US House Redistricting: Texas

[krazen1211]

They don't have to always vote for the preferred Hispanic candidate. Just often enough that the Hispanic voting influence is not clearly being diluted. (And what they did with Farenthold reflects that; he got a safe seat, and they created a new Hispanic seat to replace the Farenthold seat.)

TX-23 is similar; it can elect Republicans sometimes, it just has to generally reflect Hispanic voter will. Which the old probably does, but the new one probably does not and may get thrown out. (It would be easy enough to up the Democratic percentage anyway--Corpus has a bunch of Hispanics who could be taken, for example, and the new TX-28 and TX-15 are packed more than they need to be.)

And, yes, the map does have to be 24-12. Or, at least, it has to be at least 24-10-2 or so.

Even the current Court map has no real possibility of a 12th dem district without Chet Edwards. They're capped at 11.

[minionofmidas]

Also, if its a straight "They Have to vote for Democrats" Rule, there's really no point in even submitting a map

That, IMHO, is basically why the court (and for the court, read Anthony Kennedy, I suppose...) hasn't really spelled out or even fully thought through what its recent decisions tend to - that the VRA renders gerrymandering per se illegal in minority-impacted areas. Push him too much with a whole series of 56% VAP Hispanic, 50% Citizen VAP Hispanic, 54% Republican districts, though, and you run the very real risk of eventually getting just that verdict.

[minionofmidas]

As to the map, not too crazy in some parts, just plain lol in others. (Have a look at what they drew for Granger! )
How safe are some of those DFW seats going to remain over the decade, though? Barton's seat is actually plurality Hispanic. (So is Farenthold's new district of course, but that looks safe to me.)

They don't have to always vote for the preferred Hispanic candidate. Just often enough that the Hispanic voting influence is not clearly being diluted. (And what they did with Farenthold reflects that; he got a safe seat, and they created a new Hispanic seat to replace the Farenthold seat.)

TX-23 is similar; it can elect Republicans sometimes, it just has to generally reflect Hispanic voter will. Which the old probably does, but the new one probably does not and may get thrown out. (It would be easy enough to up the Democratic percentage anyway--Corpus has a bunch of Hispanics who could be taken, for example, and the new TX-28 and TX-15 are packed more than they need to be.)

And, yes, the map does have to be 24-12. Or, at least, it has to be at least 24-10-2 or so.

Even the current Court map has no real possibility of a 12th dem district without Chet Edwards. They're capped at 11.

This is a 24-10-2 map. Only, the two (23 and 25) are lean R seats, not pure tossups. This is assuming the DFW carveup is belived to be certain to hold - I can't judge that. I assume the 10th would be fool's gold in 2006/8 repeat conditions, just like its previous incarnation.

[krazen1211]

As to the map, not too crazy in some parts, just plain lol in others. (Have a look at what they drew for Granger! )
How safe are some of those DFW seats going to remain over the decade, though? Barton's seat is actually plurality Hispanic. (So is Farenthold's new district of course, but that looks safe to me.)

They don't have to always vote for the preferred Hispanic candidate. Just often enough that the Hispanic voting influence is not clearly being diluted. (And what they did with Farenthold reflects that; he got a safe seat, and they created a new Hispanic seat to replace the Farenthold seat.)

TX-23 is similar; it can elect Republicans sometimes, it just has to generally reflect Hispanic voter will. Which the old probably does, but the new one probably does not and may get thrown out. (It would be easy enough to up the Democratic percentage anyway--Corpus has a bunch of Hispanics who could be taken, for example, and the new TX-28 and TX-15 are packed more than they need to be.)

And, yes, the map does have to be 24-12. Or, at least, it has to be at least 24-10-2 or so.

Even the current Court map has no real possibility of a 12th dem district without Chet Edwards. They're capped at 11.

This is a 24-10-2 map. Only, the two (23 and 25) are lean R seats, not pure tossups. This is assuming the DFW carveup is belived to be certain to hold - I can't judge that. I assume the 10th would be fool's gold in 2006/8 repeat conditions, just like its previous incarnation.

I don't see that 25th as particularly competitive at R+8 or so. Travis County Democrats will likely keep nominating liberals that will get drenched in the rural areas and Ft. Worth suburbs. That seat is not a VRA seat anyway, so they could technically crack away with the Conaway district.

[minionofmidas]

Yeah, I'm guilty of simplification: once it's gone Republican it stays that way. It's just not actually a guaranteed pickup. Though maybe they already recruited Doggett's challenger, and it's a strong one?

I mean, this is Doggett's electoral history with his current district, which after all is far from a purely Austin Dem vote sink itself:

2006       68-26
2008       66-30         
2010       53-45

Seven points ahead of Obama in 2008. The man's not entirely unelectable to rural whites versus some random R bloke unless they're in 2010 mood. Though it's worth pointing out that he gets a new set of rural whites this time, of course.

(Or of course he just chicken-moves to the Hispanic seat again. And then the whole discussion is moot.)

[Verily]

They don't have to always vote for the preferred Hispanic candidate. Just often enough that the Hispanic voting influence is not clearly being diluted. (And what they did with Farenthold reflects that; he got a safe seat, and they created a new Hispanic seat to replace the Farenthold seat.)

TX-23 is similar; it can elect Republicans sometimes, it just has to generally reflect Hispanic voter will. Which the old probably does, but the new one probably does not and may get thrown out. (It would be easy enough to up the Democratic percentage anyway--Corpus has a bunch of Hispanics who could be taken, for example, and the new TX-28 and TX-15 are packed more than they need to be.)

And, yes, the map does have to be 24-12. Or, at least, it has to be at least 24-10-2 or so.

Even the current Court map has no real possibility of a 12th dem district without Chet Edwards. They're capped at 11.

They were capped at 11 on the 2000 Census numbers, but there are four new districts. There's no way that DFW map gets past the courts, and that would be the new Hispanic/Democratic seat.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Drawing these districts in DRA is really hard because so many precincts are split. This is what I have so far:

TX-10 - goes from 55% McCain to about 56% McCain.
TX-15 - stays the same, still around 60% Obama.
TX-16 - goes from 66% Obama to 67% Obama.
TX-23 - goes from 51% Obama to about 52% McCain.
TX-27 - this one goes from 53% Obama to about 59% McCain.
TX-28 - goes from 56% Obama to about 60-61% Obama.
TX-33 - the new Fort Worth/Arlington district is about 57% McCain.
TX-34 - the replacement Ortiz district is about 60% Obama.
TX-35 - a new Hispanic-majority San Antonio-Austin district is about 59-60% Obama.
TX-36 - a new Houston-Beaumont earmuff district is about 59-60% McCain.

[Dgov]

Also, if its a straight "They Have to vote for Democrats" Rule, there's really no point in even submitting a map

That, IMHO, is basically why the court (and for the court, read Anthony Kennedy, I suppose...) hasn't really spelled out or even fully thought through what its recent decisions tend to - that the VRA renders gerrymandering per se illegal in minority-impacted areas. Push him too much with a whole series of 56% VAP Hispanic, 50% Citizen VAP Hispanic, 54% Republican districts, though, and you run the very real risk of eventually getting just that verdict.

But That's the thing, what if you you draw such a district that isn't a gerrymander at all?  Say a Odessa/Midland West Texas district 10 years from now, which will probably be around 62% VAP Hispanic and at least 60% Republican despite being a COI (as much as west Texas can be anyway) Would that be illegal under the VRA even if its clearly not a gerrymander?

Also, what if I redrew the 29th as closer to 53% Obama, like where the current TX-27 is?  I still need to pull out the Black precincts for the 18th, and you can't get the district above roughly that amount without them.  Would the courts strike down that sort of kind-of gerrymandered (the district's not very clean as is anyway) even if its like 75% VAP Hispanic?

[JohnnyLongtorso]

TX-20 goes from 63% Obama to about 59% Obama.
TX-21 goes froom 58% McCain to about 56-57% McCain.
TX-25 goes from 59% Obama to 56% McCain. Ouch.

I'm done for now, this is making my mouse hand hurt.

[krazen1211]

Wasn't there some kind of Barton vs. Smith fight over redistricting? From the looks of Barton's district, he lost. His district looks like Sessions's. Winnable, but with a large number of Democrats.

Actually, interesting.

The Smith map (allegedly) was splitting the new districts 2-2, while the Barton map was always the 3-1 split. The proposed map closely mirrors the Barton map.

But now Doggett is calling this map the Smith map. So it looks like Smith just took the Barton map, put Barton in an ugly district, and submitted it away.



Of course, that ugly district is 58% McCain, so its not like he will lose it any time soon. The Barton district is deceptively conservative in a manner that its demographics might not suggest.

[freepcrusher]

remember the old 46th district in California? It went from being a 62% Bush 41 district in 1988 to a 54% Gore district by 2000. Hopefully the Texas Republicans are stupid enough for another CA 46 to happen.

[krazen1211]

remember the old 46th district in California? It went from being a 62% Bush 41 district in 1988 to a 54% Gore district by 2000. Hopefully the Texas Republicans are stupid enough for another CA 46 to happen.

Kind of have to pick your side, champ. If they did what you suggested earlier and threw every Democrat from Ft Worth to West Dallas into a single 75% or so district, you kind of lessen the chance of that happening.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

More district numbers, all that's left is the Houston area.

TX-01 - stays the same at 69% McCain.
TX-03 - goes from 57% McCain to 62% McCain.
TX-04 - goes from 69% McCain to about 70-71% McCain.
TX-05 - goes from 63% McCain to about 62-63% McCain.
TX-06 - goes from 60% McCain to 58% McCain.
TX-11 - stays the same at 76% McCain.
TX-12 - goes from 63% McCain to 57% McCain.
TX-13 - goes from 77% McCain to 78% McCain.
TX-17 - goes from 67% McCain to 59% McCain.
TX-19 - stays the same at 72% McCain.
TX-24 - goes from 55% McCain to 59% McCain.
TX-26 - goes from 58% McCain to about 60% McCain.
TX-30 - stays the same at 82% Obama.
TX-31 - goes from 58% McCain to 57% McCain.
TX-32 - goes from 53% McCain to about 55-56% McCain.

[Sam Spade]

The one I'm curious about is TX-22 - that's the one where I think there might be issues long-term for the GOP.  The other districts look pretty well-drawn with regards to where growth and population movement should occur.

Of course, not creating a Hispanic district in Dallas will bring lawsuits galore.  The rest of the gerrymander will be ok VRA-wise, I suspect.

No way Doggett runs in that TX-25; he'll move to the Hispanic district.  Where Ciro will undoubtedly run in - that's his old territory in Bexar.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Okay, last batch.

TX-02 goes from 60% McCain to 64-65% McCain.
TX-07 goes from 58% McCain to 60% McCain.
TX-08 stays the same at 74% McCain.
TX-09 goes from 77% Obama to 74-75% Obama.
TX-14 goes from 66% McCain to 65% McCain.
TX-18 goes from 77% Obama to 79-80% Obama.
TX-22 goes from 58% McCain to 64% McCain.
TX-29 goes from 62% Obama to 66-67% Obama.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Here's the entire state:


TX-01 - 69% McCain
TX-02 - 64-65% McCain
TX-03 - 62% McCain
TX-04 - 70-71% McCain
TX-05 - 62-63% McCain
TX-06 - 58% McCain
TX-07 - 60% McCain
TX-08 - 74% McCain
TX-09 - 74-75% Obama
TX-10 - 56% McCain
TX-11 - 76% McCain
TX-12 - 57% McCain
TX-13 - 78% McCain
TX-14 - 65% McCain
TX-15 - 60% Obama
TX-16 - 67% Obama
TX-17 - 59% McCain
TX-18 - 79-80% Obama
TX-19 - 72% McCain
TX-20 - 59% Obama
TX-21 - 56-57% McCain
TX-22 - 64% McCain
TX-23 - 52% McCain
TX-24 - 59% McCain
TX-25 - 56% McCain
TX-26 - 60% McCain
TX-27 - 59% McCain
TX-28 - 60-61% Obama
TX-29 - 66-67% Obama
TX-30 - 82% Obama
TX-31 - 57% McCain
TX-32 - 55-56% McCain
TX-33 - 57% McCain
TX-34 - 60% Obama
TX-35 - 59-60% Obama
TX-36 - 59-60% McCain

36 districts with only one competitive in a general election (TX-23). Pretty impressive work.

[Mr.Phips]

I really doubt this map will pass muster with the DOJ.  It only creates a net of one new Hispanic majority district, and splits up Hispanic communities in Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston that could be used to create at least two more Hispanic majority districts. 

[Sam Spade]

Okay, last batch.

TX-02 goes from 60% McCain to 64-65% McCain.
TX-07 goes from 58% McCain to 60% McCain.
TX-08 stays the same at 74% McCain.
TX-09 goes from 77% Obama to 74-75% Obama.
TX-14 goes from 66% McCain to 65% McCain.
TX-18 goes from 77% Obama to 79-80% Obama.
TX-22 goes from 58% McCain to 64% McCain.
TX-29 goes from 62% Obama to 66-67% Obama.

Maybe I misread that TX-22.    Ugh.

[Sam Spade]

I really doubt this map will pass muster with the DOJ.  It only creates a net of one new Hispanic majority district, and splits up Hispanic communities in Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston that could be used to create at least two more Hispanic majority districts. 

The DFW Hispanic district is the issue.  I've looked at the numbers, and I haven't found a way to create a second Hispanic district in Houston other than the touch-point thing krazen mentioned way back.  The Hispanics are simply too spread out, and it would come at the expense of Al Green anyway.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

That 36th district is the most vile abomination I have seen so far.

[jimrtex]

I really doubt this map will pass muster with the DOJ.  It only creates a net of one new Hispanic majority district, and splits up Hispanic communities in Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston that could be used to create at least two more Hispanic majority districts. 

The DFW Hispanic district is the issue.  I've looked at the numbers, and I haven't found a way to create a second Hispanic district in Houston other than the touch-point thing krazen mentioned way back.  The Hispanics are simply too spread out, and it would come at the expense of Al Green anyway.

You obviously didn't see the Maldef map that connected the NE Houston and NW Houston portions of TX-18 via a one block strip through North Houston.  This lets TX-29 connect east and SE Houston with the southern part of North Houston via downtown, while TX-18 also connects to the 3rd Ward.  The new Hispanic district then takes in the northern part of North Houston and wraps over the top of both parts northern arms of TX-18 so it can get to Channelview, Spring Branch and Gulfton.

BTW, the legislature is back in special session because they didn't finish with budget, and Governor Perry has added redistricting to the call.

[jimrtex]

That 36th district is the most vile abomination I have seen so far.

Careful trashing my congressional district.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Okay, last batch.

TX-02 goes from 60% McCain to 64-65% McCain.
TX-07 goes from 58% McCain to 60% McCain.
TX-08 stays the same at 74% McCain.
TX-09 goes from 77% Obama to 74-75% Obama.
TX-14 goes from 66% McCain to 65% McCain.
TX-18 goes from 77% Obama to 79-80% Obama.
TX-22 goes from 58% McCain to 64% McCain.
TX-29 goes from 62% Obama to 66-67% Obama.

Maybe I misread that TX-22.    Ugh.

It's 13% Asian, so perhaps there's a big Vietnamese population in Fort Bend or they're not registered to vote (or a combination of both).

[Dgov]

Okay, last batch.

TX-02 goes from 60% McCain to 64-65% McCain.
TX-07 goes from 58% McCain to 60% McCain.
TX-08 stays the same at 74% McCain.
TX-09 goes from 77% Obama to 74-75% Obama.
TX-14 goes from 66% McCain to 65% McCain.
TX-18 goes from 77% Obama to 79-80% Obama.
TX-22 goes from 58% McCain to 64% McCain.
TX-29 goes from 62% Obama to 66-67% Obama.

Maybe I misread that TX-22.    Ugh.

It's 13% Asian, so perhaps there's a big Vietnamese population in Fort Bend or they're not registered to vote (or a combination of both).

Some cursory checking suggests the both, as taking in 200,000 peoples worth of the most Asian areas on the county (33%) give a 50:49 Obama vote total, and that's with less than 25% Whites.   Turnout in the area is actually slightly higher than the state average too (though that's mostly because the Heavily Hispanic parts of Texas weight its totals down).

[minionofmidas]

Also, if its a straight "They Have to vote for Democrats" Rule, there's really no point in even submitting a map

That, IMHO, is basically why the court (and for the court, read Anthony Kennedy, I suppose...) hasn't really spelled out or even fully thought through what its recent decisions tend to - that the VRA renders gerrymandering per se illegal in minority-impacted areas. Push him too much with a whole series of 56% VAP Hispanic, 50% Citizen VAP Hispanic, 54% Republican districts, though, and you run the very real risk of eventually getting just that verdict.

But That's the thing, what if you you draw such a district that isn't a gerrymander at all? 

It would presumably still be legit even in that scenario - just as no one believes the South Bronx must be diluted down to 60% nonwhite. I think that TX-23 they drew should pass muster, for instance. Which is probably why they didn't shore up Canseco more. Wouldn't have been very hard to do.