US House Redistricting: Texas

[Sam Spade]

TX-34 (Recreating Another McCaul Maul)
Incumbent Home: None
Voting: McCain 58% (57.96% exact), Obama 41%
Race: White 64%, Hispanic 22%, Black 10%, Asian 4%
Comment: Pushing TX-10 further north allows us to create its cousin, TX-34, which takes in west Harris County suburbs, Fort Bend suburbs from TX-22 and Brazoria County areas from TX-14 to balance its dangling arm into the Austin interior..



TX-35 (Forcing Hispanic GOPers to Represent GOP Whites Yet Again)
Incumbent Home: San Antonio (Bexar County)
Voting: McCain 58% (57.98%), Obama 41%
Race: White 69%, Hispanic 24%, Asian 3%, Black%
Comment: I'm pretty sure Canseco resides here - if I'm wrong, some alterations can be made without destroying the CD, so...  In short, TX-35 takes the center of German Hill Country and the Austin environs from Smith and attaches it onto TX-23's GOP part of Bexar County, and some rural GOP areas (Uvalde, Hondo and the boonies).





TX-36 (A Fourth West Texas District?)
Incumbent Home: None
Voting: McCain 64%, Obama 35%
Race: White 59%, Hispanic 28%, Black 10%, Asian 3%
Comment: This new TX-36 is a combination of rural west Texas counties dropped by TX-11, TX-13 and TX-19 and leftover Fort Worth and Denton suburbs from TX-12 and TX-26.  This will be a fair fight between rural interests and suburban interests as a decent bit of the Fort Worth areas (enough to matter in the population contest) are minority-based black areas that vote Democratic.

[Sam Spade]

And later - something quite different...

[Sam Spade]

Sam, I think that your DFW minority districts are not as VRA-proof as the TX GOP might want. This provides more margin to correct for the VAP, and even citizen VAP if needed. This will be especially needed since this would go through the Obama DOJ. So, here's my bullet-proof minority districts for the Metroplex.



CD 30:
White 27%, Black 53%, Asian 3%, Hispanic 16%
Obama 79%, McCain 20%

CD 33:
White 21%, Black 9%, Asian 3%, Hispanic 66%
Obama 66%, McCain 33%

I don't think GOP would have any problem drawing those districts, even though they are *butt ugly* (to put it mildly).  I didn't do it, because, odd as it may sound, I'm aiming for something that looks a bit nicer.

Here's what I'm going to point out - Texas is really looking for fights with the Feds right now, and vice versa.  The reason why I'm drawing the maps that raise questions is because Texas lawmakers are almost certainly going to produce one based on their interpretation of LULAC v. Perry that comes as close to skirting the lines as they think possible.

In particular, they are going to read LULAC v. Perry as saying that 'so long as there is 50%+1 Latino citizen VAP, the first Gingles threshold requirement is not met, and, therefore, there is no Section 2 violation.'  TX-23, in that instance had 55% Latino population, 50% VAP and 46% citizen VAP.  TX-23 is probably going to be a tad lower on the citizen VAP than other parts of Texas, but if we have 59% to 60% Latino population, there will be 50%+1 citizen VAP.

And when the Obama Justice Dept. blocks this map through Section 5, they're going to argue the unconstitutionality of the Section 5, which the Court successfully ignored in Northwest Austin Municipal District No.1 v. Holder, but left quite a cautious tone on its continued viability (of course, Roberts does not speak for Kennedy, naturally)..

You'll see this game come to fruition in the next couple of maps I draw.

EDIT:  I see Torie's new post which suggests question between citizen VAP and regular VAP.  I am almost certain it is citizen VAP, just having read the ruling again before making the above post, but I am trying to show the number where 50%+1 citizen VAP is reached, at least along the border in Texas.

[Sam Spade]

We are in agreement here, Torie.  The Supreme Court decisions in the area of congressional appropriation in recent years generally suck royally.  No wonder is it that so many of the recent ones have been written by Kennedy.

Of course, I also think Reynolds v. Sims was wrongly decided, so maybe my opinion is a little out there.

[Sam Spade]

I wouldn't worry about Sam's metro districts, what with the fact that not nearly all the non-Blacks / non-Mexicans are Anglo. Though who knows.

I'm not worried about the metro districts - so long as they vote the right way, no one will be complaining.  And the Hispanic CDs probably fit under VAP or citizen VAP - if not, adjustments can be made easily to make them compatible.

Anyway, map #2, which I'm working on, is the real way to f-ck Democrats of which there will be a hard time to find complaints to stop it.  The trick is to go back to the old Republican method of splitting Webb County, pitting Cuellar against Hinojosa in CD-15, and design new CD-28 so that it takes in the former border areas of TX-23, the leftover parts of Webb County and then combine them with Midland and Odessa, thus giving us Conaway as an incumbent.  I can get to 62.74% Hispanic population (definitely good enough for VAP or CVAP) and 55.07% McCain numbers while making everything look nice and pretty.

[Sam Spade]

I wouldn't worry about Sam's metro districts, what with the fact that not nearly all the non-Blacks / non-Mexicans are Anglo. Though who knows.

I'm not worried about the metro districts - so long as they vote the right way, no one will be complaining.  And the Hispanic CDs probably fit under VAP or citizen VAP - if not, adjustments can be made easily to make them compatible.

Anyway, map #2, which I'm working on, is the real way to f-ck Democrats of which there will be a hard time to find complaints to stop it.  The trick is to go back to the old Republican method of splitting Webb County, pitting Cuellar against Hinojosa in CD-15, and design new CD-28 so that it takes in the former border areas of TX-23, the leftover parts of Webb County and then combine them with Midland and Odessa, thus giving us Conaway as an incumbent.  I can get to 62.74% Hispanic population (definitely good enough for VAP or CVAP) and 55.07% McCain numbers while making everything look nice and pretty.

I am finding that drawing really good maps requires a heck of a lot of work, Sam, precinct by precinct, and of course the larger number of CD's involved, the more the work. I found PA to be a bear, and Texas must be an utter nightmare. Can you imagine what will be involved to draw CA, with all those rules as an overlay?  Oh dear!

You can't just spend a couple of hours with your mouse, and call it a day. Not for this endeavor.

With Texas, the only real questions occur from Austin southward and westward.  There's really no point to playing around with the other parts of the state that much, the results are obvious, except that it makes a lot of sense to give Johnson, Culberson and Sessions some younger suburbs.  Map #2 will be a bit different in layout than the present gerrymander than Map #1, and I must admit, looks much better.

I'm going to produce a map with 60%+1 Latino population and one with 62.50%+1 Latino population just for comparison.  The second one I know will produce a Hispanic majority even under CVAP, even though I can only get Farenthold up a bit in GOP strength (about 50-50) and there will be two obvious marginals (I can get TX-27 up to marginal status).  With 60%, I can certainly produce 27 seats that should produce GOP reps as the McCain% should be above 50% in the two marginals.

Depending on the actual numbers, this is the map that should be produced b/c you get the two new Hispanic majority CDs (the third would be made up of almost already all Democratic areas in Houston, if done) and 25 certain GOP reps, along with two marginals that look much better than present TX-23 and TX-27.

Actually, the problem with so many CDs is that it makes it harder for you to open up your eyes and see the best solution, which in Texas is 1) combine Cuellar and Hinojosa together - the geography works; 2) split Webb County; 3) include Midland/Odessa in a border CD.

[Sam Spade]

btw, the next map I'll work on is the Austin pack.  You won't get to 60% Hispanic though, which will probably cause LULAC to file suit for another Hispanic district.  Or maybe not.  

The fact remains is that, without making the map *too* ugly, a pretty safe 25-11 GOP map, with the Austin-San Antonio TX-23, can be created at the 62.5% Hispanic population level with one definite marginal stronger than present TX-23 or TX-27 and another marginal the same or weaker than those..  At the 60%, those two marginals become even stronger, of course.  The issue is that I can't get Farenthold's CD above McCain 52% with 60% Hispanics in its current configuration or something close.  You go to the north and east and you pick up too many whites.

With the Austin pack, I suspect I can get 26-10 with a bit more security, but 27-9 is probably impossible.  It allows me to try to push Farenthold's CD out to the west where I think I can get a better %.  We'll see.  Anything more than 27-9 anywhere, is impossible.  The GOP may be OK with 26-10, since they probably view Farenthold as a fluke, but we'll see.

[Sam Spade]

Interview about Texas redistricting.


http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/01/redistricting-q-2.php

MA: I think their starting place will be to try to hold their districts. And they'll do that by keeping the minority percentage the same, but putting in high-voting Anglo-Republicans. High turnout Republicans. What they did this time is they won because you had high turnout among Anglos who vote straight-ticket Republican.

And then they will draw a new Hispanic district in Dallas County and just say that that's a new Hispanic district. Because you can draw it there and not hurt any incumbent. Then they'll draw some kind of Hispanic district, or at least I'll call it a "Hispanic district" from Austin, South. But rather than leave the rest of Travis County for Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D), they'll break up Travis County into three or four pieces.

So Doggett will face a tough race. Either they'll get rid of him by putting him a Republican district or they'll make him run in a Hispanic district. Doggett's been elected in a Hispanic district before; maybe he can do it again. But it keeps Democrats from netting up seats. So then, in effect, what they will have done is created three new Republican districts.



I don't know if I agree with that, but its an interesting point to ponder. It makes much more sense to me just to draw a circle in Travis County and move on.

I don't know where this idea that there's going to be another hispanic majority Dem district in South Texas. I see no reason at all to draw one. If there has to be an 8th hispanic majority district it should use the idea posted above and just rearrange the 3 existing Houston districts.

So, in other words, they're going to follow the initial plan of my maps.  But no one will have the guts to go and draw Midland-Odessa with the border and a Webb County split.  It works - quite well, I might add. 55% McCain.

[Sam Spade]

 The issue is that I can't get Farenthold's CD above McCain 52% with 60% Hispanics in its current configuration or something close.  You go to the north and east and you pick up too many whites.

I got a Farenthold district at 50% McCain, 65% Hispanic:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=129772.msg2765676#msg2765676

You could probably modify it to get 52% McCain, 60% Hispanic pretty easily.  

I should have clarified - without making it look *butt-ugly*. 

But even with that, you should seriously think about f-ing Cuellar.  The trick is going up to Midland-Odessa, pulling in rural counties  around that area in west Texas (which have lots of Hispanics) and splitting Webb.

[Sam Spade]

Interview about Texas redistricting.


http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/01/redistricting-q-2.php

MA: I think their starting place will be to try to hold their districts. And they'll do that by keeping the minority percentage the same, but putting in high-voting Anglo-Republicans. High turnout Republicans. What they did this time is they won because you had high turnout among Anglos who vote straight-ticket Republican.

And then they will draw a new Hispanic district in Dallas County and just say that that's a new Hispanic district. Because you can draw it there and not hurt any incumbent. Then they'll draw some kind of Hispanic district, or at least I'll call it a "Hispanic district" from Austin, South. But rather than leave the rest of Travis County for Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D), they'll break up Travis County into three or four pieces.

So Doggett will face a tough race. Either they'll get rid of him by putting him a Republican district or they'll make him run in a Hispanic district. Doggett's been elected in a Hispanic district before; maybe he can do it again. But it keeps Democrats from netting up seats. So then, in effect, what they will have done is created three new Republican districts.



I don't know if I agree with that, but its an interesting point to ponder. It makes much more sense to me just to draw a circle in Travis County and move on.

I don't know where this idea that there's going to be another hispanic majority Dem district in South Texas. I see no reason at all to draw one. If there has to be an 8th hispanic majority district it should use the idea posted above and just rearrange the 3 existing Houston districts.

So, in other words, they're going to follow the initial plan of my maps.  But no one will have the guts to go and draw Midland-Odessa with the border and a Webb County split.  It works - quite well, I might add. 55% McCain.

I wouldn't say nobody. Tom Delay might, if they can find a way to contract him from prison.

I still believe the cleanest solution is 26-10, Austin Pack, 3 GOP marginals (Canseco, Farenholdt, and whomever gets the new district), and 7 hispanic majority districts. LULAC will probably complain no matter what you do.

I don't see any court forcing any type of Austin to San Antonio district, which is really just a waste of Republican votes and forces you to crack the Austin liberal whites. I'm going to try to work on a map to use TX 13, 19, and 11 and utterly chop Austin into bits.

The Austin-San Antonio thing won't be forced either, I agree. 

But since I can chop Austin into bits in map #2 with McCain % being 57.50% in all the Austin choppers (map#2 I've designed has it being Smith, Canseco, Neugebauer and Flores!) I don't view it as being that big of a wast. 

[Sam Spade]

Interview about Texas redistricting.


http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/01/redistricting-q-2.php

MA: I think their starting place will be to try to hold their districts. And they'll do that by keeping the minority percentage the same, but putting in high-voting Anglo-Republicans. High turnout Republicans. What they did this time is they won because you had high turnout among Anglos who vote straight-ticket Republican.

And then they will draw a new Hispanic district in Dallas County and just say that that's a new Hispanic district. Because you can draw it there and not hurt any incumbent. Then they'll draw some kind of Hispanic district, or at least I'll call it a "Hispanic district" from Austin, South. But rather than leave the rest of Travis County for Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D), they'll break up Travis County into three or four pieces.

So Doggett will face a tough race. Either they'll get rid of him by putting him a Republican district or they'll make him run in a Hispanic district. Doggett's been elected in a Hispanic district before; maybe he can do it again. But it keeps Democrats from netting up seats. So then, in effect, what they will have done is created three new Republican districts.



I don't know if I agree with that, but its an interesting point to ponder. It makes much more sense to me just to draw a circle in Travis County and move on.

I don't know where this idea that there's going to be another hispanic majority Dem district in South Texas. I see no reason at all to draw one. If there has to be an 8th hispanic majority district it should use the idea posted above and just rearrange the 3 existing Houston districts.

So, in other words, they're going to follow the initial plan of my maps.  But no one will have the guts to go and draw Midland-Odessa with the border and a Webb County split.  It works - quite well, I might add. 55% McCain.

I wouldn't say nobody. Tom Delay might, if they can find a way to contract him from prison.

I still believe the cleanest solution is 26-10, Austin Pack, 3 GOP marginals (Canseco, Farenholdt, and whomever gets the new district), and 7 hispanic majority districts. LULAC will probably complain no matter what you do.

I don't see any court forcing any type of Austin to San Antonio district, which is really just a waste of Republican votes and forces you to crack the Austin liberal whites. I'm going to try to work on a map to use TX 13, 19, and 11 and utterly chop Austin into bits.

The Austin-San Antonio thing won't be forced either, I agree. 

But since I can chop Austin into bits in map #2 with McCain % being 57.50% in all the Austin choppers (map#2 I've designed has it being Smith, Canseco, Neugebauer and Flores!) I don't view it as being that big of a wast. 

Map 2 is the 27-9 map, right? 3 Houston, 2 Dallas, 1 El Paso, 1 San Antonio, 2 South Texas?

1 San Antonio-Austin

I can get you 27 McCain districts (25 being 54% or above, 24 being 57.50% or more) with at least 9 Hispanic-majority districts at 60% or more.  But you can probably only count on 26, as the 27th will have to be a kind-of-strange rural district.  The GOP won one of the HDs this year that would almost certainly be in the 27th, and there's the party-switcher, so there will be possible candidates

[Sam Spade]

don't include San Angelo, but include Midland.  don't go too far west into central Texas.  Pick through the El Paso precincts for strong Hispanic ones.

I've gotten 60.54% Hispanic and 57.32% McCain; 62.73% Hispanic and 55.09% McCain.  Plus, if you include Midland, you get Conaway as an incumbent in a district with a lot of strange rural counties where it's too GOP for Pete Gallego to take a chance.

[Sam Spade]

They pretty much have to add some territory to the border seats and create an additional seat there. Not trying to make that an R seat would be silly. Going north from Corpus and drawing a seat for Farenthold is the obvious choice - otherwise you're forced to do the kind of map krazen and Sam are talking about further west.
Obviously, you could make it a whole lot more marginal on the basis of "look at the seat he won in 2010", but...

Lewis, you're basically forced to go north on Farenthold regardless of whether you do the thing out west I'm talking about if you want to give him a McCain CD.  I'm working on trying to get him to 53% or 54% while staying above 60% Hispanic, but it ain't easy, and is probably as far as I can go.

As for Texas, what is pretty clear is this - you have 24 obvious GOP seats and 7 obvious Dem seats (3 Houston, 2 Dallas, 1 San Antonio, 1 El Paso, 4-5 Hispanic minority majority) in a fairly nice looking map, irregardless.  What's left is Doggett, Cuellar, Hinojosa, Canseco and Farenthold.  Drawing Canseco into a new north Bexar and other district is rather easy, so you'll create an open seat.

As for the rest, another Dem seat has to either be the Hispanic-majority Austin to San Antonio thing I mentioned or the Austin pack.  The Hispanics will insist (especially with Austin pack, but with other too) that the others be Hispanic-majority, and it is hard for me to disagree there because the numbers support it.

So we're left with an OK district for Farenthold and even though I can get one of the others into marginal status (kinda), with South Texas this is always a question mark.

That's where the west idea comes from.  And don't think it has no chance in the courts - under the rules laid out by Kennedy, it is a much stronger argument, as it will 1) have a CVAP of over 50% and 2) be fairly compact (less important argument).

[Sam Spade]

What you're trying to do is eliminate a Hispanic opportunity seat (that is, a seat in which the victor will be reliant on widespread Hispanic support), while technically fulfilling a random cutoff line and while creating unnecessarily disparate, huge constituencies in particularly empty minority country. You're doing exactly what the TX-23 decision says you can't do in West Texas, except with several districts. And run the risk of the same thing happening again - your seats struck down and your evil plans for other seats thwarted as an indirect consequence.

I'm basically not worried about that.  Any court-designed map based on present gerrymander (which is what they'll do) is going to be hard not to make 24-12, especially if you play Austin-pack and sacrifice Canseco to the Anglo wolves.  Getting seat #25, in almost any way you design it, becomes quite difficult unless you can do what I did or convince them to let you create an Anglo-majority district for Farenthold.  Any Hispanic minority-majority district with Farenthold can be made stronger, but not safe.  There is, at least, a GOP institutional base in Nueces, so if he screws up, the CD is certainly not lost for good.

As for the rest of your points on LULAC v. Perry I respectfully disagree.  Maybe more later.  The last two Texas maps have gone to the Supremes, so I wouldn't be surprised if Kennedy is involved again.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

My point about TX-23 is, once again, how is it dilution of Latino voting strength if, where they are located, they vote more Republican than in other places?  That wasn't really at issue in LULAC, as they voted rather predictably in its prior iteration.  TX-11 is 30% Hispanic, after all, in present form.  Is it a requirement now that you have enough Hispanics that vote Democratic consistently in order for compactness to be met?

My TX-15 and TX-28 are pure border districts and quite legal, regardless of the fact that I can get one of them to potential marginal status if I make Farenthold weaker.  I recognize who they'll probably elect, but that's not the point. 

Lastly, Farenthold's CD will have to push north to take in San Antonio suburbs anyway if you want to make it a good partisan gerrymander with enough Hispanic votes.

[Sam Spade]

Btw, I may create a version of said map (talked about above in great extent) which leaves Cuellar and Webb intact, thus leaving us to argue whether the fact Canseco and Farenthold got elected in TX-23 and TX-27 means that the Hispanic majority is exercising its vote differently now. 

[Sam Spade]

You know, I can do my map without splitting Webb, though I really don't think that there is any prohibition against that per se.  Splitting Webb is done because I can get the highest McCain % that way (about 1% more than the others that I've found so far) and it makes the map look the prettiest.  Besides, I like the idea of combining Cuellar and Hinojosa in a primary, though there's no real need for it if you concede TX-28 and 10 seats to the Dems, which the GOP may well do, recognizing that Farenthold was likely a fluke who needs protection and attempting to create another south Texas GOP opportunity seat is unlikely to be successful.

[Sam Spade]

This is the last map I'm going to do until the new numbers come out.  It is really four maps, all of which "pack" Austin, one based on an Odessa-San Antonio TX-23 with 63% Hispanic and no Webb intrusion, the second based on an Odessa-Midland-Laredo TX-23 with 63% Hispanic and a Webb split.  The other two maps give TX-27 60% Hispanic instead of 63% Hispanic with this configuration.

Also, I saw an earlier comment on precincts after new numbers come out - Texas counties almost never redraw their precincts, rather they split current precincts up (when they become too big, I guess).  I should know why but I don't.

Goals:
1) 24 safe GOP seats (McCain 60.00% or greater)
2) 10 safe DEM seats (Obama packs)
3) 2 marginal GOP seats (TX-23 = McCain 55%; TX-27 = McCain 52% (if 63% Hispanic) or McCain 54% (if 60% Hispanic)
4) All incumbents get a seat.  (Exceptions: Canseco has to go into TX-36, where his greatest danger will be an Anglo GOP.  In the Odessa-Midland-Laredo TX-23, Conaway has to go into TX-23 (unless he's scared, and he may well be - he would certainly b!tch), leaving TX-11 open)
5) 8 Hispanic-Majority seats, 2 Black-majority seats, 2 Minority-Majority seats.
6) No safe GOP seat has greater than 29.50% Hispanic population to avoid claims of dilution. (Exception: In the Odessa-Midland-Laredo TX-23 with TX-27 = 60% Hispanic, TX-14 (Paul) has 30.90% Hispanic.  It would require a major redesign of a lot of other Houston area seats (and possibly TX-17 and TX-21) to get this one right, so I passed.  Let them complain - it doesn't make any difference as to the result in TX-14).
7) All deviations under 1,000.

TX-X = Odessa only, TX-23 and TX-27 = 63% Hispanic
TX-Xa = Odessa + Midland, TX-23 and TX-27 = 63% Hispanic
TX-Xb = Odessa only, TX-27= 60% Hispanic
TX-Xc = Odessa + Midland, TX-27 = 60% Hispanic

I think that's about it.

[Sam Spade]

CODE
a) Incumbent
b) McCain %, Obama %
c) White %, Black %, Hispanic %, Asian %, Other %
d) Comment

TX-1
a) Gohmert
b) McCain 69, Obama 30 (previous McCain 69, Obama 31)
c) White 70, Black 20, Hispanic 8, Asian 2
d) Basically the same as before, except it takes in Texarkana now and removes parts south.

TX-2
a) Poe
b) McCain 63, Obama 36 (previous McCain 60, Obama 40)
c) White 63, Hispanic 24, Black 8, Asian 5
d) Now a Harris County only seat, it wraps around the city of Houston, with the most important GOP parts being in NW Houston.  I believe Poe lives here; if not, he lives in neighboring TX-35, no biggie.

TX-3
a) Johnson
b) McCain 61 (60.95), Obama 38 (previous McCain 57, Obama 42)
c) White 77, Hispanic 9, Asian 9, Black 5
d) Now a Collin County only seat, it stretches much further north to pick up virgin suburban territory.

TX-4
a) Hall
b) McCain 64, Obama 35 (previous McCain 69, Obama 30)
c) White 66, Hispanic 16, Black 12, Asian 5
d) Hall's CD moves away from east Texas to pick up some inner Dallas suburbs, including Garland.  Splitting these suburbs east of US-75 is key to making a good Dallas gerrymander.

TX-5
a) Hensarling
b) McCain 62, Obama 37 (previous McCain 63, Obama 36)
c) White 71, Hispanic 15, Black 12, Asian 3
d) Hensarling's CD shifts further west to pick up some more inner Dallas suburbs and even some Waco suburbs.  I'm pretty sure he lives here.  Anyway, the key here is keeping fast-growing Kaufman County in its midst.

TX-6
a) Barton
b) McCain 61 (61.16), Obama 38 (previous McCain 60, Obama 40)
c) White 74, Hispanic 14, Black 9, Asian 4
d) The areas in Tarrant and Dallas County are quite marginal (mostly taken from TX-24).  The areas in the three counties to the South are not.

TX-7 (Odessa only)
a) Culberson
b) McCain 61 (61.00), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 64, Hispanic 23, Asian 8, Black 5
d) Pushing the McCain % up is achieved by taking in virgin suburban territory in NW Houston where whitey is.

TX-7a & TX-7c (Odessa + Midland)
a) Culberson
b) McCain 61 (60.56), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 64, Hispanic 23, Asian 8, Black 5
d) The only change here is made because TX-22 needed a little more McCain %.

TX-7b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Culberson
b) McCain 61 (60.50), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 63, Hispanic 23, Asian 8, Black 5
d) Ditto with TX-7a.

TX-8
a) Brady
b) McCain 64, Obama 35 (previous McCain 74, Obama 26)
c) White 70, Black 16, Hispanic 11, Asian 3
d) TX-8 moves to take in all old parts of TX-2 (including Jefferson County) and Montgomery is split in half.  So is the city of Galveston (not necessary, but amusing).  Montgomery is too useful for the GOP not to split it up. 

TX-9
a) Green
b) Obama 73, McCain 27 (previous Obama 77, McCain 23)
c) Hispanic 34, Hispanic 32, White 21, Asian 13, Other 1
d) Very similar to before, except it heads further into Fort Bend.

TX-10 & TX-10b (Odessa only)
a) McCaul
b) McCain 61 (60.58), Obama 38 (previous McCain 55, Obama 44)
c) White 76, Hispanic 18, Asian 4, Black 3
d) Instead of heading east this time, we head west to pick up sizable chunks of German Texas, San Angelo and assorted rural counties.  And we end up with a safer CD.  I think I have McCaul, but if not, he can just move somewhere else in Austin.

TX-10a & TX-10c (Odessa + Midland)
a) McCaul
b) McCain 60 (60.00), Obama 39 (previous McCain 55, Obama 44)
c) White 76, Hispanic 17, Asian 4, Black 2
d) Minor changes - the CD moves further south to pick up even more of German Texas.

TX-11 (Odessa only)
a) Conaway
b) McCain 68, Obama 31 (previous McCain 76, Obama 24)
c) White 64, Hispanic 20, Black 13, Asian 3, Other 1
d) This fajita strip is compressed a bit, and makes sure to pick up Fort Hood/Killeen to the east.

TX-11a (Odessa + Midland)
a) None
b) McCain 68, Obama 31 (previous McCain 76, Obama 24)
c) White 64, Hispanic 20, Black 12, Asian 3, Other 1
d) In exchange for dropping Midland, a whole bunch of rural counties are picked up, making Abilene the population center of the CD.  Conaway lives in TX-23 in this makeup, so no incumbent!

TX-12
a) Granger
b) McCain 62, Obama 38 (previous McCain 63, Obama 36)
c) White 74, Hispanic 14, Black 9, Asian 4
d) Picks up territory from TX-6 and TX-13, in exchange for dropping Wise County.  In actuality, this is rather cosmetic.

[Sam Spade]

TX-13
a) Thornberry
b) McCain 71, Obama 28 (previous McCain 77, Obama 23)
c) White 79, Hispanic 11, Black 7, Asian 3
d) I figure if we have border districts to the south, why not have a border district in the north. 

TX-14 (Odessa only)
a) Paul
b) McCain 63, Obama 36 (previous McCain 66, Obama 33)
c) White 60, Hispanic 29 (29.49), Black 7, Asian 3
d) In order to maximize McCain votes in TX-27, you have to split Corpus Christi and San Patricio - there's basically no way around it.  The McCain % in TX-14 is never the problem, since all of Brazoria County is included in TX-14 this time, but the Hispanic % is a bit high for my tastes.  Still pretty compact.

TX-14a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Paul
b) McCain 64, Obama 35 (previous McCain 66, Obama 33)
c) White 60, Hispanic 29 (29.47), Black 7, Asian 3
d) The Odessa-Midland-Laredo TX-23 pushes everything further east to get under 29.50% Hispanic.

TX-14b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Paul
b) McCain 64, Obama 35 (previous McCain 66, Obama 33)
c) White 60, Hispanic 29 (29.48), Black 8, Asian 3
d) Now things get ugly as the necessary expansion of TX-27 east to pick up white areas gathers steam.

TX-14c (Odessa + Midland), TX-27 = 60%)
a) Paul
b) McCain 64, Obama 36 (previous McCain 66, Obama 33)
c) White 58, Hispanic 31 (30.90), Black 7, Asian 3
d) When I realized that I'd have to make major changes to the Houston suburbs to get it down to 29.50% Hispanic, I stopped.  It can be done, however.

TX-15 (Odessa only)
a) Hinojosa
b) Obama 70, McCain 29 (previous Obama 60, McCain 40)
c) Hispanic 88, White 11, Asian 1
d) Not that bad really.  Most of the population is Hidalgo County and Hinojosa's home is here too.  Brownsville is included.  Not Harlingen - for rather obvious reasons (it has whites).

TX-15a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Hinojosa
b) Obama 70, McCain 29 (previous Obama 60, McCain 40)
c) Hispanic 88, White 11, Asian 1
d) Changes are cosmetic.

TX-15b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Hinojosa
b) Obama 71, McCain 28 (previous Obama 60, McCain 40)
c) Hispanic 89, White 10, Asian 1
d) Not much change. Yawn.

TX-15c (Odessa + Midland, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Hinojosa
b) Obama 72, McCain 27 (previous Obama 60, McCain 40)
c) Hispanic 90, White 9, Asian 1
d) No changes worth mentioning.

TX-16
a) Reyes
b) Obama 65, McCain 34 (previous Obama 66, McCain 34)
c) Hispanic 77, White 18, Black 3, Asian 2, Other 1
d) Basically the same as before.  There is really no reason to play around with El Paso, except at the margins, unless you want to do something like Martin did.

TX-17 (Odessa only)
a) Flores
b) McCain 65, Obama 34 (previous McCain 67, Obama 32)
c) White 68, Hispanic 16, Black 13, Asian 3
d) This complete redesign of TX-17 takes advantage of Flores' base to swipe a bit of Austin.  The northern half of Montgomery County is added for good measure, but the heart of the CD will be Bryan-College Station.

TX-17a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Flores
b) McCain 64, Obama 34 (previous McCain 67, Obama 32)
c) White 67, Hispanic 17, Black 13, Asian 3
d) Changes are cosmetic to pick up a few more Hispanics from TX-21.

TX-17b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Flores
b) McCain 64, Obama 35 (previous McCain 67, Obama 32)
c) White 66, Hispanic 18, Black 13, Asian 3
d) The requirements of TX-14 make this iteration a bit ugly.  Kinda looks like a misshapened bat.

TX-17c (Odessa + Midland, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Flores
b) McCain 64, Obama 35 (previous McCain 67, Obama 32)
c) White 67, Hispanic 17, Black 13, Asian 3
d) Only cosmetic changes here.  Major changes would have been required to get TX-14 down to 29.50%, which I didn't do.

TX-18
a) Lee
b) Obama 84, McCain 15 (previous Obama 77, McCain 22)
c) Black 53, Hispanic 26, White 16, Asian 4, Other 1
d) This is about as black as I can make the annoying b!tch's CD without making it very ugly.

TX-19 & TX=19b (Odessa only)
a) Neugebauer
b) McCain 73, Obama 26 (previous McCain 72, Obama 27)
c) White 64, Hispanic 28, Black 6, Asian 2
d) So I decided to do something which will never happen in real life - the Amarillo and Lubbock CD!

TX-19a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Neugebauer
b) McCain 73, Obama 26 (previous McCain 72, Obama 27)
c) White 64, Hispanic 28, Black 6, Asian 2
d) The change here is a county in the south of the CD or something.  No big deal.

TX-20
a) Gonzalez
b) Obama 68, McCain 31 (previous Obama 63, McCain 36)
c) Hispanic 68, White 19, Black 10, Asian 2, Other 1
d) TX-20 picks up a chunk of the former TX-23 areas, as required.

TX-21 (Odessa only)
a) Smith
b) McCain 61 (60.76), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 61, Hispanic 29 (29.46), Black 7, Asian 3
d) TX-21 is radically altered in these two maps.  Instead of picking up Austin and German Texas, this version goes southeast to pick up Victoria.  Which actually works quite nicely, as the San Antonio suburbs will still control.

TX-21a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Smith
b) McCain 61 (60.78), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 60, Hispanic 29 (29.48), Black 7, Asian 3
d) Changes are cosmetic.

TX-21b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Smith
b) McCain 61 (60.87), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 61, Hispanic 29 (29.47), Black 7, Asian 3
d) Extends "more literally" to the southeast, but the actual changes really don't mean much.

TX-21c (Odessa + Midland, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Smith
b) McCain 61 (60.97), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 60, Hispanic 29 (29.45), Black 7, Asian 3
d) Changes are still cosmetic, actually.

TX-22 (Odessa only)
a) Olson
b) McCain 61 (60.52), Obama 38 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 62, Hispanic 19, Asian 11, Black 9
d) A nicely compact CD which takes in all of Fort Bend not in TX-9 and some west Houston suburbs.  Of all of the GOP CDs, this one would worry me the most in the future, but not *that* much.

TX-22a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Olson
b) McCain 60 (60.10), Obama 39 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 62, Hispanic 19, Asian 11, Black 9
d) The changes address problems in TX-14, but are still cosmetic.

TX-22b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Olson
b) McCain 60 (60.18), Obama 39 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 62, Hispanic 19, Asian 11, Black 9
d) Changes are cosmetic.

TX-22c (Odessa + Midland, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Olson
b) McCain 60 (60.00), Obama 39 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 62, Hispanic 19, Asian 11, Black 9
d) Keeps getting uglier, but the changes really aren't important.

[Sam Spade]

TX-23 (Odessa only)
a) Open
b) McCain 55 (55.26), Obama 44 (previous Obama 51, McCain 48)
c) Hispanic 63 (63.20), White 33, Black 3, Asian 1
d) In the Odessa-only version, TX-23 picks up a number of rural counties north of Odessa (almost all the way to Lubbock) along the border, and then goes east at Del Rio to pick up some of the inner San Antonio Hispanic precincts.  I consider this version a safer VRA test b/c Odessa and San Antonio have been combined in past CDs and are presently combined in Senate District 19.  Going north into west Texas will probably be complained about, but there are Hispanics here (of course, they vote more GOP than the ones in Maverick County, but let the challenge occur).  I do not, however, consider this a safer GOP hold than version 2 because 1) there will be no incumbent; 2) Odessa is not growing (unlike Midland or Laredo); 3) the Dems have a potential very dangerous candidate in Pete Gallego in the Trans-Pecos, who represents a lot of the *swing* area of this CD (his state Rep seat is entirely included - note that I don't include Uresti in this description, as he would need much more of Hispanic Bexar to win).

TX-23a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Conaway
b) McCain 55 (54.83), Obama 44 (previous Obama 51, McCain 48)
c) Hispanic 63 (63.04), White 32, Black 3, Asian 1
d) In this version, all of San Antonio, strongly GOP Uvalde and Medina County is moved to TX-28 and TX-36 in exchange for Midland, Maverick County and a little over half of Webb.  Thus, this becomes a much more Hispanic version of the original DeLay-mander.  The problem is that you have to convince Conaway to take a potential problem seat - although Odessa and Midland accounts for about a fourth of the population and about a third of the votes.  Cuellar will probably take the safe road - and run in the southern Webb seat.  Of course, I view this one as more VRA problematic.  You can get it down to 60% and avoid the Webb split, but I didn't make that one.

TX-24
a) Marchant
b) McCain 62, Obama 37 (McCain 55, Obama 44)
c) White 72, Hispanic 13, Asian 8, Black 6
d) A nice compact DFW CD that swings west into GOP Tarrant County territory.  Removed most of the rest of the CD into new TX-33.

TX-25
a) Doggett
b) Obama 74, McCain 24 (previous Obama 59, McCain 40)
c) White 47, Hispanic 34, Black 12, Asian 6
d) Packed every Austin Democrat into this CD as I thought I could.

TX-26
a) Burgess
b) McCain 64, Obama 35 (previous McCain 58, Obama 41)
c) White 77, Hispanic 12, Asian 5, Black 5
d) This DFW CD snakes around a little bit, but is still basically Denton and Tarrant County-based.  Getting rid of minority precincts makes it even more GOP, as expected.

TX-27 (Odessa only)
a) Farenthold
b) McCain 52 (52.07), Obama 47 (previous Obama 53, McCain 46)
c) Hispanic 63 (63.18), White 33, Asian 2, Black 2
d) I combed through literally every precinct in Hidalgo and Cameron counties looking for the best Hispanic-GOP ratios, and this is the best I could do, after recognizing that getting to Brownsville is not worth it.  And then I had to do the same for Nueces, splitting the thing in two.  And this is still about the best I can do.  Hey, it's still a lot better than Obama 53, McCain 46.

TX-27a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Farenthold
b) McCain 52 (52.18), Obama 47 (previous Obama 53, McCain 46)
c) Hispanic 63 (63.23), White 32, Asian 2, Black 2
d) Very similar, except moved to the east because of TX-28.  I also think my division is slightly better this time (by hundredths of percentage points, I know, but still...)

TX-27b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Farenthold
b) McCain 54 (54.17), Obama 45 (previous Obama 53, McCain 46)
c) Hispanic 60 (60.27), White 36, Asian 2, Black 2
d) Now it extends further to the east to take in some more white precincts.  Yawn.  Percentage is up to 54%, but that's about the best you can do.

TX-27c (Odessa + Midland, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Farenthold
b) McCain 54 (53.88), Obama 45 (previous Obama 53, McCain 46)
c) Hispanic 60 (60.15), White 35, Asian 2, Black 2
d) Last iteration of this CD looks the cleanest, actually.

TX-28 (Odessa only)
a) Cuellar
b) Obama 74, McCain 25 (previous Obama 56, McCain 44)
c) Hispanic 93, White 6, Black 1
d) This version of TX-28 looks rather clean, actually.  A nice border CD, and also much safer than before, btw.

TX-28a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Cuellar
b) Obama 72, McCain 28 (previous Obama 56, McCain 44)
c) Hispanic 89, White 9, Asian 1, Black 1
d) Lots of good visual imagery here.  Consider this the son of DeLay-mander, as half of Webb County extends north to take in a number of Bexar County barrio precincts (but not enough for Ciro to win).

TX-28b (Odessa only, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Cuellar
b) Obama 74, McCain 26 (previous Obama 56, McCain 44)
c) Hispanic 92, White 7, Asian 1
d) Basically the same as original, with little changes to fit the needs of TX-27.

TX-28c (Odessa + Midland, TX-27 = 60%)
a) Cuellar
b) Obama 71, McCain 28 (previous Obama 56, McCain 44)
c) Hispanic 89, White 10, Asian 1, Black 1
d) Same as original, with changes for TX-27's sake.

TX-29
a) Green
b) Obama 68, McCain 32 (Obama 62, McCain 38)
c) Hispanic 67, White 18, Black 12, Asian 3
d) Not really much different than before, except more Democratic.

TX-30
a) Johnson
b) Obama 82, McCain 17 (previous Obama 82, McCain 18)
c) Black 51, White 25, Hispanic 20, Asian 3
d) Now extends to reach the blacks in Tarrant County.  Also now majority-black.

TX-31
a) Carter
b) McCain 60 (60.01), Obama 39 (previous McCain 58, Obama 42)
c) White 74, Hispanic 15, Black 7, Asian 3
d) Not really much different than before, except Killeen and Fort Hood (and all points north are removed) in exchange for a couple of counties to the south.  Williamson County remains in full here, it's kind of hard to separate Carter from it without hurting him (since he lives in Round Rock).

TX-32
a) Sessions
b) McCain 60 (60.07), Obama 39 (previous McCain 53, Obama 46)
c) White 71, Hispanic 16, Asian 6, Black 6
d) Getting rid of the Hispanic precincts does wonders to the numbers.  Also adding half of Collin County, half of Grayson County and some of Denton works wonders as well.

TX-33
a) None
b) Obama 69, McCain 30
c) Hispanic 63 (63.16), White 21, Black 13, Asian 3
d) What an ugly looking strip of Hispanic minority-majority land.

TX-34
a) None
b) McCain 67, Obama 32
c) White 71, Black 16, Hispanic 11, Asian 2
d) The heart of Democratic Waco, with Nacogdoches and Lufkin included.  Let's see Chet Edwards make a comeback here!

TX-35
a) None
b) McCain 64, Obama 36
c) White 67, Hispanic 18, Black 10, Asian 5
d) Poe may be here, he may be in TX-2, whichever...  Kingwood plus Pasadena suburbs plus all of the parts of Galveston County where white people from Houston will probably head = safe GOP.

TX-36 (Odessa only)
a) Canseco
b) McCain 60 (60.05), Obama 39
c) White 66, Hispanic 27, Asian 3, Black 3
d) NW San Antonio plus German Texas and the more Republican parts of Hays County (well, it does include Texas State, so not exactly).  This is where Canseco resides (I'm pretty sure), so all he has to fear is an Anglo.  I made this a real San Antonio-centered CD to eliminate that possibility as much as possible while keeping the CD safe GOP.

TX-36a (Odessa + Midland)
a) Canseco
b) McCain 60 (60.10), Obama 39
c) White 65, Hispanic 28, Asian 3, Black 3
d) Replace German Texas for GOP Medina and Uvalde County.  Yawn.

[Sam Spade]

Would you post your entire map Sam, perhaps two maps, one for east Texas and one for the west, since Texas is so big?  Or you could do two that you append together like I did for Indiana; I have become so accomplished at that, that you can hardly see that I appended two screen shots together.

Or you could email me your Dave Bradlee drf data file, and I could put them up for you, making them your mappie with zooms all look so pretty - just gorgeous really.

I'll do that - tomorrow.  It will also require more like five to ten maps, not two. 

[Sam Spade]

OK, but I suggest that you darken the colors by reducing the opacity level. Color choices for each CD are also important. But then you do have an artistic side I know.  You probably are a closet metrosexual.

My artistic side is completely musical and theatrical.  I have below zero visual sense though, really.  I go to the museum, but I can barely draw stick figures.  If you want to redesign the thing, feel free.

And I'm about as far from a metrosexual as possible.  As has been noted by many friends on many occasions. 

[Sam Spade]

So even this supposed uber-gerrymander creates a new Hispanic majority seat? Not that I'm surprised though.

You basically have to create one new Hispanic seat in Dallas - some GOP seats will be far too marginal without it.  You can create another San Antonio-Austin one to f-ck Doggett, but it's not necessary.  More than that is probably not going to be needed - I don't think Al Green's seat needs to be Hispanic-majority, and I don't think it can be anyway.

Let's face it - the previous map was a 21-10 GOP gerrymander with one marginal (TX-23).  GOPers wouldn't have considered Ortiz marginal in prior years.  The one the courts struck down was meant to be 22-10 GOP.

I don't really have to see the new Census numbers to know that 24 GOP seats can be created with almost any halfway competent gerrymander - and they can be ultra-safe too.  The problem is after that with the VRA.  It's nearly impossible to get it to 8 DEM seats under the VRA without having the courts strike down your map and I don't think trying to keep them to 9 seats will work either - playing with South Texas is rather problematic, you need decent margins, it's not really worth it under 52% McCain. 

So you pack ten Dems (the 9 already there, plus the new Dallas seat) and create the two most favorable Hispanic-majority seats you can (since you already hold two of them) for TX-23 and TX-27.  This is what is done above.

[Sam Spade]

I mean I kind of figured that, but it results in the new seats being 3-1 GOP, which is only a +2. Then again shoring up Farenthold and making a Rodriguez comeback impossible might count as two more seats.

I just don't think the Texas GOP can make all four new seats GOP with the VRA and all.  You basically have to shore up Farenthold (South Texas seats tend to act 2-4 points Dem PVI than they say, and I assume his seat is 2008 iteration only (ignoring 2004), meaning R/D+0, basically).  And I can't see how they think Canseco's seat will give you the "right" result every time.  It has to be majority Hispanic, and adding more Bexar is not going to up the percentage as much as you like - which is why the radical rethink.  Plus, the majority Hispanic CD in Dallas fixes a lot of problems for the next decade, which is why it'll be done.

I have to think that the Texas GOP basically views Farenthold's seat as a gift, but always thought that Canseco's seat should have been theirs.  Therefore, since the prior map is basically drawn as a 22-10 gerrymander with a lucky bounce (Farenthold), a 26-10 gerrymander should be viewed as a likely end game and not a negative.  But who knows.

[Sam Spade]

For some reason, it told me that it was contiguous, but I changed it in later versions when I saw it wasn't.  It's not a big deal - you can change things around Harlingen an the numbers are not particularly different.