New PA Maps In Effect

[Virginiá]

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Appears Open To Striking Down Gerrymandered Map

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pennsylvania-gerrymandering_us_5a5f8856e4b046f0811c5bbe?f7e

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Virginiá]

Rick Hasen noted that Republicans seem to be indicating they will appeal to the US Supreme Court, even though such an appeal doesn't seem possible. He said they might try to argue that state courts don't have the authority to order new maps, which is the legislature's power. It's not out of the question that the Supreme Court would take the case.

[Virginiá]

Rick Hasen noted that Republicans seem to be indicating they will appeal to the US Supreme Court, even though such an appeal doesn't seem possible. He said they might try to argue that state courts don't have the authority to order new maps, which is the legislature's power. It's not out of the question that the Supreme Court would take the case.

Wasn't this issue already resolved by the Supreme Court, in favor of a loose understanding of the term "legislature"?

I think the idea was that that case concerned the legislature, and now this one would concern state courts. It seems kind of stupid to me, but quite frankly, I could see them doing it. Accepting the case and thus ending the chance of fair maps for PA this year would absolutely stink to high heaven of partisanship though, and I know Roberts likes to try and manage the perception of the court, so I'd hope he would consider that before accepting some silly appeal that seems destined to conclude the way we all think (re: courts can order new maps. who knew!). I could have interpreted it wrong, but it seems like Hasen was thinking something about partisanship as well. I really don't think federal judge(s) are above that - particularly when it comes to election law, where the results always seem to break down along such predictable partisan lines. So in this case, I'm just hoping they let state courts deal with their own state matters.

[Virginiá]

Victory for America!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Virginiá]

How many days was Florida given? And they ended up having to adopt the Women Voters map with slight changes.

They gave the legislature 100 days to do it, and when all was said and done I believe a new map wasn't adopted until December. A completely predictable response, tbh.

Little bit of a tangent here, but I strongly dislike the idea of letting a body of lawmakers who passed the first rigged map to get another shot at it. Many of the times this happens, they either try to pass another rigged map or the process breaks down and they don't end up passing anything at all. I mean, what is the point? They already proved themselves as corrupt the first go 'round, why trust them again?

[Virginiá]

https://twitter.com/srl/status/955526442640605184

crap crap crap crap

I have no faith in SCOTUS.

Attention: LimoLiberal (D?-VA) is concerned.

[Virginiá]

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...

Man that Republican is a hack, even most Trumpists I know in real life think the PA scenario is bs, disgusting partisanship, for shame.

Steal seats? You mean gain rightful and fair representation?

Basically, yes. In the most cynical way, to many people, this is all just a game. Of course he's being a shameless hack and he knows what he said is bs, but modern politics is all about bs. How much public support your party/"team" has is irrelevant. What is most relevant is how much power you have at the moment and how you can use that to steal or scheme your way into more power (at any cost) or at the very least, keeping what you have.

[Virginiá]

If Kennedy refuses to take the case since they've established that other groups have sovereignty to make districting decisions though...

I mean, it would seem kind of silly for the Supreme Court to take a case where the argument is that courts have no right to decide the validity of legislative/Congressional maps, all while SCOTUS is hearing numerous partisan gerrymandering lawsuits. All this of course happening after the Arizona case, where they already kind of weighed in on this, on the legislative-side. Quite frankly, that Republicans would even go down a road where they could try to bar courts from ever even being able to hear gerrymandering lawsuits seems kind of reckless. But I guess politicians are rarely praised for their long-term thinking.

I'd really hope they just not issue a stay here. This seems like an ideal situation for Roberts to say no as well, since there is no good reason to issue a stay, and so then it is hard to see this as anything but a partisan conservative majority once again siding with Republicans in a way that sustains partisan gerrymanders/Republican power through another election cycle. God knows they've already earned a bad rep in regards to voting rights in general.

[Virginiá]

There is apparently now an effort by Pennsylvania Republicans in the state legislature to impeach the 5 justices that ruled against the gerrymandered maps. Requires a majority in the state house and 2/3 in the state senate, which Republicans have if they all voted together.

I have not seen this anywhere on Twitter or on DKE

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/scotus-denies-gop-lawmakers-attempt-to-delay-drawing-new-congressional-map-20180205.html

https://twitter.com/normative/status/960683507587670016




Scary. FWIW, it would take practically every Republican Senator to vote to remove them, and I'm not yet convinced they can make that happen. Impeaching judges for ruling against a brazenly gerrymandered map is a big f'ing deal.

[Virginiá]

Reading between the lines it sounds like this is some dude blasting this out.

That said, I do wish the PASCT would release the opinion.

That is my initial read, but it's enough to make me nervous because as we all know, Republicans from other states have reacted pretty drastically to unfavorable rulings themselves. North Carolina Republicans are currently toying with the idea of ending judicial elections entirely just because they lost a few cases under a 4-3 Democratic Supreme Court majority. I think Arizona Republicans had tried to remove someone from their redistricting commission as well.

Republicans are losing their damn minds, and all in the pursuit of power. As if using a rigged Congressional map for 3 of the decade's 5 elections wasn't good enough for them.

[Virginiá]

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

[Virginiá]

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

Probably one of the biggest design flaws of our system from the get-go is letting lawmakers draw these maps. It should have been obvious even back then what would happen. Legislators, after all, are basically tasked with picking exactly who goes in each district. It's just a recipe for corruption.

Now compare that to people like the PAGOP, who have spoiled themselves over 2 decades of map-making. It's like letting a heroin addict steal a kilo of dope, watching them get high for months, then telling them they have to return what they have left. Hah, yeah, sure, they'll definitely do that! More like you'll have to pry that dope from their cold, dead hands. Likewise, the PASC is going to have to create a map over the incessant whining of these gerrymandering-addicted Republicans.

[Virginiá]

The question will be what the legislature does once the court begins to draw their map. The Republicans have tried to throw up hurdles whenever possible, so I doubt we have seen the end of the dirty tacrics.

I saw it pointed out somewhere that if impeachment proceedings are begun against a judge, that judge cannot rule on anything until the Senate rules one way or the other. So it's possible that the GOP state House could vote to impeach a handful of Democratic justices, knowing it will fail (or not?), and then you have a situation where maybe there are only 2 or 3 judges who are not impeached, 2 of whom would be Republicans, and they could possibly rule in a favorable way.

Of course there may be some quorum issues here, but the general idea remains the same. Obviously if this were to happen, it would have to happen soon, so I guess we'll see. It's pretty absurd but I could see them doing it.

[Virginiá]

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

[Virginiá]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/state/pennsylvania-gerrymander-case-deadline-republicans-strategy-20180208.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They told the court they would need around 3 weeks to redraw the map, and then after told to redraw the map, they waste all but <week of that time whining to the US Supreme Court, not even opting to prepare a map (or two) just in case their request for a stay is denied. Now they are left scrambling, looking to cut corners.

Is there any situation where a Republican-controlled legislature would just opt to throw up their hands and say, "fine, you win this round. The decade is almost over, let's just draw a fair map with marginal incumbent considerations and be done with it." Is that possible anywhere in the country? For gods sakes. Stop being so god damn greedy.

[Virginiá]

I give this map a 100% change of a wolf veto, and even if it somehow finds its way over (I doubt, anything would be better than this for dems, philly machine is dead) the court would reject this simply because of the number of cuts, not even needing to go into the partisan data. When Republicans said that they were going to do a redraw there was an actual chance of them drawing a fair map that tilted right, which would be acceptable to the court so Wolf would have to approve in order to avoid looking like a partisan. But this map? This map is just handing power over to the special master.

In trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, I think maybe they want to punt to it to the special master under the assumption that that any map they are capable of producing will have the same result. When the special master draws it, maybe they try to bring it to federal court as the state court usurping their power after not being given enough time to go through the motions. I think that was the basis of their SCOTUS appeal but I'm wondering if they can have another crack at it if the court has to draw the map.

Although one way or the other I still believe my addict metaphor ties into this. I do not believe they are capable of just letting go of partisan games and drawing a reasonable map, so this map is the natural result of this idea + them not really believing any of their maps will be accepted.

[Virginiá]

Does anyone remember the date where the court said they'd have a map one way or the other? Or rather, when the special master's map would be presented?

The map is going to be court drawn now... the GOP really shot themselves in the foot.

They could potentially strike a deal with Wolf to postpone the primaries in order to buy more time to submit more maps, but I think it's more likely Wolf lets the court draw the map.

That would have been more likely (imo) if they had tried to arrange that from the get-go, as opposed to after they send a fresh gerrymander at the last minute to Wolf, which at the very least hints at them having no intention of drawing a fair map.

[Virginiá]

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

[Virginiá]

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

snip

Well I suppose we'll find out by next Monday. There has already been a lot of discussion about what the map could look like based on the rules the PASC dictated. It seems very unlikely they would push an unfair map, unless your definition of an unfair map was anything more friendly to Democrats than the current map. Do court-drawn maps even have a track record for being overly biased in favor of one party? I don't recall it being an issue.

[Virginiá]

According to DKE, the PA supreme court is accepting submissions until tomorrow...anyone have any idea where that is?

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/2/8/1739648/-Pennsylvania-will-soon-redraw-its-House-map-to-end-GOP-gerrymandering-How-would-you-draw-the-lines

I have no idea. You could always try and tweet or PM on DK someone from DKE, like Stephen Wolf? (@PoliticsWolf iirc).

I looked briefly for a place to submit it and it isn't immediately obvious.

[Virginiá]

Yeah I don't like this map one bit. too many cuts, and obvious mischief with PA-11.

Interestingly, they also throw Cartwright under the bus.

Oh, and Politicswolf is defending this map...somehow.

To be fair, reading his tweets, Wolf acknowledges it is a light gerrymander, but his defense is from the perspective that it is ok if it is to help correct a partisan imbalance that even a non-partisan map would promote. Or in other words, he's saying it's ok if it helps promote proportional representation.

I'm a little biased since I prefer proportional representation, but the map doesn't meet the standards called for in this situation. However I'm still sympathetic to that argument.

[Virginiá]

@Oryxslayer: Did you find where you officially submit your map? You really should get it in proper. It's such a sexy map

[Virginiá]

Keeping in mind that the swing to Trump really throws off the pvi of these districts, especially in the western part of the state, I think an eerie through Beaver County District would be reasonably competitive. As would a South-Western corner of the state district that creeps into Southern Allegheny County.

Would it be possible to split Allegheny County more or less on a north-south access using the Ohio River as a boundary for the Western half of the county at least? How much if at all would it have to spill over into Westmoreland and / or Butler County to populate to full districts? What would their pvi be depending on how you split the city? There may be a push to include all the predominantly black neighborhoods from the Hill district, homewood-brushton, and Wilkinsburg into a Northern District. I wonder if a black Democrat would have a reasonable chance of winning the primary there and, thereby the general election?

That's a good point. I'd like to see a 2012 PVI for some of these maps. It's not like Democrats will never win PA again. This is actually their lowest point in a generation, so there will be a rebound.

[Virginiá]

Many a Gerrymander has turned into a Dummymander after 10 years.

Gerrymandering is an American tradition that is even older than the person for whom it is named.

Do you keep a straight face when you make the argument that rigging elections via crafty map making is OK because ...tradition?

Jesus

[Virginiá]

And let me guess, Virginia, you prefer the recent map aptly labeled Democratic Gerrymander, too, because you, like me are a partisan who wants their party to win.

Not really. If I had my way, I'd just switch everything to proportional representation, sure. But until then, I'm not demanding a 9-9 PA map. I liked Oryxslayer's map, which I believe had more safe R seats than safe D.

You really do live up to your name though. What I take from your posts on this is that you believe partisan bias infects everything, so there is no point in trying to fix it. Then tradition, etc etc. I can't speak for everyone, but I myself am not asking for a map that is 100% free of partisan tricks. I don't have an expectation for that. I just think we can have better maps than the crap pumped out by partisan lawmakers who seek to ensure they win as many elections as possible, by any means possible. Such greedy people do not deserve the power to draw the maps we use to elect lawmakers. As such, I don't care for your cynical view of redistricting, and I suspect most people aren't clamoring for partisan politicians to game the system for their "team" either.

I don't believe the framers got everything right, and I also do not believe that just because we have done things one way for a long time, that we can't change it. I don't believe our system is properly representing the will of the voters, so I will try to change it, in the meager ways I can as a single person.