Pennsylvania proposes allocating electoral votes by Congressional distrct

[Brittain33]

You have never heard me criticize NE or ME, and NE did benefit Obama. 

Only in a theoretical sense, and for his ego and Democratic bragging rights. It is 99.9% impossible for Nebraska's splitting its EV to be a deciding factor in a modern presidential election. (I suppose there is a highly unlikely, bizarre scenario where the race is close AND NE-2 is close.) It is quite conceivable that Pennsylvania doing the splitting would be a factor.

[Torie]

You have never heard me criticize NE or ME, and NE did benefit Obama. 

Only in a theoretical sense, and for his ego and Democratic bragging rights. It is 99.9% impossible for Nebraska's splitting its EV to be a deciding factor in a modern presidential election. (I suppose there is a highly unlikely, bizarre scenario where the race is close AND NE-2 is close.) It is quite conceivable that Pennsylvania doing the splitting would be a factor.

Well maybe a bunch of "f****ts" and persons of color and metrosexuals and the Godless, and all of Buffet's liberal friends will move to Omaha soon. Did you ever think of that? 

[Sbane]

JJ, until you take gerrymandering out of the process, this cannot be fair. And it might hurt reps in the future. I have a Democratic gerrymander of PA in the works. I will unfurl it soon someday tuned to the P&G board.

And I'd call that Democratic gerrymander fair, so long as it meets the constitutional requirements.  This is, "We don't like it, therefor it is unfair."

No, no, no. Gerrymandering is wrong no matter who it is done by. Not to mention if the Dems were gerrymandering now, you would find some way of finding a problem with it, while the same  people up in arms about current Republican gerrymandering would be quiet or even supportive.

You have never heard me criticize NE or ME, and NE did benefit Obama.  I recognize that that the states can do it.  I think, in this case, it has some negative drawbacks, from both an R and D perspective.  It certainly would diminish the importance of PA in presidential elections.

This is just an example of, "We don't like it, therefor it is unfair."

Is NE gerrymandered? I have stated this before on this thread, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with this if every state was gerrymandered fairly and all the states followed this method at the same time.

Or we could just go for a PV election with a runoff so someone gets 50% of the vote.

[Torie]

Well the Pubbies are moving the pawns around some to help moot some more this little issue in Omaha is my impression. It's redistricting time.

The "solution" of course is to make all three CD's in Nebraska precisely the same in partisan coloration. So that should be done just for "good government" reasons.

[Keystone Phil]

Re: unconstitutional, I said further up thread that it looked like a potential Baker v. Carr situation where a minority of the popular vote could get a majority of the electoral vote with the kind of gerrymandering and concentration of Dem voters in cities that you see in Pennsylvania.

Potential. Got it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I would think that those that a system so unfair would be vocally opposed to it in all situations, not just when it could directly affect the result.

[Brittain33]

Re: unconstitutional, I said further up thread that it looked like a potential Baker v. Carr situation where a minority of the popular vote could get a majority of the electoral vote with the kind of gerrymandering and concentration of Dem voters in cities that you see in Pennsylvania.

Potential. Got it.

Indeed. I think it is likely unconstitutional but there's no way it's an open-and-shut case.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's unfair because it could affect the result. If it doesn't affect the result, it's pretty much irrelevant.

Are you so wrapped up in the idea that I'm a hypocrite or a liar that you can't see this point?

[Sbane]

Sbane, I'd be intrested in seeing your PA gerrymander.  I'd like to see one where the Philly districts are chopped up and split up over the entire eastern Pennsylvania area, giving Dems a victory chance throughout the region.

I posted it. Go check it out. There are 11 Obama districts and 7 Mccain districts. Really shows how much the VRA hurts Dems.

[Torie]

Sbane, I'd be intrested in seeing your PA gerrymander.  I'd like to see one where the Philly districts are chopped up and split up over the entire eastern Pennsylvania area, giving Dems a victory chance throughout the region.

I posted it. Go check it out. There are 11 Obama districts and 7 Mccain districts. Really shows how much the VRA hurts Dems.

Does it simulate a Dem gerrymander, or a non partisan court draw? If the former, surely you can do better than that! 

[Devils30]

It's not the VRA that hurts Dems, it's the GOP gerrymanders along with it. Dems would make the majority-minority districts closer to 65% Dem rather than 80-90%

[Sbane]

Sbane, I'd be intrested in seeing your PA gerrymander.  I'd like to see one where the Philly districts are chopped up and split up over the entire eastern Pennsylvania area, giving Dems a victory chance throughout the region.

I posted it. Go check it out. There are 11 Obama districts and 7 Mccain districts. Really shows how much the VRA hurts Dems.

Does it simulate a Dem gerrymander, or a non partisan court draw? If the former, surely you can do better than that! 

How would you do it better? I didn't take into account where anyone lived of course.

[Torie]

Well you should be able to limit the pubs to maybe 4 CD's in central and west PA I would think, and basically shut them out in the East I would think. Even with the VRA.  Maybe 5 CD's but surely not seven. In PA, the Pubs are rather concentrated, and in the east, the best you get is marginal McCain stuff anyway, that is easy to deal with a few slugs of Dems. It was hell for me to draw eastern PA from  a Pub perspective - just hell. I had to come up with every trick in the book, and even then it was a close call.

I will look at your map when I can.

[Sbane]

Take a look at the partisan numbers. The problem with the burbs, as we all know, is that they are just too bland and the same. And they vote the same way! Pretty hard to gerrymander them. So my CD-6 is only 51% Mccain. Otherwise I got the Mccain number pretty high in the other Republican districts. Also I chose to make the eastern Dem districts close to 60% Obama. In the west I relaxed it a little, but not much.

[J. J.]

By using that standard, you would have to claim that all Representative from the state have to be from the same party.

No, I wouldn't.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Right, I agree that it would be wrong for Texas to do this.

Sorry it would not make it wrong for Texas to do it.

[Torie]

Take a look at the partisan numbers. The problem with the burbs, as we all know, is that they are just too bland and the same. And they vote the same way! Pretty hard to gerrymander them. So my CD-6 is only 51% Mccain. Otherwise I got the Mccain number pretty high in the other Republican districts. Also I chose to make the eastern Dem districts close to 60% Obama. In the west I relaxed it a little, but not much.

We shall see if I can do better! If not, you have my permission to stick your tongue out at me, and join Lewis in gang banging me on the NY redistricting thread.

[Fritz]

From Nate Silver:

Pennsylvania Electoral College Plan Could Backfire on G.O.P.

[Devils30]

The state chairman opposes it to and the RNC head isn't too warm on it either. Considering that only 6 GOPers in the state senate need to defect, this plan likely will be tabled. There will be hell to pay in terms of backlash if they attempt to go through. Not to mention this very well violates the one person, one vote principle. As I said earlier, this is different because legislators can fix the vote thru the districts but the state's borders cant be moved.

[BigSkyBob]

Re: unconstitutional, I said further up thread that it looked like a potential Baker v. Carr situation where a minority of the popular vote could get a majority of the electoral vote with the kind of gerrymandering and concentration of Dem voters in cities that you see in Pennsylvania.

Potential. Got it.

Indeed. I think it is likely unconstitutional but there's no way it's an open-and-shut case.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's unfair because it could affect the result. If it doesn't affect the result, it's pretty much irrelevant.

No, it is not "irrelevant" since it establishes a precedent that allows for this change in other states. The change in other states could alter the outcome from what the result would have been under the old rules.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

Wouldn't it be ironic if the GOP passed this and Obama ended up losing the state, but winning enough electoral votes to have a second term.

Then again if Obama losses Pennsylvania he would lose the election and we'd be looking at 300+ electoral votes for the GOP.

[J. J.]

From Nate Silver:

Pennsylvania Electoral College Plan Could Backfire on G.O.P.

I think several of Silver's points are garbage, but not #1 and #4.   The plan is fair and constitutional, but it makes no political sense.

(I'd say the same thing regarding Texas.)

[minionofmidas]

You have never heard me criticize NE or ME, and NE did benefit Obama. 

Only in a theoretical sense, and for his ego and Democratic bragging rights. It is 99.9% impossible for Nebraska's splitting its EV to be a deciding factor in a modern presidential election. (I suppose there is a highly unlikely, bizarre scenario where the race is close AND NE-2 is close.) It is quite conceivable that Pennsylvania doing the splitting would be a factor.

Well maybe a bunch of "f****ts" and persons of color and metrosexuals and the Godless, and all of Buffet's liberal friends will move to Omaha soon. Did you ever think of that? 

You have some inside information on Sam Spade's next career phase? Please illucidate.

[minionofmidas]

I see no constitutional issue with allocating electoral votes by Congressional district as such - provided that a scenario where someone not receiving the most votes cast in the state nonetheless receives the majority of its Electoral Votes is outlandishly unlikely (it's actually impossible in Nebraska as well as in Maine, given the two statewide winners' EVs.) You could even, theoretically, have electors elected in separate single-member districts existing only for that purpose. (IIRC some state did that for a few years before the civil war - Maryland?)
There clearly are constitutional issues with gerrymandering given, and although the court has always skirted well away from deeming "political" gerrymandering unconstitutional, it's pretty clear that your swing vote there Mr Kennedy is very uneasy about it.
Using heavily gerrymandered districts to elect electors? They'll find a way. I don't know what logic they'll use - there are several possible approaches, none of which a mythical genuine Originalist would sign on to - and what avenues for EV splitting they will leave open, but I'm as confident as Torie that they will strike it.

[The_Texas_Libertarian]

If this does happen I could easily see the Democratic base getting motivated again.  Being a a blatant political maneuver even though it would cost Democrats electoral votes in Pennsylvania even a small increase of 2% of Democratic turnout could cost the GOP Virginia, Ohio and Florida again and maybe even a dozen or so additional House seats.

[J. J.]

If this does happen I could easily see the Democratic base getting motivated again.  Being a a blatant political maneuver even though it would cost Democrats electoral votes in Pennsylvania even a small increase of 2% of Democratic turnout could cost the GOP Virginia, Ohio and Florida again and maybe even a dozen or so additional House seats.

This would have zero direct effect in other states.  It really only would interest only political junkies. 

Indirectly, candidates might spend less money in Pennsylvania, probably in the Pittsburgh media market (which is another reason why it is a bad idea), and possibly several in the "T."  They would have more money to spend elsewhere.

[krazen1211]

If this does happen I could easily see the Democratic base getting motivated again.  Being a a blatant political maneuver even though it would cost Democrats electoral votes in Pennsylvania even a small increase of 2% of Democratic turnout could cost the GOP Virginia, Ohio and Florida again and maybe even a dozen or so additional House seats.

Keep dreaming. Look how many political junkies were ignorant of these tactics being used in colorado. Nobody will even know about it.

[Stranger in a strange land]

If this does happen I could easily see the Democratic base getting motivated again.  Being a a blatant political maneuver even though it would cost Democrats electoral votes in Pennsylvania even a small increase of 2% of Democratic turnout could cost the GOP Virginia, Ohio and Florida again and maybe even a dozen or so additional House seats.

This would have zero direct effect in other states.  It really only would interest only political junkies. 

Indirectly, candidates might spend less money in Pennsylvania, probably in the Pittsburgh media market (which is another reason why it is a bad idea), and possibly several in the "T."  They would have more money to spend elsewhere.

If the Democrats make enough of an issue of this it could be: this is pretty much the most blatant psuedo-legal (I say psuedo-legal because there's a good chance it runs afoul of the VRA, given that minority voters tend to be concentrated in heavily minority districts, and this plan would dilute their voting power by accident if not by design) political power grab possible in American politics.

In addition, there's a decent chance the Republicans could end up shooting themselves in the foot on this one: Obama's approvals in PA aren't all that great, and it's winnable for the right candidate.