2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I increasingly don't think TX-39 is going to happen this round.  How might things shake out differently with a 38 CD map?

Well, under 39 CDs, DFW, Houston metro, and San Antonio-Austin corridor all gain a seat. Under 38, one of them doesn't. Which of the three is growing the slowest?

I suspect under 38 seats all 3 metro areas still gain a seat and a rural seat is technically abolished.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I increasingly don't think TX-39 is going to happen this round.  How might things shake out differently with a 38 CD map?

Well, under 39 CDs, DFW, Houston metro, and San Antonio-Austin corridor all gain a seat. Under 38, one of them doesn't. Which of the three is growing the slowest?

I suspect under 38 seats all 3 metro areas still gain a seat and a rural seat is technically abolished.

We also could have one of the metros gain a "half-seat" where a rural seat is made exurban I guess.

I suspect something like that would happen. All three urban areas gain a seat but they're more exurban than with 39 seats, and a rural seat is lost in the difference.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/215c4506-b2b1-43d9-9041-f9c9fab5e391
so I constructed this map.
three D seats in DFW, with northern Dallas County cracked between 4 seats, all of them GOP-leaning
an ingenious way of preventing an additional Democrat from getting elected from Travis County - one seat going west far into West Texas, another going east in Montgomery County, and then a D vote sink
TX-07 is kept competitive by becoming more exurban
Fort Bend is chopped in half to prevent a D from winning there
TX-23 is turned into a McCain district, but its Hispanic % is higher than in the 2010s
12 districts went to McCain with over 65%, and 9 more gave him between 60% and 65%.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/33de3b30-3901-41ea-8533-aa0395d89209
It's always useful to redraw maps in 2010 figures so you get some useful election data to better evaluate the map's effectiveness.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

What I will say is that my crack of northern Dallas should work flawlessly or close to flawlessly for one or two cycles and then degrade heavily as the decade goes on. However, this is still better than conceding an additional district to Dems. At the beginning of 2018 they had 2 seats in DFW, then they gained another. Now I turned this seat into a pack and then destroyed the D pickup (TX-32), taking the heavily white liberal southern portion into the D vote sink and then splitting its territory among three seats. The NW Dallas County seat is probably the first domino to fall though, in any event, and if the crack failed anywhere, it would do so here. But the others are more resilent. I designed the Park Cities CD to take in a lot of territory in northern Collin, to help insulate it from trends in Dallas County, and the Richardson CD has a ton of exurban territory, which should counterweigh hostile trends in Dallas County; the portion outside of Dallas and Collin is not all that smaller than the Dallas County portion, which helps it a lot. Ds would have to not just landslide in the Dallas County portion by a larger margin than Rs landslide in the exurban portion, they would also need to win the Collin portion. And while the Garland CD retreats quite a bit, its still quite difficult turf for Dems. The 1/3rd of it outside of Dallas County will be strong R turf and Ds would need massive turnout in Dallas County to overcome that. As for the Tarrant CD, it is 64% white in 2016 and has loads of areas that have remained steadfastly R even in the Trump Era. So I have doubts it really needs help.

Given the 4th, 5th and 9th are all right on the edge of Tarrant and all over R+20 why not get them to take a larger bite of Fort Worth allowing the 33rd to take a chunk of blue Dallas allowing the 2 Dallas packs to take more blue territory there. And given the 2nd is only D+12 you could definitely improve the D packs in Dallas county too. And the 9th could also help take a chunk of bluer Dallas too.

As for San Antonio and Austin - I deliberately drew a GOP safe seat here (Comal+north Bexar+Hays+Hill Country). And I don't think Ds can break through easily at all in either of the Travis GOP seats. Are Ds supposed to get massive swings in Montgomery County or the rural areas of either the Texas Triangle or West Texas? Less than a third of either district is in Travis County as of 2016 estimates, and the other parts of the seats in question are overwhlemingly R. Yes I'm aware MJ Hegar would win this version of the Williamson CD. That's not really something I see as possible to avert without dealing serious damage elsewhere or making the map look super ugly.

Instead of adding another Rio Grande Hispanic seat you could keep the existing arrangement (so giving Corpus Christi back to an R seat) and instead keep the current 35th which can take blue east san antonio and then take it up to Austin to get rid of the risk on the Travis splitters.
The risk of MJ Hegar could definitely be gotten rid of by just splitting up Williamson-Bell. The 20th is R+23 so could definitely take a large chunk of Williamson, the 19th then moves north abandoning most of Williamson and instead taking Bell some of the 20th and some of the Eastern counties off the 16th. And the 16th could instead come in and take a large chunk of Williamson too, it's R+18 so it has room to spare.

As for the South East parts of Texas - no I do not think the Fort Bend seats are vulnerable. Fort Bend going D by 60-65% overall (a scenario which I do not see as very plausible as a long-term possibility), would be enough to flip both seats, but until you get to that stress point, you have cracked a county that would have elected a D by itself in 2, keeping that from happening for at the very least, two to three election cycles, at the most, until the next round of redistricting. And I don't think TX-07 is a lost cause for GOPers here. It takes on a large amount of GOP turf and gives up minority territory, making it almost majority white in total population. Culberson only lost by 5 points in 2018, and that was with lots of Hispanic areas in SW Houston thrown in. These have all been excised out, and replaced with white, conservative exurban GOP precincts. This should produce a seat that can rather easily vote R in 2022 and 2024, and potentially later on if you have an entrenched, skilled incumbent. And I doubt that the CD in NE Harris is particularly vulnerable either. It has a large chunk of Montgomery (around 20% of the CD), and Liberty County (another 10% or so). And these would make it very hard for the D to win. The only "GOP" seat that should actually be Dem here by 2022 is the one in SW Harris, but that can't be helped too much. Perhaps it would be competitive however, for three to four election cycles.

Rather than being indecisive the GOP could actually try and secure the 27th a good bit more. Your map improves its PVI vs the current district by 2, but by trading precincts with the 18th, 28th and 29th you could definitely get that seat a few points redder without risking the others.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

What I will say is that my crack of northern Dallas should work flawlessly or close to flawlessly for one or two cycles and then degrade heavily as the decade goes on. However, this is still better than conceding an additional district to Dems. At the beginning of 2018 they had 2 seats in DFW, then they gained another. Now I turned this seat into a pack and then destroyed the D pickup (TX-32), taking the heavily white liberal southern portion into the D vote sink and then splitting its territory among three seats. The NW Dallas County seat is probably the first domino to fall though, in any event, and if the crack failed anywhere, it would do so here. But the others are more resilent. I designed the Park Cities CD to take in a lot of territory in northern Collin, to help insulate it from trends in Dallas County, and the Richardson CD has a ton of exurban territory, which should counterweigh hostile trends in Dallas County; the portion outside of Dallas and Collin is not all that smaller than the Dallas County portion, which helps it a lot. Ds would have to not just landslide in the Dallas County portion by a larger margin than Rs landslide in the exurban portion, they would also need to win the Collin portion. And while the Garland CD retreats quite a bit, its still quite difficult turf for Dems. The 1/3rd of it outside of Dallas County will be strong R turf and Ds would need massive turnout in Dallas County to overcome that. As for the Tarrant CD, it is 64% white in 2016 and has loads of areas that have remained steadfastly R even in the Trump Era. So I have doubts it really needs help.

Given the 4th, 5th and 9th are all right on the edge of Tarrant and all over R+20 why not get them to take a larger bite of Fort Worth allowing the 33rd to take a chunk of blue Dallas allowing the 2 Dallas packs to take more blue territory there. And given the 2nd is only D+12 you could definitely improve the D packs in Dallas county too. And the 9th could also help take a chunk of bluer Dallas too.

As for San Antonio and Austin - I deliberately drew a GOP safe seat here (Comal+north Bexar+Hays+Hill Country). And I don't think Ds can break through easily at all in either of the Travis GOP seats. Are Ds supposed to get massive swings in Montgomery County or the rural areas of either the Texas Triangle or West Texas? Less than a third of either district is in Travis County as of 2016 estimates, and the other parts of the seats in question are overwhlemingly R. Yes I'm aware MJ Hegar would win this version of the Williamson CD. That's not really something I see as possible to avert without dealing serious damage elsewhere or making the map look super ugly.

Instead of adding another Rio Grande Hispanic seat you could keep the existing arrangement (so giving Corpus Christi back to an R seat) and instead keep the current 35th which can take blue east san antonio and then take it up to Austin to get rid of the risk on the Travis splitters.
The risk of MJ Hegar could definitely be gotten rid of by just splitting up Williamson-Bell. The 20th is R+23 so could definitely take a large chunk of Williamson, the 19th then moves north abandoning most of Williamson and instead taking Bell some of the 20th and some of the Eastern counties off the 16th. And the 16th could instead come in and take a large chunk of Williamson too, it's R+18 so it has room to spare.

As for the South East parts of Texas - no I do not think the Fort Bend seats are vulnerable. Fort Bend going D by 60-65% overall (a scenario which I do not see as very plausible as a long-term possibility), would be enough to flip both seats, but until you get to that stress point, you have cracked a county that would have elected a D by itself in 2, keeping that from happening for at the very least, two to three election cycles, at the most, until the next round of redistricting. And I don't think TX-07 is a lost cause for GOPers here. It takes on a large amount of GOP turf and gives up minority territory, making it almost majority white in total population. Culberson only lost by 5 points in 2018, and that was with lots of Hispanic areas in SW Houston thrown in. These have all been excised out, and replaced with white, conservative exurban GOP precincts. This should produce a seat that can rather easily vote R in 2022 and 2024, and potentially later on if you have an entrenched, skilled incumbent. And I doubt that the CD in NE Harris is particularly vulnerable either. It has a large chunk of Montgomery (around 20% of the CD), and Liberty County (another 10% or so). And these would make it very hard for the D to win. The only "GOP" seat that should actually be Dem here by 2022 is the one in SW Harris, but that can't be helped too much. Perhaps it would be competitive however, for three to four election cycles.

Rather than being indecisive the GOP could actually try and secure the 27th a good bit more. Your map improves its PVI vs the current district by 2, but by trading precincts with the 18th, 28th and 29th you could definitely get that seat a few points redder without risking the others.

I don't think its necessary to cross the Tarrant-Dallas county line. What I have with Tarrant is a stable 3R-1D arrangement - one seat that has as much minorities as is feasible, and then the rest of the Tarrant just draws itself. I'd also note that the new D vote sink is pretty much as packed as it feasibly can for the most part (the only caveat being that it was drawn to optimize Latino voting power, hence requiring the inclusion of some GOP-leaning precincts in and around Love Field). You have a fair point regarding the two Denton districts; a precinct exchange is in order, with TX-37 losing areas in its north and it gaining Wise and SW Denton.

I'm also dead-set against keeping the current TX-35. It's a total eyesore, it puts GOP seats in and around Travis at risk, erodes count integrity for no clear partisan benefit, and is too much of a danger, due to it forcing nearby GOP districts to take in some D-trending precincts. The GOP can no longer afford not to have a district very firmly based in eastern Travis. However you have outlined a good alternative arrangement in Williamson so I'm using that. Thanks for the help. And you have a decent point regarding TX-07. It definitely could be improved.

Also thanks for making a map to figure out PVIs.

No, I mean having the current 35th in addition to a new D sink in Austin. Even after 1 D sink there's a lot of blue territory left over in Austin. My suggestion is dropping Corpus Cristi from the D seats so more of Austin can be added instead.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Collin is zooming left as well. I'd guess that in 2020, your CD 7 and 8 would flip with 60-40 Dem margins in Dallas and 55-45 GOP margins at best in Collin/Denton. You need a North Dallas/Park Cities/Plano pack. If you want 6 instead of 8 Dem seats in DFW all the way through 2030, you need a NE Tarrant/NW Dallas/SW Collin/SE Denton pack, North Dallas/Plano pack, and a NE Dallas/Richardson pack. Similarly, giving Fort Bend it's own pack keeps CD 28 and 32 from eventually flipping.

6 Dem seats in DFW would be a rather ugly gerrymander, even taking into account trends. Even on the hardest of swings you only need 4 Dem packs in DFW, then just splitting off the rest of the suburbs and sinking it (and with 4 D packs you can get every single R seat around DFW to over 60% Cruz, which should be pretty safe for a decade)

In 2030, Collin, Denton, and Tarrant will all be safe Dem counties. Therefore, any district that splits chunks of Dallas out to any of the other three is bound to flip. It's much smarter to pack the inner suburbs and split the outer fringes of these counties out to the rurals. Same goes for Travis and Bexar with Williamson, Comal, and Hays; and for Harris with Fort Bend, Brazoria, and yes, Montgomery.

Tarant being blue in a decade is somewhat plausible, but Collin and Denton being not only blue but Safe D is a rather bold prediction to say the least. And the solution to the risk of Collin and Denton going blue isn't to give up and hand away seats to the Dems, it's to make the map uglier and get more rurals involved in splitting up the suburbs. And treating Montgomery (a county that Cruz got 72% in) and Comal (where Cruz got 71%) in the same category as Hays and Williamson is rather silly.

By 2030, Texas is going to be a D+5 state with a Dem geographic advantage. A good map for the GOP keeps Dems below 18 seats through the decade, which means starting the decade with 15-16 Dem seats. Anything else is a dummymander.

Even on the hardest of swings Texas in 10 years being the same PVI as Oregon is rather unlikely. And you can draw a 23-16 map with every R seat over 60% Cruz, so saying a "good" map for the GOP gives away 18 seats is rather absurd.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

No, I mean having the current 35th in addition to a new D sink in Austin. Even after 1 D sink there's a lot of blue territory left over in Austin. My suggestion is dropping Corpus Cristi from the D seats so more of Austin can be added instead.

Ah. Apologies for misunderstanding you.
35th+new Austin vote sink might make sense if not for the fact that 1) I don't need any further protection against Ds in Austin, 2) Corpus Christie being placed out of a D seat means that someway or another the red rurals I am using to crack Fort Bend will be taken out of the equation for certain due to geography, and 3) all this makes the map unnecessarily ugly regardless.
Anyway, I redid some of the districts. Thoughts on the changes?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/33de3b30-3901-41ea-8533-aa0395d89209
2010 map updated to match.
You could definitely redraw 7/10/11 to get them nearly as or as safe as 8/9 are. The 3rd could take Grayson and some more then everything east swivels around to get safer too. Merge the 21st and 22nd into one East Texas district and you free up one more district to split up Dallas. And you could still get the 19th to get some ruby red counties from the 16th and the 16th to take some of Williamson to properly shore up against MJ Hegar.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Anyway will start drawing it soon but thought of a concept for a Safe 14-25 map, if the 5th circuit literally doesn't care about the VRA

 4 Houston seats
4 Dallas seats(could be 3 even). 4 seats each should easily hold up for a decade.
Travis= 1 pure sink in central Travis, Draw one in SE travis to Hispanic San antonio,similar to the current Tx 35th,
1 El paso
2 RGV, (Hidalgo +cameron + few more counties)
1 Laredo to San antonio
The rest of the map is GOP.

They may not, but Roberts and Alito(!) joined the majority in striking down the 2011 NC-01, and Thomas believes very strongly that race should never be a consideration in drawing districts and has no problem joining the left in these cases.  Thomas joined the majority opinion in full, providing the 5th vote to strike down NC-12 as well as NC-01. 

I expect less SCOTUS intervention going forward, but a blanket "VRA doesn't apply to redistricting at all" ruling seems highly unlikely.  The 5th circuit may take that position, but it will be appealed. 

It also has the risk that if the Dems get the senate at some point and get a SC justice or two appointed then they could strike down the entire map and force fair court-drawn maps to replace it.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Anyway will start drawing it soon but thought of a concept for a Safe 14-25 map, if the 5th circuit literally doesn't care about the VRA

 4 Houston seats
4 Dallas seats(could be 3 even). 4 seats each should easily hold up for a decade.
Travis= 1 pure sink in central Travis, Draw one in SE travis to Hispanic San antonio,similar to the current Tx 35th,
1 El paso
2 RGV, (Hidalgo +cameron + few more counties)
1 Laredo to San antonio
The rest of the map is GOP.

They may not, but Roberts and Alito(!) joined the majority in striking down the 2011 NC-01, and Thomas believes very strongly that race should never be a consideration in drawing districts and has no problem joining the left in these cases.  Thomas joined the majority opinion in full, providing the 5th vote to strike down NC-12 as well as NC-01. 

I expect less SCOTUS intervention going forward, but a blanket "VRA doesn't apply to redistricting at all" ruling seems highly unlikely.  The 5th circuit may take that position, but it will be appealed. 

It also has the risk that if the Dems get the senate at some point and get a SC justice or two appointed then they could strike down the entire map and force fair court-drawn maps to replace it.

Or just do well enough statewide to flip the elected Texas supreme court and do an NC/PA.  3/9 seats are up every 2 years, and they run explicitly as R's and D's.     

Exactly. The 2020 elections will definitely be influential for the TXGOP perspective. Will they treat 2018 as a blip, as the result of a blue wave that can't be expected in normal years, or will they treat the 2018 results as the new normal in Texan politics?

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Gonna work on a 10-29 map.

edit: thinking 10-29 isn't possible, probably gonna do 11-29.

D sinks would be 3 Dallas/ 3 Houston

1 Austin
1 Austin to San antonio
1 San Antonio.
1 Rio grande valley sink
1 El paso.

Do 3 Dallas/3 Houston at your own risk. I really wouldn't count on that holding.

Doesn't need to hold all decade.  If it starts at 3 Dem seats in (say) DFW and all but one R seat is safe all decade, that's better than 4 sinks. 

I wouldn't count on it holding just in 2022. Don't forget how overpopulated the current D seats are. There isn't much of the Texas Triangle you can crack these seats out to.

You are adding 1 sink in Dallas and for Houston you got Montgomery county and other areas all around.

But in Houston all 3 have to be VRA seats and I don't think you can effectively crack all of West Harris/Fort Bend.

If West Harris is becoming so blue then why did Lizzie Fletcher win re-election by only three points, half the margin she won by in 2018?

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Gonna work on a 10-29 map.

edit: thinking 10-29 isn't possible, probably gonna do 11-29.

D sinks would be 3 Dallas/ 3 Houston

1 Austin
1 Austin to San antonio
1 San Antonio.
1 Rio grande valley sink
1 El paso.

Do 3 Dallas/3 Houston at your own risk. I really wouldn't count on that holding.

Doesn't need to hold all decade.  If it starts at 3 Dem seats in (say) DFW and all but one R seat is safe all decade, that's better than 4 sinks. 

I wouldn't count on it holding just in 2022. Don't forget how overpopulated the current D seats are. There isn't much of the Texas Triangle you can crack these seats out to.

You are adding 1 sink in Dallas and for Houston you got Montgomery county and other areas all around.

But in Houston all 3 have to be VRA seats and I don't think you can effectively crack all of West Harris/Fort Bend.

If West Harris is becoming so blue then why did Lizzie Fletcher win re-election by only three points, half the margin she won by in 2018?

Remember, all these districts are going to shed like 100k people. Which means Fletcher's zooms left and the districts bordering the VRAs do too. Obviously we need to wait for precinct results but I doubt a 3-Dem Harris crack can hold with population adjustments.

https://www.azavea.com/blog/2020/07/29/which-congressional-districts-are-over-and-under-populated/
Per DRA's 2018 population estimates the four Dem hold seats in Houston will only need to lose 220k in population between them, or 55k each. Likewise the three Dem held seats in DFW will only need to lose 130k population between them, or 40k each. The population growth isn't that strong in the blue inner suburbs and is counterbalanced by continued stagnation and decline in the non-white inner city.
Though regardless I agree that a 3 Dem Harris is untenable long-term, as is a 2 Dem DFW. 4 Dem packs in Houston and 3 Dem packs in DFW should keep the rest of the suburbs in safe seats for the rest of the decade.