2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[lfromnj]

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.

[Skill and Chance]

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. 

[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.

[Skill and Chance]

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.     

[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?

[Tintrlvr]

While everyone has been looking at federal redistricting, given that State Senate districts are actually larger than federal ones, opinion of this map?

https://districtr.org/edit/3296







This map should be a safe 19R-12D map. All R districts are at 58.5% Trump or more. All Dem districts are also at 58% Clinton or more.

Granted, I guess with trends and what not it could end up as a dummymander? I also think several of those districts might be illegal because of the VRA?

I think the Texas Constitution says they have to minimize county splits in the state legislative maps. So a few places you have two or more districts splitting the same two counties (like the three Dallas-Collin districts, the two Harris-Montgomery districts or the four Harris-Fort Bend districts) are illegal.

Although maybe that only applies to the state House... not certain.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

While everyone has been looking at federal redistricting, given that State Senate districts are actually larger than federal ones, opinion of this map?

https://districtr.org/edit/3296







This map should be a safe 19R-12D map. All R districts are at 58.5% Trump or more. All Dem districts are also at 58% Clinton or more.

Granted, I guess with trends and what not it could end up as a dummymander? I also think several of those districts might be illegal because of the VRA?

I think the Texas Constitution says they have to minimize county splits in the state legislative maps. So a few places you have two or more districts splitting the same two counties (like the three Dallas-Collin districts, the two Harris-Montgomery districts or the four Harris-Fort Bend districts) are illegal.

Although maybe that only applies to the state House... not certain.

It only applies to the State House. Though in practice the State Senate districts being long short strings would not fly too well among the public; so the GOP might take the path of "clean compact gerrymandering" where the seats look good but strongly favor the GOP.

[lfromnj]

Ok lets go
2018 Population estimates added to DRA in the 2010 files so we can now make a proper texas map.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Ok lets go
2018 Population estimates added to DRA in the 2010 files so we can now make a proper texas map.

How do you get the population estimates to update?

[lfromnj]

Ok lets go
2018 Population estimates added to DRA in the 2010 files so we can now make a proper texas map.

How do you get the population estimates to update?

Its the regular map you open up with 2010 Voting districts, where you see all the partisan data theres also a check box for 2018 population updates. Unfortunately the left tab that keeps track of population hasn't been updated so you have to keep checking it. So when you open Texas you see 25m with 2010 and 39 districts is about 645 on the left. However when you click on the district it will tell the estimated 2018 data.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Ok lets go
2018 Population estimates added to DRA in the 2010 files so we can now make a proper texas map.

How do you get the population estimates to update?

Its the regular map you open up with 2010 Voting districts, where you see all the partisan data theres also a check box for 2018 population updates. Unfortunately the left tab that keeps track of population hasn't been updated so you have to keep checking it. So when you open Texas you see 25m with 2010 and 39 districts is about 645 on the left. However when you click on the district it will tell the estimated 2018 data.

Got it. Thanks!

[Skill and Chance]

While everyone has been looking at federal redistricting, given that State Senate districts are actually larger than federal ones, opinion of this map?

https://districtr.org/edit/3296







This map should be a safe 19R-12D map. All R districts are at 58.5% Trump or more. All Dem districts are also at 58% Clinton or more.

Granted, I guess with trends and what not it could end up as a dummymander? I also think several of those districts might be illegal because of the VRA?

I think the Texas Constitution says they have to minimize county splits in the state legislative maps. So a few places you have two or more districts splitting the same two counties (like the three Dallas-Collin districts, the two Harris-Montgomery districts or the four Harris-Fort Bend districts) are illegal.

Although maybe that only applies to the state House... not certain.

It only applies to the State House. Though in practice the State Senate districts being long short strings would not fly too well among the public; so the GOP might take the path of "clean compact gerrymandering" where the seats look good but strongly favor the GOP.

If there is any place they go MD style all out, it will be in the state senate.  The state house district constitutional rules are probably strict enough that the chamber will inevitably flip before 2031 if it hasn't flipped already.  The state senate will be the focus.  It's their best hope to ensure a say in the state's government for another decade.  

[Skill and Chance]

The delayed census count introduces an interesting wrinkle into the process.  If the legislature has to convene a special session to redistrict after its normal session ends in May of 2021, the maps will only be valid for one election and must be redrawn at the next regular legislative session in 2023.  Also, the backup commission has no constitutional authority to step in and draw the legislative maps if there is a deadlock in a special session.

It would be able to step in after a deadlock in the 2023 regular session, but all of the statewide offices that make up 4 of the 5 seats on the backup commission are up for statewide election in 2022 and the 5th seat is the Speaker of the State House, so it is possible control of the backup commission could flip.  The commission includes the LG and AG who both won by <5% in 2018.  The most likely scenario where the backup commission would come into play would be if Democrats control the state house (whether they flipped it in 2020 or 2022 doesn't really matter) or if they flipped the governorship in 2022.  Thus, if 2022 is another Trump midterm, it is, remarkably, now plausible that Democrats could be in a position to draw the the state legislative maps in 2023.

With all this uncertainty hanging out there, I wonder if a deal could be struck on sending a nonpartisan commission amendment to the voters in 2022 if there is a split legislature after 2020?

[EastAnglianLefty]

The delayed census count introduces an interesting wrinkle into the process.  If the legislature has to convene a special session to redistrict after its normal session ends in May of 2021, the maps will only be valid for one election and must be redrawn at the next regular legislative session in 2023.  Also, the backup commission has no constitutional authority to step in and draw the legislative maps if there is a deadlock in a special session.

It would be able to step in after a deadlock in the 2023 regular session, but all of the statewide offices that make up 4 of the 5 seats on the backup commission are up for statewide election in 2022 and the 5th seat is the Speaker of the State House, so it is possible control of the backup commission could flip.  The commission includes the LG and AG who both won by <5% in 2018.  The most likely scenario where the backup commission would come into play would be if Democrats control the state house (whether they flipped it in 2020 or 2022 doesn't really matter) or if they flipped the governorship in 2022.  Thus, if 2022 is another Trump midterm, it is, remarkably, now plausible that Democrats could be in a position to draw the the state legislative maps in 2023.

With all this uncertainty hanging out there, I wonder if a deal could be struck on sending a nonpartisan commission amendment to the voters in 2022 if there is a split legislature after 2020?

I wonder if there's a chance Texas Republicans would try to stick in commissions with strong compactness requirements as a method of packing Hispanics more along the Rio Grande and in urban areas? The Fifth Circuit Court is thoroughly in the tank for them, so they'd only have to worry about the Supreme Court striking it down and if they were willing to say compact Rio Grande districts aren't unconstitutional packing, that ought to save them at least one congressional district.

[Skill and Chance]

The delayed census count introduces an interesting wrinkle into the process.  If the legislature has to convene a special session to redistrict after its normal session ends in May of 2021, the maps will only be valid for one election and must be redrawn at the next regular legislative session in 2023.  Also, the backup commission has no constitutional authority to step in and draw the legislative maps if there is a deadlock in a special session.

It would be able to step in after a deadlock in the 2023 regular session, but all of the statewide offices that make up 4 of the 5 seats on the backup commission are up for statewide election in 2022 and the 5th seat is the Speaker of the State House, so it is possible control of the backup commission could flip.  The commission includes the LG and AG who both won by <5% in 2018.  The most likely scenario where the backup commission would come into play would be if Democrats control the state house (whether they flipped it in 2020 or 2022 doesn't really matter) or if they flipped the governorship in 2022.  Thus, if 2022 is another Trump midterm, it is, remarkably, now plausible that Democrats could be in a position to draw the the state legislative maps in 2023.

With all this uncertainty hanging out there, I wonder if a deal could be struck on sending a nonpartisan commission amendment to the voters in 2022 if there is a split legislature after 2020?

I wonder if there's a chance Texas Republicans would try to stick in commissions with strong compactness requirements as a method of packing Hispanics more along the Rio Grande and in urban areas? The Fifth Circuit Court is thoroughly in the tank for them, so they'd only have to worry about the Supreme Court striking it down and if they were willing to say compact Rio Grande districts aren't unconstitutional packing, that ought to save them at least one congressional district.

That's interesting.  A commission amendment would have to get 2/3rds support in the legislature to get referred to the ballot.  I think it's likely Republicans would try to rally support from black and Hispanic Dem legislators like they did for the commission amendment in Ohio.  So if anything you would be more likely to see something with stricter than VRA protections that would also benefit Republican incumbents in neighboring districts?

Actually, now that I think about it, if control is split in a special session, they will probably just approve a Dem map in the House and a GOP map in the Senate and let a court draw the 2 year congressional map.  Even if it's a long shot, the chance to draw both chambers through the backup commission in 2023 (or have all the leverage to get their preferred commission language enshrined in the state constitution) is just too valuable to either side.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

The delayed census count introduces an interesting wrinkle into the process.  If the legislature has to convene a special session to redistrict after its normal session ends in May of 2021, the maps will only be valid for one election and must be redrawn at the next regular legislative session in 2023.  Also, the backup commission has no constitutional authority to step in and draw the legislative maps if there is a deadlock in a special session.

It would be able to step in after a deadlock in the 2023 regular session, but all of the statewide offices that make up 4 of the 5 seats on the backup commission are up for statewide election in 2022 and the 5th seat is the Speaker of the State House, so it is possible control of the backup commission could flip.  The commission includes the LG and AG who both won by <5% in 2018.  The most likely scenario where the backup commission would come into play would be if Democrats control the state house (whether they flipped it in 2020 or 2022 doesn't really matter) or if they flipped the governorship in 2022.  Thus, if 2022 is another Trump midterm, it is, remarkably, now plausible that Democrats could be in a position to draw the the state legislative maps in 2023.

With all this uncertainty hanging out there, I wonder if a deal could be struck on sending a nonpartisan commission amendment to the voters in 2022 if there is a split legislature after 2020?

I wonder if there's a chance Texas Republicans would try to stick in commissions with strong compactness requirements as a method of packing Hispanics more along the Rio Grande and in urban areas? The Fifth Circuit Court is thoroughly in the tank for them, so they'd only have to worry about the Supreme Court striking it down and if they were willing to say compact Rio Grande districts aren't unconstitutional packing, that ought to save them at least one congressional district.

Compactness really benefits Dems more than Republicans in TX, though. Even if Dems lose a seat in the RGV because of it, it gives them a lock on 6 DFW seats, 6 Houston seats, and 5 Austin-San Antonio seats. The GOP is really packed in rural areas in TX.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Anyway, I tried to make a completely trend-resistant map with 2018 populations. It locks in a 17D-21R map through 2030 even if TX becomes 55-45 Dem. The key is to concede 5 safe seats to Dems in Dallas-Fort Worth, 4 in Houston, 2 in Austin, 2 in San Antonio, 1 in El Paso, and 3 along the Rio Grande Valley. It should have 7 Latino VRA seats, 2 black VRA seats and 16 majority minority seats overall. With the remaining metropolitan suburbs and exurbs, I made sure to split them out to different rural areas so even with enormous future growth, they should be majority non-metropolitan seats. The map looks like this:



DFW Closeup:


Houston Closeup:

[Nyvin]

I'd consider it a big win if the Dems come out of redistricting with 17 districts in Texas.

[Gass3268]

Anyway, I tried to make a completely trend-resistant map with 2018 populations. It locks in a 17D-21R map through 2030 even if TX becomes 55-45 Dem. The key is to concede 5 safe seats to Dems in Dallas-Fort Worth, 4 in Houston, 2 in Austin, 2 in San Antonio, 1 in El Paso, and 3 along the Rio Grande Valley. It should have 7 Latino VRA seats, 2 black VRA seats and 16 majority minority seats overall. With the remaining metropolitan suburbs and exurbs, I made sure to split them out to different rural areas so even with enormous future growth, they should be majority non-metropolitan seats. The map looks like this:



DFW Closeup:


Houston Closeup:

South Texas violates the VRA, everything else looks great.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

While everyone has been looking at federal redistricting, given that State Senate districts are actually larger than federal ones, opinion of this map?

https://districtr.org/edit/3296







This map should be a safe 19R-12D map. All R districts are at 58.5% Trump or more. All Dem districts are also at 58% Clinton or more.

Granted, I guess with trends and what not it could end up as a dummymander? I also think several of those districts might be illegal because of the VRA?

I think the Texas Constitution says they have to minimize county splits in the state legislative maps. So a few places you have two or more districts splitting the same two counties (like the three Dallas-Collin districts, the two Harris-Montgomery districts or the four Harris-Fort Bend districts) are illegal.

Although maybe that only applies to the state House... not certain.

It only applies to the State House. Though in practice the State Senate districts being long short strings would not fly too well among the public; so the GOP might take the path of "clean compact gerrymandering" where the seats look good but strongly favor the GOP.

If there is any place they go MD style all out, it will be in the state senate.  The state house district constitutional rules are probably strict enough that the chamber will inevitably flip before 2031 if it hasn't flipped already.  The state senate will be the focus.  It's their best hope to ensure a say in the state's government for another decade.  

Yeah, by design its much easier to gerrymander the State Senate than the State House. I fully expect a devious gerrymander there designed to hurt the Democrats' chances. It probably won't be ugly overall - but it will be fine-tuned to achieve its intended effect regardless.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

Anyway, I tried to make a completely trend-resistant map with 2018 populations. It locks in a 17D-21R map through 2030 even if TX becomes 55-45 Dem. The key is to concede 5 safe seats to Dems in Dallas-Fort Worth, 4 in Houston, 2 in Austin, 2 in San Antonio, 1 in El Paso, and 3 along the Rio Grande Valley. It should have 7 Latino VRA seats, 2 black VRA seats and 16 majority minority seats overall. With the remaining metropolitan suburbs and exurbs, I made sure to split them out to different rural areas so even with enormous future growth, they should be majority non-metropolitan seats. The map looks like this:



DFW Closeup:


Houston Closeup:

South Texas violates the VRA, everything else looks great.

Does it? I just swapped the 3 fajitas+San Antonio to El Paso district for a McAllen pack, Brownsville fajita, Laredo-El Paso district, and second San Antonio Latino district. Same number of VRA districts in the same area but with different combinations.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

I'd consider it a big win if the Dems come out of redistricting with 17 districts in Texas.

It would be at first, but if the GOP tries to push their luck and only draw 4 DFW packs and 3 Houston packs, then by 2024 or so Dems could easily hold 20 seats in TX. This is particularly risky is they don't give us a North Dallas/South Collin pack and a West Houston/Fort Bend pack which I could see them thinking are areas they could win.

[Gass3268]

Anyway, I tried to make a completely trend-resistant map with 2018 populations. It locks in a 17D-21R map through 2030 even if TX becomes 55-45 Dem. The key is to concede 5 safe seats to Dems in Dallas-Fort Worth, 4 in Houston, 2 in Austin, 2 in San Antonio, 1 in El Paso, and 3 along the Rio Grande Valley. It should have 7 Latino VRA seats, 2 black VRA seats and 16 majority minority seats overall. With the remaining metropolitan suburbs and exurbs, I made sure to split them out to different rural areas so even with enormous future growth, they should be majority non-metropolitan seats. The map looks like this:



DFW Closeup:


Houston Closeup:

South Texas violates the VRA, everything else looks great.

Does it? I just swapped the 3 fajitas+San Antonio to El Paso district for a McAllen pack, Brownsville fajita, Laredo-El Paso district, and second San Antonio Latino district. Same number of VRA districts in the same area but with different combinations.

That McAllen pack packs in too many Latinos into one district. The current fajita strips situation is essentially mandated under the current court interpretation of the VRA.

[lfromnj]

I am pretty sure after this decade's weakening of the VRA the fajitas won't be required anymore especially as they don't fit the gingles test(compactness)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I am pretty sure after this decade's weakening of the VRA the fajitas won't be required anymore especially as they don't fit the gingles test(compactness)

Depending on the total # of districts, you might have a single district that is contained mostly within Hidalgo (as there is a limit to how many seats you can send north).
Try to draw a 40 CD map without having one CD like that. It is tough.