2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Wisconsin

[Nyvin]

Regarding the State Assembly and whether or not the GOP can get a supermajority, it doesn't seem realistic to me (State Senate is unfortunately).  

This is the bare minimum seats that I see the Democrats getting after redistricting if municipal and county lines are respected at all by the court map -

1 Iron Range area
1 Eau Claire
1 Portage County
1 La Crosse
1 Appleton
1 Oshkosh
1 Green Bay
1 Green County
2 Rock County
8 Dane County
14 Milwaukee County
1 Racine
1 Kenosha
1 Ozaukee County

That totals 35 seats and 33 or lower would mean the GOP has the supermajority.   Again this is pretty much "bare minimum" seats that can be drawn assuming a bad court map is made.  I'm figuring Ozaukee's trend will continue in 2022 and the suburn seat that flipped there last year will stay Dem in the end.

The Democrats currently only hold two seats that I'd see as vulnerable - a second seat in the Iron Range (74) and a second seat in La Crosse (94).   Everything else they hold is either solid or in an area that should be trending their way going forward (mostly the southeast).

There's a couple seats in the Green Bay area and the southeast that will be swingy going forward in pretty much any map that's drawn (4th district in Green Bay would be borderline Lean D by 2022 with no remap).

[Nyvin]

Regarding the State Assembly and whether or not the GOP can get a supermajority, it doesn't seem realistic to me (State Senate is unfortunately).  

This is the bare minimum seats that I see the Democrats getting after redistricting if municipal and county lines are respected at all by the court map -

1 Iron Range area
1 Eau Claire
1 Portage County
1 La Crosse
1 Appleton
1 Oshkosh
1 Green Bay
1 Green County
2 Rock County
8 Dane County
14 Milwaukee County
1 Racine
1 Kenosha
1 Ozaukee County

That totals 35 seats and 33 or lower would mean the GOP has the supermajority.   Again this is pretty much "bare minimum" seats that can be drawn assuming a bad court map is made.  I'm figuring Ozaukee's trend will continue in 2022 and the suburn seat that flipped there last year will stay Dem in the end.

The Democrats currently only hold two seats that I'd see as vulnerable - a second seat in the Iron Range (74) and a second seat in La Crosse (94).   Everything else they hold is either solid or in an area that should be trending their way going forward (mostly the southeast).

There's a couple seats in the Green Bay area and the southeast that will be swingy going forward in pretty much any map that's drawn (4th district in Green Bay would be borderline Lean D by 2022 with no remap).

No they would not be winning an Ozaukee County seat that doesn't dip into Milwaukee County. It wouldn't even have voted for Biden and local trends will lag presidential there quite heavily. Do probably agree on the rest though.

If they push out the Milwaukee county portion then that's about 25k people left in Milwaukee.  25k more people to distribute in Milwaukee probably means they concede 15 districts in Milwaukee,  they already lost districts 13 and 14 which span the Waukesha and Milwaukee border.

[Nyvin]

What are people’s thoughts on whether WI-01 will remain in roughly its current form. It’s an odd district, largely because it includes generally Democratic Janesville; if the GOP had tried to draw an optimal map, they would have packed Janesville in with Madison, but Paul Ryan lived there, as does the current Rep, Bryan Steil. The main source of GOP strength in the district is from the southern half of Waukesha County, but as this trends D, the district might get less comfortable for the GOP (probably fine for the rest of the 2020s, though), although this is counterbalanced to an extent by the R trend in Kenosha. Anyway, if, as expected, Wisconsin gets a court-drawn map, the biggest threat to the district would be the fact that it doesn’t make a lot of sense from a CoI perspective, although the court could of course settle for a least change map.
 

I agree both Janesville and Waukesha in the district doesn't really make sense (maybe a *small* part of Waukesha if really needed).   What's most practical is adding more of the southern part of Milwaukee to the district and leaving the three southeast counties whole.  

That said, unlike the WoW counties, both Racine and Kenosha are trending at a snail's pace, if at all, so the district probably won't be truly competitive for quite some time.

I always thought Rock county should go with Jefferson and Dane, the highways are kinda setup in that manor -

[Nyvin]

You should love one of my maps then no?

The first one yeah, that'd be fine.   Don't like the idea of Jefferson with Racine/Kenosha,  that's...awkward.

[Nyvin]

This would work!





https://davesredistricting.org/join/f0d5df9e-5cee-48df-9714-2b3d3a5e1e2c

[Nyvin]

Ron Kind is retiring and will not run for reelection in WI-03 in 2022. This will make it much easier to draw it more Republican.

https://twitter.com/allymutnick/status/1425169654465581057

Well, that one is probably a goner,  it was really on borrowed time anyway, similar to IL-17.   

Hopefully the next map makes WI-1 more competitive cause that's probably the most realistic path to keeping the map 5-3.

[Nyvin]

That purple district works good for making a WI-7 with no county splits up north.



https://davesredistricting.org/join/c7785023-9693-423b-9934-c75c059a4f38

Love the district with Green Bay and Fox Valley together.

[Nyvin]

1 county split map



https://davesredistricting.org/join/8068ede1-8b6a-4c57-a13e-9e82ac75a494


I believe it keeps all incumbents in their districts too,  if Tom Tiffany is from Oneida.

Too bad the website requires you to check a box saying your a resident of Wisconsin or I would seriously submit this map.

[Nyvin]

1 county split map



https://davesredistricting.org/join/8068ede1-8b6a-4c57-a13e-9e82ac75a494


I believe it keeps all incumbents in their districts too,  if Tom Tiffany is from Oneida.

Too bad the website requires you to check a box saying your a resident of Wisconsin or I would seriously submit this map.

Nice map. That looks like a 2-1-4? Trying to deal with Green bay (districts 6 and is always kinda annoying.

Ugh...for real, there is no good way to handle that part of the state.  I had another configuration that worked better but it required a county split of just 6k people :-(

[Nyvin]

Congressional map 3 would be okay.

[Nyvin]

Does Evers have veto power over the maps?

yes, requires two thirds vote in legislature to override, which Republicans don't have (barely) in either chamber.

[Nyvin]

Assuming they keep all the county splits the same, this most likely means Beloit gets added to WI-1, which is a (very small) positive for the Democrats.

[Nyvin]

This would be my take



https://davesredistricting.org/join/71ccdfb7-94c7-4aed-aee5-d92b63023075

As expected, the only change that really matters is that between 1, 2, and 4.   WI-1 goes to Trump+8.3, down from 9.2 right now.

Honestly it's kind of amazing how effectively spread out the Republicans are in Wisconsin,  it's not just a matter of Democrats being packed in Milwaukee and Dane but also Republicans themselves having perfect geography in the state.  

A decade after their gerrymander was drawn and 4 of their 5 seats are all in the perfect range between 55% Trump and 60% Trump, not too much and not too little.  No real weakness anywhere to holding 50% of the delegation for this decade at minimum.

[Nyvin]

Good, because there never was any reason for WI-1 to go into Waukesha to begin with.

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Yes. North Carolina.

Was speaking more about the current court (Post-Barrett in other words).

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Yes. North Carolina.

Was speaking more about the current court (Post-Barrett in other words).

I noted a counter-example from the 90's, I think. The decision went against the
GOP's ability to pack as many Democrats as possible, because these political
oacking of voters was deemed "racial gerrymanders."  The decision cuts two
ways, Democrats can't crack Black-majority districts to create White liberal districts,
and, Republicans can't create districts that are "too" Black, whatever that means.

The notion that the Court has invariable favored the GOP is simply false.

Again, I'm talking about Court decisions made in the 2021-2022 timeframe,  obviously throughout history the court has not favored Republicans exclusively, that would be nuts.

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Actually,  this is what you said. There was restriction to this term.

Even with that restriction, the Court did not side with the GOP on the Wisconsin Congressional map. What you said is simply false.

They refused to take the case, they didn't make a decision in that.   I guess I wasn't exact in my original wording but I typed it pretty quickly.

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Actually,  this is what you said. There was restriction to this term.

Even with that restriction, the Court did not side with the GOP on the Wisconsin Congressional map. What you said is simply false.

They refused to take the case, they didn't make a decision in that.   I guess I wasn't exact in my original wording but I typed it pretty quickly.

Their decision to not take the case disfavored the GOP, did it not?

"Decision" being the legal term for the papers the court writes after it hears arguments.

[Nyvin]

Just looking ahead at what might happen if the new court majority strikes down the Senate map.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/55a7886e-0a74-4fac-9e68-7b8608b63ea6

[Nyvin]

I'd rather not see the congressional map get redrawn.  Stick with redrawing the state legislature maps.

I just can't see a court drawn map doing things like splitting Milwaukee or Madison.  They might split part of Dane County, but that's probably as good as it gets.  Not worth it imo.

[Nyvin]

After building out a full state assembly map with an accompanying state senate map, here's the main points I found, if any weren't obvious already -

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 Hudson and River Falls (Northwest) should be put together to make an assembly district that's competitive, but that might just be my opinion.  

State Senate -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/f5da008a-821c-4ada-a961-c3b5ae0fa8cf



State Assembly -
https://davesredistricting.org/join/6b0d5e35-f6be-4452-8d48-400f5284a0f8

[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.

[Nyvin]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1710422196680585286

You go girl!

[Nyvin]

Rebecca Bradley really doesn't seem like an intelligent person.

But anyway - Yeah, I'm almost positive new maps are coming.  The 4 liberal justices are all on a warpath here, it's pretty obvious.  Surprisingly the most tame liberal justice is actually Protasiewicz, lol.