2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Missouri

[ProgressiveModerate]

An 8R-0D map is probably legal.

No MO-01 is pretty objectively protected by VRA and for someone to say it isn’t is on crack

At least five SCOTUS justices believe the VRA doesn't apply to redistricting.

Uh that’s not what their ruling said…

MO-1 is objectively a compact district my any metric, this isn’t like Alabama where a 2nd black district is more controversial

[ProgressiveModerate]

So now what?

Today canidates filing begins and we still don’t have CDs. Can the legislature still pass and enact a map or does the court take over?

[ProgressiveModerate]

So now what?

Today canidates filing begins and we still don’t have CDs. Can the legislature still pass and enact a map or does the court take over?

It's possible the court might just extend the filing period.

Bruh.

If a legislature can’t do its job I don’t have sympathy

[MarkD]

State Rep. Peter Meredith (HD-80; St. Louis) ... posted the following on Facebook three days ago:

So… the new maps for the House were (amazingly) passed unanimously by the bipartisan commission. Nobody expected that. But here’s the thing: Dems have a LOT to be optimistic about going into the next election.

Under the current maps, 49 districts voted for Biden in 2020 and 50 voted for McCaskill in 2018. Dems currently hold 49 seats.

Under the new maps, 57 districts voted for Biden and 60 for McCaskill. We have every reason to believe we can grow our caucus significantly this year.
-
-
-
-
-

Here was the link to the district map: https://redistrictmo.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/basic/index.html?appid=b30ec69d8b0f46ebaf6e080ca54b8ed1&fbclid=IwAR2Hgz6RT0ddqCzFC96GwTvxzr9CL2T9noo7HgEOPxGIaeuU3xNuQLxqg2w

-
-

Counties that will be made up of 2 or more whole districts, and no partial districts:
Cole - 2 districts (59-60)
Boone - 5 districts (44-47, 50)
Jefferson - 6 districts (97, 111-115)
Greene - 8 districts (130-137)
St. Louis City - 8 districts (76-82, 84)
St. Charles - 11 districts (63-65, 69, 102-108)
Jackson - 19 districts (19-37)
St. Louis - 27 districts (66-68, 70-75, 83, 85-96, 98-101, 110)
(Combined population of those 8 counties = 3,214,712 -- which is 52.23% of the state's population. Those 8 counites will have 86 seats in the House, which is 52.76% of the 163 seats in the House.)
-
-

Update: Today was the first day of filing to appear on the ballot in the August primary. Of course, neither a congressional map nor a state senate map has come out yet, so perhaps some people who filed don't even know whether they will live in the district that they have filed to run in.

Here's some more information about the degree of competition that there will be for seats in the Missouri House, as discussed above by Peter Merideth.
According to this document available on the MO SoS website, the House Independent Bipartisan Citizens Commission which drew the map described the specific details of the 163 districts with the following data: population per district, VAP per district, black population per district (either all black in the census or part black), total minority population per district, black VAP per district, total minority VAP per district, and lastly partisan statistics per district.

The document, for some reason, does not explain how the commission calculated the partisan makeup of the districts, but I will assume that it was pretty similar to how the commission that did the district map ten years ago calculated at that time. Ten years ago, they used the elections results for 11 different kinds of elections from the preceding five general elections in even-numbered years: all three federal elections, and eight kinds of state elections, including state legislative elections. The only difference between ten years ago and this time is that ten years ago, they did not bother to include the votes cast for minor-party candidates/independents, but this time they did include those votes. You can find the partisan statistics that the commission calculated on pages 57-61 of the document.

Based on this document, I can't confirm what Rep. Merideth said about there being 60 districts that McCaskill won, or 57 districts that Biden won. The data in this table only explains what percentage of votes were cast for all Democrat candidates, all Republican candidates, and all other candidates in every general election for the last five general elections (again, I'm assuming that is the basis of the calculating that they did). But here is the way I can summarize the data from those pages (57-61).
Exactly 100 districts have a Republican percentage of at least 52.50%, which I take to mean they will be Likely R to Safe R.
13 districts I would rate in the Tossup to Lean R range, because these districts are 48% to 52.50% Republican. (One of these districts, #29, located in south-central Independence, is almost exactly evenly matched between Rs and Ds.)
11 districts I would rate in the Tossup to Lean D range, because these districts are 48% to 52.50% Democratic.
That leaves 39 districts that are 52.50% or more Democratic, making them Likely D to Safe D.

So, if Democrats do win all 50 districts that are 48% or more Democratic, according to this table, then they only have to win 5 of the districts that are in the 48% to 52.50% Republican range to be able to get over the 33.33% hump that they have been under for the last seven years. (55 out of 163 seats is 33.74% of the seats in the House.) But they have to win a total of 16 of the 24 districts that are in the most competitive range -- 52.50% D to 52.50% R -- to get to that point.

[Greedo punched first]

SCOTUS would allow the map I made. Every district voted for Roy Blunt in 2016 and Trump in both elections.

[BoiseBoy]

SCOTUS would allow the map I made. Every district voted for Roy Blunt in 2016 and Trump in both elections.

Piss off. You're not funny.

[MarkD]

There are four House districts in which no one has yet filed to run for the seat, even though each of them has an incumbent who is eligible to run for at least one more term. One of those four is district 80, in the city of St. Louis; the incumbent is Peter Merideth, who I quoted above. One of the other three is district 42, encompassing Warren County and a chunk of Montgomery County; the incumbent is Jeff Porter (R), who is eligible to run for two more terms. The other two are in lower Clay County: districts 17 and 18, in which the incumbents are Mark Ellebracht (D) and Wes Rogers (D), respectively.

There's a former state representative who is trying to win a seat again after giving hers up two years ago: Deb Lavender. She has run for state rep six times in the last 14 years. She lost her first three tries in a district that encompasses Kirkwood in St. Louis County (2008, 2010, and 2012), then she won the next three times (2014, 2016, and 2018). She gave up her seat in 2020 when she tried to run for state senate, but lost with 46%. She is still eligible to win one more term, and she is trying to do so from a new district, a few miles west from Kirkwood; the new district she is trying in encompasses much of the same area in west St. Louis County that Democrat Trish Gunby won in a 2019 special election and in 2020.

I recognize one other name of someone running for state rep in the city where I grew up, in a district in which the new lines include my boyhood neighborhood. In district 106, which encompasses most of the northern half of the city of St. Charles, Buddy Hardin is one of two Republicans who have filed. This district includes most of the population who were in the previous district 65, which is currently vacant because the guy who won in 65 the last three elections died of a stroke last year: Tom Hannegan. I first met Buddy about thirty years ago, at the weekly meetings of the St. Charles County Pachyderm Club. Buddy had once run for state rep in the state of Illinois -- in 1988, I believe -- but lost that race. Then he moved across the river to St. Charles, MO. He married County Recorder of Deeds Barbara J. Hall (who was first elected to that position in 1986, and she recently retired, as of 2018, after 32 years as RoD), then he ended up running for state rep in St. Charles County twice during the 1990s. In 1996, he had the Republican nomination without opposition, but lost the general election with 46%. Two years later, he won the Republican primary with 68%, but lost a second time to the same Democrat with 47.7%. Now here it is, 24 years later, and he's going to try again? Wow.

In the senate side, there's a few interesting things going on. The new map is still not out; there are over 30 candidates who have filed even though they don't know what their district is going to look like. Republicans currently hold 14 of the seats that are up this year; Democrats hold only 3. The three districts they have are all in the St. Louis area: districts 4, 14, and 24. District 4 shares a mutual boundary with 14, and 14 shares a long mutual boundary with 24. Karla May has filed to run again in 4, Brian Williams has filed to run again in 14, and district 24, where Jill Schupp is term limited, has state rep Tracy McCreery running. None of these three districts has yet to see a Republican file to run as well (although it would be understandable for Republicans to not even try for 4 or 14; it's district 24 where they certainly have a good chance to win and they ought to have a nominee file this year). But conversely, there are no Democrats who have yet filed to run for any of the 14 districts that Republicans currently hold. They certainly have a good chance to win district 30, covering most of the city of Springfield, and they should have nominees running for districts 6, 8, 26, and 34 too. I think state rep Crystal Quade ought to run for SD 30, but she has not filed to run for any office yet.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Uh hello?

Has the state legislature just given up? Why hasn't the court stepped in by now?

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

[BoiseBoy]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

Lol so the Republicans won't gerrymander out of concerns over fairness even though Democrats are doing it in Illinois and New York? Lmao they're giving away seats for nothing.

[Brittain33]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

Lol so the Republicans won't gerrymander out of concerns over fairness even though Democrats are doing it in Illinois and New York? Lmao they're giving away seats for nothing.

Republicans aren’t worried about the unfairness, they’re worried about the sh**ttiness.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

Lol so the Republicans won't gerrymander out of concerns over fairness even though Democrats are doing it in Illinois and New York? Lmao they're giving away seats for nothing.

Republicans aren’t worried about the unfairness, they’re worried about the sh**ttiness.

How is it a bad map for them if it guarantees them 7 congressional seats?

[Brittain33]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

Lol so the Republicans won't gerrymander out of concerns over fairness even though Democrats are doing it in Illinois and New York? Lmao they're giving away seats for nothing.

Republicans aren’t worried about the unfairness, they’re worried about the sh**ttiness.

How is it a bad map for them if it guarantees them 7 congressional seats?

It probably messes up the primary risk and what counties people want to or don’t want to represent. And some of them may not want a less Republican seat even if it’s unlikely to flip.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

Lol so the Republicans won't gerrymander out of concerns over fairness even though Democrats are doing it in Illinois and New York? Lmao they're giving away seats for nothing.

Republicans aren’t worried about the unfairness, they’re worried about the sh**ttiness.

How is it a bad map for them if it guarantees them 7 congressional seats?

It probably messes up the primary risk and what counties people want to or don’t want to represent. And some of them may not want a less Republican seat even if it’s unlikely to flip.

It's pretty silly nevertheless. Giving up a whole new Safe Republican seat to make sure your R+30 seat doesn't turn into R+20.

[Smash255]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

Lol so the Republicans won't gerrymander out of concerns over fairness even though Democrats are doing it in Illinois and New York? Lmao they're giving away seats for nothing.

Republicans aren’t worried about the unfairness, they’re worried about the sh**ttiness.

How is it a bad map for them if it guarantees them 7 congressional seats?

It probably messes up the primary risk and what counties people want to or don’t want to represent. And some of them may not want a less Republican seat even if it’s unlikely to flip.

It's pretty silly nevertheless. Giving up a whole new Safe Republican seat to make sure your R+30 seat doesn't turn into R+20.

One thing that likely plays into it as well, is the ability to make sure MO-02 becomes more Republican.  Carving up Kansas City, the way the GOP carved up Nashville in Tennessee comes with more risk of getting overturned.  While I'm not are of tighter redistricting rules in Missouri, any time you start carving up cities, you are going to run into that risk.


 If the maps get overturned it could lead to a court drawn map.  A court drawn map likely results in MO-02 remaining a Democratic trending swing seat instead of a GOP leaning one which they are intending to draw.  Probably not an issue this year, but certainly an issue down the road unless the GOP stops the bleeding of educated suburbanites.    Quite simply, they would rather go for a pretty safe 6-2 map, then push for a 7-1 which could backfire likely result in a 5-2-1 map or a 5-3 map as the decade progresses.

[MaxQue]

Wait so why isn't the legislature just passing the 7-1 map? What's there to lose?

Because most of the legislature does not want to cave in to angry idiot far-right caucus members for a sh**tty unfair map.

Lol so the Republicans won't gerrymander out of concerns over fairness even though Democrats are doing it in Illinois and New York? Lmao they're giving away seats for nothing.

Republicans aren’t worried about the unfairness, they’re worried about the sh**ttiness.

How is it a bad map for them if it guarantees them 7 congressional seats?

It probably messes up the primary risk and what counties people want to or don’t want to represent. And some of them may not want a less Republican seat even if it’s unlikely to flip.

It's pretty silly nevertheless. Giving up a whole new Safe Republican seat to make sure your R+30 seat doesn't turn into R+20.

Also, there is a big feud between most of the Republican caucus and the so-called "Conservative Caucus", so it also about trying to keep members of latter out of Congress (where they could use their influence against the current leadership and in favor of the Conservative Caucus).

It's like some of the Midwest states where the party is split in 2 wings that absolutely hate each other.

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1503377543155666945?s=20&t=EKRoRKwZ...

MO senate map. legislature has adjourned until March 21.

[MarkD]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1503377543155666945?s=20&t=EKRoRKwZ...

MO senate map. legislature has adjourned until March 21.

Here are the election results by district - a pretty status quo map:

https://twitter.com/Missouri_Mapper/status/1503402072355573763

"Pretty status quo"? Maybe, for most districts. But I notice three very surprising things about this map. 1) They split Buchanan County. No county with a population of that size has been split by senate district lines since the 1980's, when Franklin County was split. 2) They rearranged boundaries for districts 28, 29, and 31 when they didn't have to. If those three districts were left as is -- to have the exact same boundaries as the last ten years -- they would still have been within optimal population size. District 28's population, if the boundaries were not changed, would be 1.26% below average (178,754 compared to 181,027); District 29's population would be 1.08% above average (182,980); and District 31's population would be 2.14% below average (177,156). So why change those three at all? 3) They changed District 11, in Jackson County, so drastically that it is now going to be even more Republican than District 8. That means a high probability that it will flip in the 2024 election, and will elect a Republican for the first time ever. (At the same time, it is somewhat probable that District 19 will flip back to the Democrats in 2024, although that partisan change was pretty much to be expected.) So this map is "status quo" mainly in terms of the fact that Democrats are unlikely to win any more than the ten seats they currently hold.

I've been toying with senate district maps of my own, but the only two districts that I drew that are exactly the same as in this map are districts 19 and 32. I kept 28, 29, and 31 as is (the same boundaries as ten years ago), and I left District 11 as a Dem-lean district, so with District 19 likely to flip, I was giving Dems 11 seats instead of their current ten. And my new version of District 30 would have been slightly more competitive than this version. So this map looks to me very surprising in a lot of ways.

~~~~
In other news, a Republican has filed to run in HD 80, but incumbent Democrat Peter Merideth has still not filed for reelection. Now all 163 districts have at least one candidate who is running. Like HD 80, no Democrat has yet filed in HD 132, even though they currently hold it, and they are likely to keep both 80 and 132 in their column this November so long as they have good candidates (80 is a sure thing, but 132 only leans D). Besides 132, there are 7 other districts which are definitely very competitive -- less than 52.50% Republican -- but no Dems have filed to run in them yet. Nineteen Democrats have so far filed to run in Safe R districts (60% Republican or more), but of the 19 districts that are Likely R (52.50% to 60% Republican), only 7 have Dem candidates that have filed so far. So far, only 81 districts have Democrats who have filed to run. In the last five election cycles, Dems have had 114 nominees who ran for the House on average, and the lowest number has been 97 nominees, so they certainly should have 20 to 35 more people who run for the House this year. So far, Republicans have filed to run in 129 districts, and they'll probably have about five or six more than that before filing closes.

UPDATE: As of this morning, 3/17, Rep. Jeff Porter is not going to run for re-election to his seat in the House: A) he doesn't live in the new version of HD 42, B) he has filed this morning to run for SD 10. There is going to be a three-way race for SD 10 between two incumbent members of the House and one former member of the House: Porter, Travis Fitzwater (four terms so far, so he's term limited; he represents most of Callaway County), and Bryan Spencer, who was elected to four terms, 2012-2020, in western St. Charles County (and a chunk of northeastern Warren County). A fourth Republican who filed to run for SD 10, Joshua Price, of Mexico, MO, is not in SD 10 now that the new map is out, and I think it's highly likely he will withdraw from the race for SD 10 and instead will run for SD 18 against incumbent Cindy O'Loughlin (if Price will run at all; or maybe he'll switch to run for the House against incumbent Kent Haden in HD 43). There's also another Republican who filed to run for the state senate who does not live in the district he filed for, and that's a guy who lives in Camden County, who filed to run in SD 16 (because that county was located in that district for the last ten years), but he now lives in SD 6 instead, so maybe that guy will also change which district he's filed in.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1506390617651396615

So much for the Show Me State.

[BoiseBoy]

It appears there might be a deal at hand for the congressional map:

https://twitter.com/scottfaughn/status/1506858484725342208
Apparently with Jefferson County in the 8th?

Which bill is the congressional map? Any bill text?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It appears there might be a deal at hand for the congressional map:

https://twitter.com/scottfaughn/status/1506858484725342208

Apparently with Jefferson County in the 8th?

What broke the impasse?

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/scottfaughn/status/1506974490055614469?s=20&t=m7SqxO1-V6...

Supposedly the compromise. Wagner gonna be mad.

It appears there might be a deal at hand for the congressional map:

Apparently with Jefferson County in the 8th?

What broke the impasse?

Time. Filing deadline's next week and if there wasn't a map then good chance of court intervention by necessity and all the GOP plans get spoiled.

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

https://twitter.com/scottfaughn/status/1506974490055614469?s=20&t=m7SqxO1-V6...

Supposedly the compromise. Wagner gonna be mad.

It appears there might be a deal at hand for the congressional map:

Apparently with Jefferson County in the 8th?

What broke the impasse?

Time. Filing deadline's next week and if there wasn't a map then good chance of court intervention by necessity and all the GOP plans get spoiled.

Imagine if the courts made a least change map that ends up 3-5

[BoiseBoy]

MO senate passed this plan on a 22-10 vote, now the map goes to the House. If it passes there, this is the final map, coming just days before the filing deadline.

https://twitter.com/missourinet/status/1507052841579520003?s=21&t=xcpBuXr-y2...