional maps?  If so I would agree.  Regarding the state legislative maps, it’s a whole different ballgame.

[Torie]

Fair enough. Federal courts do least change when drawing CD maps where there is deadlock, but whether state courts must follow that standard is another matter. I just don't know the law on that one as to CD maps. I withdraw my prediction. That one had a short half life I must say.  I got "owned," and deservedly so.

As to legislative maps, on which I did not comment, I also agree that it is open season on the legislative maps, it would appear, where ISL or some variant thereof is not in play in all events.
Here is the squib on the saga.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redistricting_in_Wisconsin

I guess another issue is whether state supreme courts redraw CD maps with impunity where one party does not control the trifecta and there is gridlock, as and when, and each and every time, that the partisan control of the state high court changes, as it becomes a third branch of the legislature, and one that trumps the other two branches and the executive in a deadlock situation. That eventually might get to SCOTUS as state supreme courts get ever more partisan and hackish. The way things are going, we might end up going in the direction of Israel and the tension between the courts and the law passing bodies reaches the breaking point. Wouldn't that be fun, not?

Here is what the new judge said in the debate for the record:

Speaking at a campaign forum Monday, Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz called state election maps "rigged" and designed to take away votes from people in larger communities including Dane and Milwaukee counties.

"They do not reflect people in this state. I don't think you could sell any reasonable person that the maps are fair," said Protasiewicz, a Milwaukee County judge and one of four running for a seat on the state Supreme Court. "I can't tell you what I would do on a particular case, but I can tell you my values, and the maps are wrong."

I don't know if she is including the CD map when she refers to "state election maps," and further don't know how the CD maps could be viewed as screwing the twin liberal counties, except through the proportional or efficiency gap theory, which would require them to be sliced and diced. I guess we will find out. Perhaps she will hold her fire to the legislative maps.

And of course, now that the Pubs have a third thirds majority, in the state senate, she could be impeached and removed from office, given that a bunch of them might see their seats disappear. And then the governor could reappoint her. Sigh.

[Oryxslayer]

I also recently played around with the legislative lines. My goal in this map was "Michigan style" aka, semi-corrective mapping so that the overall result is both competitive overall and match the statewide popular vote. I think I achieved that result, to an acceptable degree even though the State Senate nesting makes things awkward on the lower district map. Throughout this process several things became apparent to be as absolutes in the event of a non-GOP biased remap, so I'll just add on to list Nyvin already started:

-

1. The BOW region is the most heavily gerrymandered.  There really should be 7 assembly seats and 2 state senate seats there that are competitive, with a good number being Biden seats.  
Currently the Dems only hold the three vote sinks in the assembly, and aren't competitive in any others in the assembly or senate.

2. Sheboygan really should have a Biden assembly seat that leans D.  It's a perfect COI and fits very nicely with the rest of the map, it's just partisan interests that wants the city split up.

3. Milwaukee county is a pain in a** to draw, but anyway, 5 senate districts should be within the county, with the one in the southwest most likely competitive.  The amount of splitting the GOP did and sending the districts way out into the country is awful, although SD-5 probably flips in the next few cycles if there's no redraw.

4. SD-17 (southwest) is an obvious gerrymander along with it's accompanying assembly districts.  It should go into Dane county a bit and lean D.

5. Eau Claire should have more of it's suburbs/exurbs in with it on the senate map, and make the assembly  districts better for the D's.

6. I think Huran and River Park (Northwest) should be put together to make an assembly district that's competitive, but that might just be my opinion.  

1. There will very likely be a Biden-won 'snake-by-lake-Winnebago' State House seat mainly built from Menasha and Neenah but also some areas to their south. This district basically needs to exist so as to not strand Oshkosh and connect it with Appleton in the Senate.

2. There will be two Biden State House seats nested in Green Bay + a bit more. How competitive depends upon the goals for the region overall. They will be paired with a third marginal State House seat in the suburbs to the south of Green Bay - which are a bit larger than 1 district + what Green Bay needs - to form a highly competitive State senate seat.

3. There should be a highly competitive State House seat in Wausau City + suburbs. The way I have drawn it appears extremely competitive: it appears to have always voted for all Statewide winning candidates that I have data for (including 2022) except 2018 Gov. Of course there are other ways of drawing it.

4. There will be a highly competitive seat in the Twin Cities exurbs. The way I have drawn it seems to be the best possible lines for Democrats, but this still only gets it to Trump+200 or 0.6%. It's also a seat that's historically GOP so you need Dems to win by a bit statewide - at least until 2022 when Evers carried it - so making it min-maxed for Dems/marginality seems fine.

5. Two Blue State House seats in the Eau Claire region. How democratic in each is an open question though. Here I made sure to divide things down the middle so both are equivalent, but there are plenty of alternatives where one is safer than the other.

6. There will be Blue seat(s) in the far NW counties of Douglass, Bayfield, Ashland, and Iron which doesn't vote Dem but is tied at the hip to the other three. Reminder that all the incumbents in this region right now are Republicans. The 2022 remap made the region better for the GOP, going from a marginal Biden 73rd State House seat to marginal Trump, and a 2% Trump 74th to 4% one, which made the already red but now slightly redder senate seat harder for Dems to hold.

This region is effectively a sliding scale. One one end of the scale is the pairing of Douglas and Bayfield and nothing else for one seat, and then stranding Ashland with like Sawyer and other bits. This creates one reliably Democratic seat and one that should go GOP except in a few scenarios. The other side of the scale is you split Bayfield and create two Dem seats, but both are going to be around 1% wins for Biden and be highly competitive. I opted for a middle ground, since the GOP are the incumbents, but anywhere on the scale is possible. The senate seat cannot be made Democratic without so serious gerrymandering, but you can try to keep it competitive.

7. There will be a marginal State House seat in Waukesha City: the community is larger than 1 seat, and is currently split down the middle to prevent competition. Nesting a State House seat in the city and then nibbling at the edges to satisfy surrounding districts produces a marginal GOP district. Marginal GOP though is the closest you can get to 50-50: this is true ancestral GOP turf and I'm fairly confident only Daniel Kelly has lost the district I drew - which is no more favorable for the GOP than the town overall - in the last several decades.

You will note that I didn't comment on Dane and Milwaukee. That's cause they have the most potential variation in districts, and what goals the potential remap pursues competitiveness, COIs, compactness, counties, or whatever will have a big impact on the outcomes here. So there really are no absolutes, other than the fact that Milwaukee still needs to have it's minority access districts.
_____________________________________________________________________

Colors shown on the House and Senate maps Below reflect 2020 Presidential partisanship. Overall Partisanship is 51-48 Biden in the State House and 17-16 Biden in the State Senate, but that fluctuates. State House seats are numbered based on nesting.









_______________________________________________________________









______________________________________________________________

Now for some things I particularly liked after adjusting the map around for a while. First, just to raw competitiveness of the map. DRA puts 20 State House districts inside their window of competitiveness. The map swings: Trump in 2016 wins 52 State House seats, Biden in 2020 wins 51, and the larger number of seats won by Johnson in 2016 and Baldwin in 2018 reflect their more confident statewide wins. Both close in around 60, which more reflects how Johnson was probably the high point for close-race GOP wins when it comes to the BOW region rather than any overall geographic advantage.

More specifically though, I like what happens with the 2022 data. Evers wins 54 district with his 3% win, the Dem AG wins by 1.5% and wins 52 seats,  La Follette wins by 0.3% and wins 50 seats, and then the successful GOP candidates who win by a tiny bit over 1% carry 50 seats. And using all this data suggests that the map is highly competitive even beyond the tightest districts.



The senate map looks neater from a birds eye, at least in terms of aesthetic shapes and especially around Madison. But it is less swingy overall based on results. This isn't to say their arn't marginal districts of course, cause there's quite a few depending on your definition. However, the lower seat count means that it is often just the Green Bay and the Wausau/Steven's Point districts that changes alignments in a bunch of tight races like 2022.

Another thing I specifically like is the Milwaukee region. Milwaukee County + Ozaukee County + the Menomonee Falls square from Waukesha county is a clean 6 Senate seat/18 State House seat grouping. Obviously I pair one of these senate seats with regions outside the grouping, and one with regions inside the grouping, but this is more to not strand the 4th Biden/Competitive House seat that should be drawn somewhere between Kenosha and Racine. Also makes the senate seats in WOW group better. The main feature of this grouping is allowing for some very neat and sensible distracts to be drawn in the inner NE and western Milwaukee County suburbs.

Obviously, in relation to the previous point, The obvious criticism would be what I happens to Menomonie Falls. But I should caution that this was done purely out of the desire to create a new minority seat out of district 7. If I decided to not follow this access line, then nothing in the big picture changes. Menomonee + surplus precincts from NW Milwaukee still votes Blue, just a bit closer to the margins. The only outcome that shifts is now it is electing a Democrat whose the candidate of choice for White primary voters and the overall minority-district count stays the same from the current map, whereas the cutup allows for an African American. Still would get paired in Senate 4 as the white block to avoid minority packing. Something like this:

[Nhoj]

The WI Supreme court invalidating the WI maps under state law would be the NC SCOTUS case on steroids. There is nothing in state law on redistricting other than districts must be contiguous and compact. Zip. Nada.

The WI state constitution doesn’t even really have much of an equal protection clause. It merely states that, “All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=does+the+wisconsin+state+constitutuion+have+an+equal+protection+clause

Here is some legal chatter on the WI redistricting law, or lack thereof:

“Jeff Mandell, board president of the liberal group Law Forward and attorney at Stafford Rosenbaum in Madison, believes there are several areas of the state constitution that could be grounds for a challenge.

"There is no hard and fast plan," he said. "There is no complaint or document that is written. But there are plenty of conversations going on about what such a lawsuit would look like."
A challenge could be based on the state constitution's redistricting provisions, he said, but also on other areas related to voting.

"You could also imagine claims that maybe it violates that right to vote," he said. "Is the right to vote merely the right to stand on a line on Election Day and cast a ballot? Or is it a right to cast a meaningful ballot?"

Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, says that even if a map challenge were to be brought before the state Supreme Court, he doubts a violation of the Wisconsin Constitution could be proven.

"The problem is that there really isn't anything in the Wisconsin Constitution, other than a requirement that the maps be contiguous and compact," he said. "And the thing about the maps in Wisconsin is that they are contiguous and compact."



https://www.wpr.org/wisconsin-supreme-court-april-race-state-legislature-redistricting-maps



If the WI high court redraws the maps based on the efficiency gap theory or whatever other theory it embraces, SCOTUS will bounce it. Roberts will write the opinion.

The Dems may well take over the House due to the abortion issue and Pub fecklessness in general, but the road to control will not be through Wisconsin.  It’s a dry hole.

We shall see. Anyone want to bet the other way?  

Maybe for the Congressional map, but there would be no grounds for the Federal Supreme Court to interfere itself on issues related to the Wisconsin Constitution, how the Wisconsin Supreme Court interprets said Constitution or state level maps. It would be a complete overstepping of their authority, which means they'll probably do it.

There also isn't really any reason Dems would need to overturn the Congressional Map, seeing as it is the map Evers made to comply with the previous court. Both WI-3 and 1 are winnable in the right circumstances.

[Spectator]

The WI Supreme court invalidating the WI maps under state law would be the NC SCOTUS case on steroids. There is nothing in state law on redistricting other than districts must be contiguous and compact. Zip. Nada.

The WI state constitution doesn’t even really have much of an equal protection clause. It merely states that, “All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; to secure these rights, governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=does+the+wisconsin+state+constitutuion+have+an+equal+protection+clause

Here is some legal chatter on the WI redistricting law, or lack thereof:

“Jeff Mandell, board president of the liberal group Law Forward and attorney at Stafford Rosenbaum in Madison, believes there are several areas of the state constitution that could be grounds for a challenge.

"There is no hard and fast plan," he said. "There is no complaint or document that is written. But there are plenty of conversations going on about what such a lawsuit would look like."
A challenge could be based on the state constitution's redistricting provisions, he said, but also on other areas related to voting.

"You could also imagine claims that maybe it violates that right to vote," he said. "Is the right to vote merely the right to stand on a line on Election Day and cast a ballot? Or is it a right to cast a meaningful ballot?"

Rick Esenberg, president of the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, says that even if a map challenge were to be brought before the state Supreme Court, he doubts a violation of the Wisconsin Constitution could be proven.

"The problem is that there really isn't anything in the Wisconsin Constitution, other than a requirement that the maps be contiguous and compact," he said. "And the thing about the maps in Wisconsin is that they are contiguous and compact."



https://www.wpr.org/wisconsin-supreme-court-april-race-state-legislature-redistricting-maps



If the WI high court redraws the maps based on the efficiency gap theory or whatever other theory it embraces, SCOTUS will bounce it. Roberts will write the opinion.

The Dems may well take over the House due to the abortion issue and Pub fecklessness in general, but the road to control will not be through Wisconsin.  It’s a dry hole.

We shall see. Anyone want to bet the other way?  

Maybe for the Congressional map, but there would be no grounds for the Federal Supreme Court to interfere itself on issues related to the Wisconsin Constitution, how the Wisconsin Supreme Court interprets said Constitution or state level maps. It would be a complete overstepping of their authority, which means they'll probably do it.

There also isn't really any reason Dems would need to overturn the Congressional Map, seeing as it is the map Evers made to comply with the previous court. Both WI-3 and 1 are winnable in the right circumstances.

Evers submitted it as a “least change” map that the prior majority on the court wanted. Protasiewicz was very vocal in her opinion on “least change”

[GALeftist]

The annoying thing about drawing a 4-4 Wisconsin is that, while making WI-03 a Biden district is fairly trivial even without splitting Dane just because Madison has such a weirdly large geographic sphere of influence, I'm pretty sure making WI-01 a Biden district is straight up impossible without splitting Milwaukee. You can make that look fine, of course, but the real issue is that you need to put a bunch of WOW into WI-04 to compensate, which always makes my WI-05 look pretty gross. Still better than the existing map imo (which has the Portage tentacle, splits WOW, splits Fox Cities, etc.), but still, I wish there was a more elegant solution.

[ProgressiveModerate]

The annoying thing about drawing a 4-4 Wisconsin is that, while making WI-03 a Biden district is fairly trivial even without splitting Dane just because Madison has such a weirdly large geographic sphere of influence, I'm pretty sure making WI-01 a Biden district is straight up impossible without splitting Milwaukee. You can make that look fine, of course, but the real issue is that you need to put a bunch of WOW into WI-04 to compensate, which always makes my WI-05 look pretty gross. Still better than the existing map imo (which has the Portage tentacle, splits WOW, splits Fox Cities, etc.), but still, I wish there was a more elegant solution.

This WI-01 is Biden + 2.5, and Milwaukee is kept whole in WI-04. However, this WI-01 sucks from a COI and makes the rest of the map a nightmare to draw.

I think people need to rmbr though that there's not a *major* difference between having a Biden + 1 vs a Trump + 1 seat, and trying to aim for exactly a 4-4 map may not be the best route to go here.

[Epaminondas]

I also recently played around with the legislative lines.

Incredible work as usual - when's your blog coming? - but would you explain the meaning of "declination" in your last graph? Can't tell whether it's the gradient of the LBF or some sort of angular measure.

[Oryxslayer]

I also recently played around with the legislative lines.

Incredible work as usual - when's your blog coming? - but would you explain the meaning of "declination" in your last graph? Can't tell whether it's the gradient of the LBF or some sort of angular measure.

It's just pulled straight from DRA, so I can't speak to it. Graphs like these were used often in the anti-gerrymandering pieces over a year ago, especially  by Sam Wang's PEC-affiliated outlets, and is similarly part of the evidence used in redistricting lawsuits. That's why DRA added it, cause a competitive map with many districts should look close to the linear line, with obvious shifts to the left or right of the chart based on the overall states lean. A Gerrymandered chart looks very obvious, arrows added for visual effect:


Current WI House



TX House



GA Senate



MD Senate

[Epaminondas]

It's just pulled straight from DRA, so I can't speak to it. Graphs like these were used often in the anti-gerrymandering pieces over a year ago, especially  by Sam Wang's PEC-affiliated outlets, and is similarly part of the evidence used in redistricting lawsuits. That's why DRA added it, cause a competitive map with many districts should look close to the linear line

Understood. It's the angular increase in competitive steepness after the median seat, or the rise between left and right competitiveness gradients.
I'll look into how Wang uses them, haven't heard his name much since his 2016 prediction.

(Beautiful arrows.)

[GALeftist]

The annoying thing about drawing a 4-4 Wisconsin is that, while making WI-03 a Biden district is fairly trivial even without splitting Dane just because Madison has such a weirdly large geographic sphere of influence, I'm pretty sure making WI-01 a Biden district is straight up impossible without splitting Milwaukee. You can make that look fine, of course, but the real issue is that you need to put a bunch of WOW into WI-04 to compensate, which always makes my WI-05 look pretty gross. Still better than the existing map imo (which has the Portage tentacle, splits WOW, splits Fox Cities, etc.), but still, I wish there was a more elegant solution.

This WI-01 is Biden + 2.5, and Milwaukee is kept whole in WI-04. However, this WI-01 sucks from a COI and makes the rest of the map a nightmare to draw.

I think people need to rmbr though that there's not a *major* difference between having a Biden + 1 vs a Trump + 1 seat, and trying to aim for exactly a 4-4 map may not be the best route to go here.

I think I agree, actually. From a fairness perspective you can actually not only keep Milwaukee whole but keep WI-04 entirely within Milwaukee County and still push WI-01 under Trump+1 if you put your thumb on the scale somewhat with what parts of Milwaukee and Rock you add to it; that's essentially 50-50 and not meaningfully different from, like, PA-07 or whatever other narrow Biden seats. However, I think you pretty obviously have a majority on the court for strict proportionality now, and given that you in all likelihood have 4 districts that will consistently elect Republicans I think you have a fairly strong incentive for Democrats to argue that WI-01 and WI-03 ought to at least lean their way in a 50-50 state.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

In the wake of the Democratic victory over Republicans - a win for fair maps - I hereby propose a map to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.



This corrects for the big bias for Republicans that existed under the maps in the 2010s and in 2022. It creates good districts that have strong communities of interest.

The cohesive nature of each of the districts are as follows.

1st: This seat combines areas alongside Lake Michigan, including all of Kenosha and Racine County, all the way to the Menominee River, in the process serving as a Latino interest seat and unifying Latino areas in cities alongside the shoreline.

2nd: This district has most of Dane County, as well as some northern parts of southeast Wisconsin. It takes on most of Waukesha County in order to reach quota. It retains the same basic core as it did pre-2023 and post-2023.

3rd: This CD takes in a wide range of areas along and close to the Mississippi River, and takes in Rock County to reach the full population. If it instead pushed north, it would encroach on the compact WI-07, and if it went into Central WI, it would have hurt WI-06.

4th: This district takes in basically the rest of the coastline of the Wisconsin (on Lake Michigan, anyhow). The district also has Green Bay, home to the Packers. (Some) Packers fans in Milwaukee now can enjoy the Packers being in their home district.

5th: This congressional district centers on rural and urban areas along linked highways running from downtown Milwaukee and the Illinois state border. It also takes many parts of Milwaukee that cannot go in the 4th. It, along with the 5th, serves as a seat where especially relatively substantial numbers of the Dem primary electorate would be Black.

6th: This seat combines the urban community of interest in Central and eastern Wisconsin. Appleton, Oshkosh, Stevens Point, all are within this seats' borders.  Unfortunately, it would have ruined the 8th to have it include Green Bay. Boxed in by the 7th, 6th, and 3rd, it takes in parts of Dane.

7th: This seat is very nice, and is compact and basically perfect. I loved it so much I accepted an imperfect 3rd, 6th, and 8th just to see it exist.

8th: Wisconsin is 30 percent rural. The state needs two rural seats, and WI-03 doesn't count because a big chunk of its population comes from La Crosse, Eau Claire, and Rock Counties. WI-07 is one such rural seat, and this is another. It does have some exurban/suburban communities within it, but that can't be helped. If we have a quasi-dedicated rural seat in Western Wisconsin, there should also be one, or as close as one that can exist, in Eastern Wisconsin. Since this is Eastern Wisconsin, having it not completely rural is fine...population densities are higher in this part of the state.

I look forward to this map being adopted by the WI supreme court who will overturn the currently unfair Republican maps, and the court masters they will appoint to draw new maps to take their place.

[Oryxslayer]

The new lawsuit against the legislative maps uses DRA screenshots, so we have a clear idea of their gerrymadering allegations against the map, you can read it here.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I think the court overturning the maps is somewhat inevitable at this point.

The real question is do they go for a partisan-blind maps, or maps that purposely seeks to overcome unfavorable geography?

[Atlas Force]

In the wake of the Democratic victory over Republicans - a win for fair maps - I hereby propose a map to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.



This corrects for the big bias for Republicans that existed under the maps in the 2010s and in 2022. It creates good districts that have strong communities of interest.

The cohesive nature of each of the districts are as follows.

1st: This seat combines areas alongside Lake Michigan, including all of Kenosha and Racine County, all the way to the Menominee River, in the process serving as a Latino interest seat and unifying Latino areas in cities alongside the shoreline.

2nd: This district has most of Dane County, as well as some northern parts of southeast Wisconsin. It takes on most of Waukesha County in order to reach quota. It retains the same basic core as it did pre-2023 and post-2023.

3rd: This CD takes in a wide range of areas along and close to the Mississippi River, and takes in Rock County to reach the full population. If it instead pushed north, it would encroach on the compact WI-07, and if it went into Central WI, it would have hurt WI-06.

4th: This district takes in basically the rest of the coastline of the Wisconsin (on Lake Michigan, anyhow). The district also has Green Bay, home to the Packers. (Some) Packers fans in Milwaukee now can enjoy the Packers being in their home district.

5th: This congressional district centers on rural and urban areas along linked highways running from downtown Milwaukee and the Illinois state border. It also takes many parts of Milwaukee that cannot go in the 4th. It, along with the 5th, serves as a seat where especially relatively substantial numbers of the Dem primary electorate would be Black.

6th: This seat combines the urban community of interest in Central and eastern Wisconsin. Appleton, Oshkosh, Stevens Point, all are within this seats' borders.  Unfortunately, it would have ruined the 8th to have it include Green Bay. Boxed in by the 7th, 6th, and 3rd, it takes in parts of Dane.

7th: This seat is very nice, and is compact and basically perfect. I loved it so much I accepted an imperfect 3rd, 6th, and 8th just to see it exist.

8th: Wisconsin is 30 percent rural. The state needs two rural seats, and WI-03 doesn't count because a big chunk of its population comes from La Crosse, Eau Claire, and Rock Counties. WI-07 is one such rural seat, and this is another. It does have some exurban/suburban communities within it, but that can't be helped. If we have a quasi-dedicated rural seat in Western Wisconsin, there should also be one, or as close as one that can exist, in Eastern Wisconsin. Since this is Eastern Wisconsin, having it not completely rural is fine...population densities are higher in this part of the state.

I look forward to this map being adopted by the WI supreme court who will overturn the currently unfair Republican maps, and the court masters they will appoint to draw new maps to take their place.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Vosem said that the Congressional maps is very unlikely to be overturned because the only argument the WISC could use to do so would actually undermine and diminish its own power, but he didn't elaborate on how. I'm interested in hearing that because that sounds rather strange.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

Vosem said that the Congressional maps is very unlikely to be overturned because the only argument the WISC could use to do so would actually undermine and diminish its own power, but he didn't elaborate on how. I'm interested in hearing that because that sounds rather strange.

Vosem literally believes in the most optimistic(for gop) outcome in all the redraws

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Vosem said that the Congressional maps is very unlikely to be overturned because the only argument the WISC could use to do so would actually undermine and diminish its own power, but he didn't elaborate on how. I'm interested in hearing that because that sounds rather strange.

Vosem literally believes in the most optimistic(for gop) outcome in all the redraws

I'm more just intrigued in hearing the reasoning that by ordering a redraw the WISC would diminish its own power in future cases.

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/PoliticsWolf/status/1687523198965862409?t=fHfHq6QcstpfqA8oVD...

Congressional suit is apparently also forthcoming,  they are probably just seeing how immediate the legislative suit will get taken up.