New PA Maps In Effect

[Nyvin]

Woah, this is huge for PA redistricting precedent:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So this pretty much guarantees PA-8 isn't going to change much since it's already 95% exclusive to Bucks county.

Also obviously, PA-7 is going to be sacrificed to the Dems since Meehan is DOA nowadays.  PA-16 will almost certainly be moved west to fully incorporate Lancaster and Reading will be removed.

Nothing west of Harrisburg really matters all that much, so that basically leaves PA-6 and PA-17 as the open questions for redrawing. 

I'm thinking this ends with PA-7 as safe Dem, PA-6 tilt D, PA-8 remain tossup, and PA-17 might get more Republican. 

[Nyvin]

Wait how can SCOTUS hear a case that was decided based on the Pennsylvania Constitution, right?

Wouldn't they need to declare the Pennsylvania Constitution unconstitutional to overturn it?

Wasn't that what was done with the state constitutions that banned gay marriage?

That was when there was a national precedent set against prohibiting gay marriage,  it'd be Extremely difficult to set any national precedent for a state's constitution on congressional district maps.

[Nyvin]

Unfortunately, Republicans are probably just going to throw Pat Meehan under the bus and call it a day, only netting Democrats 1 seat.

If they move PA-7 almost entirely within Delaware County, then that still leaves Chester County for PA-6, which would be at most a tossup seat.    They really can't do much with PA-8 since the court order is saying no county/municipal splits and Bucks is almost perfectly a district by itself.

Also if the "No County Splits" is taken heavily enough and Allegheny county is only permitted to have 2 districts in it, then the second district outside of Pittsburgh would be Lean R at the most.

[Nyvin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Even Republicans admit SCOTUS won't bail them out this time. Also, I think I identified Krazen...

A "power grab" is drawing fair maps that split as few counties as possible....as opposed to the travesty that PA currently has for a congressional map?   

I say "HA!"

[Nyvin]

I really hope that the SCOTUS doesn’t issue a stay order (my gut tells me they will), because Democrats may need to do better in Pennsylvania to compensate for them possibly missing the ballot in some of the California House Races (CA-48, CA-39, and CA-45 if Raths runs).

If they didn't do it with Florida, they won't here for the same exact situation.

I agree that their is no legal precedent for them to get involved, but that may not be enough to stop a Republican-controlled SCOTUS from intervening to save a few Republican districts.

The only way to stop it is to declare it unconstitutional for state constitutions to regulate congressional district maps.   That would be too extreme of a ruling even for the Republican Justices.

[Nyvin]

If the map gets struck down by the supreme court, what do you guys think of this one I drew? Its very clean, minimizes county splits, and keeps towns whole (except for Philadelphia)
1 (White) D+38 VRA Black district 45% Black 35% White
2 (Green) D+30 VRA Black district 42% black (most whites are republicans in E Philly)
3 (Purple) R+8
4. (Red) R+14
5. (Gold) R+16
6. (Teal) R+2
7. (Gray) D+13
8. (Slate Blue (Bucks Co)) R+2
9. (Cyan) R+22
10. (Pink) R+12
11. (Light Green) R+10
12. (Cornflower Blue (West of Pittsburgh)) R+7
13. (Salmon(MontCo)) D+8
14. (Brown) D+17
15. (Orange) R+3
16. (Lime (Lancaster)) R+8
17. (Dark Gray) R+5
18. (Light Yellow) R+14

So when the court strikes down a map saying it's drawn with too much partisan intent, you draw another map that makes 13R-5D.   Exactly the same representation as they have now.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the court (or Wolf) won't buy that.

You split metros everywhere (Harrisburg/Cumberland,  Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, Allentown/Northampton) and that definitely does not minimize county splits either.

[Nyvin]

Here's my quick take on it:



Just a few tidbits-

PA-6:  The Republicans will obviously push to have the Chester district go west into Lancaster, while the Democrats will want to go north into Reading/Berks.   I'm assuming between the courts and Wolf the Democrats will probably prevail on this one.

PA-8: 95% sure this ends up mostly unchanged and remains mostly a tossup district.

PA-12:  I know Butler matches with Allegheny better to make two districts, but that leaves you with Beaver in an incredibly odd spot with either a wrap around with PA-18 or a reach southward from PA-3.   I decided it's better to put Allegheny with Beaver since the difference between Beaver/Butler is only like ~13k people, which can easily be made up elsewhere.

PA-17:  Cartwright actually has a good chance to benefit from all this just due to how picture perfectly Lackawanna, Luzerne, and Monroe counties form a district with hardly any split needed, and all linked together with highways.   The district matches what the SCoPA was directing almost exactly.   This district actually moves slightly more than one PVI to the left from where it is now.

PA-15:  This one isn't quite as good as PA-17, but still Lehigh, Northampton, and most of Carbon form about as good of a compact, neat district as you can expect, and has almost exactly what the court is asking for with their order.

I kinda dislike what PA-10 turned into ("the leftovers" district) but PA-17 is just too beautiful to pass up.

Here's close up of SEPA:




SWPA:



2012/2016 PVI's:

PA-1: D+27.35  (37.1% AA)

PA-2: D+41.06 (52.5% AA)

PA-3: R+7.23

PA-4: R+17.39

PA-5: R+16.92

PA-6: D+1.71

PA-7: D+11.53

PA-8: R+1.17

PA-9: R+22.07

PA-10: R+17.03

PA-11: R+8.04

PA-12: R+3.95

PA-13: D+8.33

PA-14: D+13.72

PA-15: R+0.71

PA-16: R+11.81

PA-17: D+0.26

PA-18: R+13.91

5D - 9R - 4s


I also attempted my best to keep this as "least change" as possible (except obviously SEPA).   The key points for the redistricting will be PA-6 going north or west, PA-15 including all or part of Northampton, and probably PA-17 having all or part of Luzerne.    Other than that not much seems to matter if county lines are respected enough.

[Nyvin]

Its pretty much my map from page five. This isn't a bad thing though, Pennsylvania has a whole lot of districts that more or less draw themselves, so all fair maps are going to be reasonably similar. The difference between this map and my previous one is that this map places priority on keeping the current districts located reasonably close to their current iterations over county cuts, and my map did the opposite. This map cuts 12 counties, but each district is based in its former location. My two maps only cut 7 counties each, but saw the 9th/12th/18th migrate around a bit as I undid the current map. That is tradeoffs.

Only downside of this map I can see is that the court ordered as few county cuts as possible, and little to now lower division cuts (I'm fairly sure your map cuts philly wards, but that can be fixed). So, if I was the court, I would select my map, even with the moving districts, since it cuts less counties - as per their orders.

Wow, I honestly didn't notice how similar they were, lol, that really wasn't intentional.   You're right though, especially the northeast part of the map.    I'll be mad if they don't draw the PA-17 district that way,  there really isn't any possible argument not to.

Some of the county splits probably could've been done better, I'm sure it can be improved.   Really a lot of the western 2/3's of the map is mostly irrelevant, all the action is in the eastern third.   

[Nyvin]

I'm pretty sure this 5-4 decision will be instrumental in how this plays out in PA:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/06/29/supreme-court-arizona-congress-maps/27400015/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Nyvin]

I really hope the Republicans think this through, because if the Supreme Court rules any kind of state intervention for redistricting unconstitutional, there's nothing stopping states like California, New Jersey, New York, Washington, and others from disbanding their committees and redrawing heavily gerrymandered seats.

In the end it's the Republicans that currently benefit quite heavily from Redistricting Reform.   The only states where they don't (that I can think of) are Florida and Arizona.

[Nyvin]

I really hope the Republicans think this through, because if the Supreme Court rules any kind of state intervention for redistricting unconstitutional, there's nothing stopping states like California, New Jersey, New York, Washington, and others from disbanding their committees and redrawing heavily gerrymandered seats.

In the end it's the Republicans that currently benefit quite heavily from Redistricting Reform.   The only states where they don't (that I can think of) are Florida and Arizona.

There's also Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, North Carolina, Virginia, and Michigan. Redistricting reform hurts Republicans in those states.

If you're talking about the VRA I'm pretty sure that wouldn't apply.  

I would love to see the Republicans try to gerrymander any more seats out of Ohio and North Carolina.

[Nyvin]

Is it Alito's decision or of the entire court?

They need 5 votes in favor.   Obviously Alito didn't get them.

[Nyvin]

Republicans in the state legislature now have 10 days to draw a new map and Governor Wolf said he will veto any new gerrymander.

Come on Wolf don't cave.

The main fear is Republicans working with machine Democrats in Philly to ensure that Philly keeps 3 seats, at the expense of a fair map.

Isn't that almost a no-go now that Bob Brady is gone?   It always was a real longshot with how the court order was worded.  

Regardless there will be Delco, Bucks, and MontCo anchored districts in any map...it's really just a question of what happens to Chester county.

[Nyvin]

Judging by how redistricting played out in other split states (and even a state like Florida, with unified control), it's unlikely that Republicans can agree on a map that Wolf + PASC would OK.

Generally speaking, I think most lawmakers who are used to getting their way in redistricting are just not capable of drawing a fair map. They are too greedy and unfamiliar with the concept of not gaming the system. The reaction to this ruling kind of shows that. Instead of just saying, "ah well, we had a brutal gerrymander for most of the decade, let's just get this over with," they instead flail around and start cooking up desperate legal schemes/appeals and even fking impeachment for gods sakes.

Just wait until the PASC overturns the legislative maps, and a bipartisan commission where ties are broken by the PASC is put together to do the redraw

You are essentially correct:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Basically they are going to make as little changes as possible, but try to fit in the requirements made by the PASC, while only having now 8 days to do it. No way Governor Wolf will go for that.

Source

They should look at the map I made on page 7 :-P

I knew "least change" was going to come up at some point or another, it always does.

[Nyvin]

Pa. Supreme Court releases gerrymandering opinion: 2011 map violates 'free and equal' elections

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/pennsylvania/pa-supreme-court-releases-gerrymandering-opinion-2011-map-violates-free-and-equal-elections-20180207.html?mobi=true

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Majority opinion: http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-1-2018majorityopinion.pdf?cb=1
Concurring and dissenting opinion: http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-1-2018concdissopinion.pdf?cb=1
Dissenting opinions: One and two

Baer's opinion explains why the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is violating due process and the US Constitution Elections clause.

I'm glad we have the Supreme Court to decide those things instead of partisan hacks on forums.

[Nyvin]

And failed to persuade Justice Alito?

To be fair, I'm sure Justice Alito would have gone along with any justification (dissenting opinion, Scottish law, Klingon precedent) that preserved 13 Republican butts in seats for 2018, but if he couldn't get 4 of his colleagues to go along there was no point in looking like a loser on the stay.

Another possibility is that Alito knows that SCOTUS has the votes to rule against political gerrymandering and will do so later this year. That means PASC would likely be upheld. Therefore a stay serves no good purpose from SCOTUS' perspective.

One can dream....

Well clearly Alito knows the outcome in Gill v Whitford (WI). Like the legislative case in WI, the PA case is based in part on the requirements of the state constitution. That differentiates PA from the gerrymandering cases for MD and NC which are federal questions only. It seems to me that if Gill was going in favor of the state, Alito would almost certainly have gone for a stay for the PA map. But if Gill was going against the state, and the argument in conference was something that would also apply to PA, then then the fate of the PA case is already sealed. In late Mar SCOTUS hears Benisek v. Lamone (MD) and the questions there may shed even more light as to the direction of SCOTUS' thinking on the subject.

A complication is that the PA Supreme Court finally explained their decision, and endorsed the efficiency theory, meaning the map needs to be gerrymandered to help the Dems get more proportionality (one map somebody drew at RRH had a seat going from Lackawanna to Centre county, excluding Luzerne in a long erose snake with hideous bridge chops as an example of this concept). It is highly unlikely Justice Kennedy will adopt that concept, so to that extent PA law and federal law will substantially diverge. Things are really a mess now because the efficiency theory and minimizing chops and maximizing compactness, don't go together very well at all in states such as PA.

That map doesn't appear to be a complete set of Congressional Districts though, the yellow district is certainly quite overpopulated.

Plus it was intentionally made to look ridiculous.  There's no reason for that northern border district and you don't need to split Dauphin between three districts just for two examples.  The MontCo/Berks district look overpopulated as well.

They're taking the concept of efficiency theory to the extreme.

[Nyvin]

Let's just say darn near anything is better than the system in place now...

[Nyvin]

It's obvious they're trying to placate the Philly dems with 3 seats.    PA-7 is just basically drawn as the Dem vote sink for everything outside of Philly that's left.

The Republicans seem extremely hellbent on keeping Harrisburg and Cumberland separated, even though it's really no threat whatsoever till 2022 redistricting.

I agree splitting Allegheny three ways and MontCo four ways is entirely unneeded.   

The Dauphin-Luzerne district just seem pointless too.

All of that is pretty non-issue though partisan-wise though.    The real sticking point will obviously be what they did to PA-6.  They put way too much of Chester into PA-7 and intentionally snaked around Reading.    There's absolutely zero chance that Wolf approves that part.

[Nyvin]

That map is god awful and completely ignores the court order.   19 county splits???  That's absurd.

And the courts wanted more competitive districts and they make PA-1 and PA-2 into even HEAVIER dem vote sinks?

This is a slap in the face

[Nyvin]

Nate Cohen got the 2016 results:



Source

In other words,  they basically gave up PA-7 to draw a gerrymander pretty much everywhere else.

6. 11, 16, and 17 all maximize the use of Republican voters in their areas.   District 4 is the only Republican vote sink east of Harrisburg. 

[Nyvin]

This diagram perfectly illustrates my thoughts on the GOP map:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/wonk/wp/2018/02/11/pennsylvania-republicans-have-drawn-a-new-congressional-map-that-is-just-as-gerrymandered-as-the-old-one/

It's a partisan gerrymander without the insane lines.   You can't get those results without having partisan intent.

[Nyvin]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

At least they'll be getting rid of that hideous arm into DelCo

[Nyvin]

Gov Wolf:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.governor.pa.gov/governor-tom-wolf-rejects-partisan-gerrymandered-map/

[Nyvin]

Thanks for the date Gass3268!

Of course the a***ole vetoed it.  Now the horrific SC can kiss Wolf's behind and draw it his way.  #ImpeachThem.

Of course he would. Why would he approve another Republican gerrymander?

I have to admit, I don't usually see strongly worded posts from you. I'm a bit surprised to see it over a Republican gerrymander being overturned. This is all part of the game, right? Republicans rigged the maps for most of the decade, and they are finally getting their due. Who cares if the court's decision was partisan or not. It's pretty clear at this point that politics is just a game, with each player vying to obtain power via any means necessary

Oh, you think the PA Supreme Court will draw a fair map......

If it improves from 13R 5D.....would you consider that "more" fair?

I'm assuming the answer is no.

[Nyvin]

This is the map PA House Democrats propose.

That's....an interesting way to do PA-16.   

Allegheny is a mess too. 

I guess it does give a good chance of a 9-9 split delegation though,  that's good.