Likely next US districts after 2020

[Nyvin]

How is Illinois in danger of losing a Dem seat?

The populations of the non-Chicagoland districts are just barely 700k (three of them are sub-700k) while the districts in the Chicago area all fall into the range of 720k or even 730k.  

Even more if Rauner loses re-election the Dems are pretty much assured full control of redistricting, and the proportional representation mandate going through the courts wouldn't really have any affect since the Chicago districts are all still such massive vote sinks for Dems.

Also I really have a hard time seeing the NC GOP drawing an 11-3 map after the lawsuit that went through earlier this year.  

[Nyvin]

Also I really have a hard time seeing the NC GOP drawing an 11-3 map after the lawsuit that went through earlier this year.  

They drew the 10-3 map in response to the lawsuit.

BTW, the SCOTUS heard the appeal of the NC case.

It was great fun to read the argument about whether NC-12 was a racial gerrymander or a political gerrymander, since the snake version doesn't exist any more, and the Democrats were arguing that the bad Republicans were packing blacks from Greensboro.

Yes, but add yet another Safe R district in a state that votes *at best* 45D-55R?   There is no way that all those Dems can be that packed without drawing crazy shaped districts similar to the map pre-lawsuit.

[Nyvin]

Yes, but add yet another Safe R district in a state that votes *at best* 45D-55R?   There is no way that all those Dems can be that packed without drawing crazy shaped districts similar to the map pre-lawsuit.

Sure there is. We simply need to solve for:

0.4 * 11 (GOP seats) + X * 3 (Dem Seats) = 0.45 * 14 (statewide)

X = 0.63 is not really packed.

If we increase the statewide to 0.47 D, that makes X = 0.73

If we increase the statewide D to 0.49, and keep X at 0.73

Y * 11 + 0.73 * 3 = 0.49 * 14

Y = 0.42.

NC has lots of small cities that aren't excessively Democratic that can be controlled by Republican rural areas.

In the NC trial, the map-drawer deliberately maintained NC-1 as black majority. But for NC-12 he simply added adjacent precincts that were 90% Democratic. Guilford County was the only Section 5 County for the district, so he checked that he was not dividing the black population. The District Court found that was a racial gerrymander.

When the legislature redrew NC-12 they were responsive to the federal court. You should be content with the new map.

The racial divides couldn't have possibly been the only complaint through the court,  the old map had county splits everywhere, while the new map has only 2-3 county splits per district.    I am not believing that the Republicans did that just by their good nature.  

If the county splits have to be kept down I don't see how the NC-4 pack will remain, and also NC-13 is bound to get pretty precarious with 14 districts.  

It looks like the population is concentrating into the Urban areas of the state (Wake and Mecklenburg counties alone were 46% of the growth from 2014 to 2015, most of the rest in their suburbs) and away from rural areas (which are almost all declining).    

It'll be interesting to see the NC district results from the 2016 pres race.   I'm pretty confident at bare minimum a 4th Dem pack district will be needed in 2022.

[Nyvin]

Yes, but add yet another Safe R district in a state that votes *at best* 45D-55R?   There is no way that all those Dems can be that packed without drawing crazy shaped districts similar to the map pre-lawsuit.

Sure there is. We simply need to solve for:

0.4 * 11 (GOP seats) + X * 3 (Dem Seats) = 0.45 * 14 (statewide)

X = 0.63 is not really packed.

If we increase the statewide to 0.47 D, that makes X = 0.73

If we increase the statewide D to 0.49, and keep X at 0.73

Y * 11 + 0.73 * 3 = 0.49 * 14

Y = 0.42.

NC has lots of small cities that aren't excessively Democratic that can be controlled by Republican rural areas.

In the NC trial, the map-drawer deliberately maintained NC-1 as black majority. But for NC-12 he simply added adjacent precincts that were 90% Democratic. Guilford County was the only Section 5 County for the district, so he checked that he was not dividing the black population. The District Court found that was a racial gerrymander.

When the legislature redrew NC-12 they were responsive to the federal court. You should be content with the new map.

The racial divides couldn't have possibly been the only complaint through the court,  the old map had county splits everywhere, while the new map has only 2-3 county splits per district.    I am not believing that the Republicans did that just by their good nature.  

In reality, most of the splits were associated with NC-1 and NC-12, with some associated with NC-4.

NC-1 only has three splits now, and one was to keep Butterfield in the district.  There are only 10 significant county splits now. NC-12 is entirely in Mecklenburg County now.

That's not true at all,  NC-9 split Iredell with NC-5, and NC-5 went into Hickery which was in NC-10 otherwise.   Cumberland (Fayetteville) was split up between 3 districts.   

The old map had county splits every which way and backward, they were everywhere.

[Nyvin]

When the legislature redrew NC-12 they were responsive to the federal court. You should be content with the new map.

Content based on the argument of racial gerrymandering or content with the map overall? Do you think a 10-3 delegation is representative of the state?

The representatives are representative of their districts. Congress requires representatives to be elected by district.

If you want to defend the old snakelike NC-12 go ahead.

That's rather disingenuous, don't you think? I know you're a lot smarter than that based on your posts. Can you really justify the NC gerrymander? What logic is there in not having a Winston-Salem/Greensboro district? County splits are a worthy consideration, but I don't see how they justify splitting a metro area to that point like in the redrawn NC map. I'm sure you've drawn a non-gerrymandered North Carolina map by now. If so, could you please point me to it?    

As for NC-12, I completely agree with you. There's absolutely no reason why a Congressional district cannot be completely within the city of Charlotte (let alone Mecklenburg County).

He might be intelligent, but that doesn't make him any less of a partisan hack.

He'll complain all day about the Arizona map Mathis made, but find a 11-3 delegation in a 48/52 vote state totally acceptable since the 11 is R.

[Nyvin]

He'll complain all day about the Arizona map Mathis made, but find a 11-3 delegation in a 48/52 vote state totally acceptable since the 11 is R.

My definition of "gerrymander" is result-oriented districting.

Lol...okay, please don't tell me you find the NC map non-result oriented?'

Greensboro and Winston-Salem are different metropolitan areas. Forsyth and Gulford are too large for a single congressional district, which probably result in the two counties being placed in different congressional districts.

Chapel Hill and Raleigh are two different Metro areas as well, that sure didn't stop the NC GOP from putting them in the same district of NC-4, how convenient for them (or result oriented, whichever you prefer).

[Nyvin]

He'll complain all day about the Arizona map Mathis made, but find a 11-3 delegation in a 48/52 vote state totally acceptable since the 11 is R.

My definition of "gerrymander" is result-oriented districting.

Lol...okay, please don't tell me you find the NC map non-result oriented?'

Greensboro and Winston-Salem are different metropolitan areas. Forsyth and Gulford are too large for a single congressional district, which probably result in the two counties being placed in different congressional districts.

Chapel Hill and Raleigh are two different Metro areas as well, that sure didn't stop the NC GOP from putting them in the same district of NC-4, how convenient for them (or result oriented, whichever you prefer).

Raleigh is larger than a district. Together the two metropolitan areas are roughly the equivalent of two districts.

Okay...so if it's not "results oriented" why not give Raleigh (Wake County) it's own district

[Nyvin]

He'll complain all day about the Arizona map Mathis made, but find a 11-3 delegation in a 48/52 vote state totally acceptable since the 11 is R.

My definition of "gerrymander" is result-oriented districting.

Lol...okay, please don't tell me you find the NC map non-result oriented?'

Greensboro and Winston-Salem are different metropolitan areas. Forsyth and Gulford are too large for a single congressional district, which probably result in the two counties being placed in different congressional districts.

Chapel Hill and Raleigh are two different Metro areas as well, that sure didn't stop the NC GOP from putting them in the same district of NC-4, how convenient for them (or result oriented, whichever you prefer).

Raleigh is larger than a district. Together the two metropolitan areas are roughly the equivalent of two districts.

Okay...so if it's not "results oriented" why not give Raleigh (Wake County) it's own district

Look at the two UCC involved, and explain how you are going to draw two districts in the two UCCs, and one entirely in Wake County. You might want to actually draw a map.

Why is it needed to draw two districts inside the two UCCs?   They certainly didn't have two districts in the two UCCs in the previous map.

[Nyvin]

How about NC and VA?  Is 11R/3D viable in NC, or will the legislature have to concede the new seat?  I would presume 8R/3D is no longer viable in VA with what is happening in Richmond and outer NOVA.  If it meets court standards, Republicans would probably want to draw the second black opportunity seat from Richmond to Woodbridge along I-95 to shore up VA-10 and VA-07.

The Virginia map is 7-4 currently,  I really don't think even that is very sustainable going into 2020 with the way VA-10 is going (and Loudon County's growth and trend).   The most likely map will be 6R-5D IMO.   The three NOVA districts will get sucked more into the NOVA area and lose their Republican exurbs.   VA-1 might possibly move Dem a little, but not enough to really matter.

Once district results in NC are available we'll know more about that state.

[Nyvin]

How about NC and VA?  Is 11R/3D viable in NC, or will the legislature have to concede the new seat?  I would presume 8R/3D is no longer viable in VA with what is happening in Richmond and outer NOVA.  If it meets court standards, Republicans would probably want to draw the second black opportunity seat from Richmond to Woodbridge along I-95 to shore up VA-10 and VA-07.

The Virginia map is 7-4 currently,  I really don't think even that is very sustainable going into 2020 with the way VA-10 is going (and Loudon County's growth and trend).   The most likely map will be 6R-5D IMO.   The three NOVA districts will get sucked more into the NOVA area and lose their Republican exurbs.   VA-1 might possibly move Dem a little, but not enough to really matter.

Once district results in NC are available we'll know more about that state.

Also, it looks like VA results by state senate district were just released.  Counting only Election Day ballots, Clinton has won 22 of the 40 districts, and by at least 6% in 21 of them.  Trump is barely up by <500 votes in SD-07 in the Norfolk area.  Given that absentee ballots are uniformly more D than countywide results in VA, it's quite likely Clinton won 23 districts.  She won the seat Dems would need to tie the chamber by 13%.  If VA Dems flip 2 seats and get to 21 in 2019, they are assured of a say in the next congressional redistricting.  If they flip one seat to tie the chamber and hold the LG office, they would also be assured of a say in the next redistricting.

That's definitely positive news,  hopefully with a say in the next redistricting the VA Dems can do something about that god awful travesty that's the current VA State House map.

[Nyvin]

How about NC and VA?  Is 11R/3D viable in NC, or will the legislature have to concede the new seat?  I would presume 8R/3D is no longer viable in VA with what is happening in Richmond and outer NOVA.  If it meets court standards, Republicans would probably want to draw the second black opportunity seat from Richmond to Woodbridge along I-95 to shore up VA-10 and VA-07.

Of course not. Another 8/3 map could and would have been drawn if the Democrats had not adjourned the special session to do so this year. First order of business if a Republican is elected in 2017 would be to take back the stolen 4th district. The 2001 iteration of the 3rd and 4th districts were already cleared by the 4th circuit court in 2004.

They didn't adjourn a special session () the map was struck down by the courts, and then the VA legislature couldn't draw a map (due to GOP incompetence, not the dems...) and the courts ended up drawing the maps.

The map drawn in 2001 was not the same as the map drawn in 2010.

Considering Hillary won Virginia by 5 points I would definitely not call a 4th Dem seat "stolen".  

It's really a moot point anyway - an 8-3 map just flat out isn't possible anymore.   Hillary won 5 seats by double digits and came within 2 and 6 points in another two (both in the east).    The only way to cram all that down into 3 districts would be to draw crazy bacon-strip districts across the state.    The only packed districts Republicans really have left are VA-6 and VA-9, both of them are on the western edge of the state.  

If the GOP takes it too far they can easily draw themselves a dummymander.

[Nyvin]

Nice, a fair state senate map probably locks in a Democratic majority. Fingers crossed...

Haha, what?

The current Virginia Senate map is a brutal Democratic gerrymander. The Republican party of Virginia rallied the people and won a majority of the seats.


This is truly amazing. A deal was made such that the Republicans in the House of Delegates drew that map, and the Democrats in the Senate drew that map. After making that deal and bundling the plans into 1 bill liberals are now complaining about their side of the deal because they lost the elections!

Even the Congressional map is basically a Democratic gerrymander as it is substantially similar to those proposed in the Virginia Senate in 2011.

How rich.

The Legislature did not produce the map, the court did.   The Virginia Senate passed three different maps, and they all died in the GOP dominated House.

It was the Republicans that produced the State Senate map, in effect.   It's absolutely not a Democratic gerrymander,  it hardly changed anything in the NOVA area.

[Nyvin]

They didn't adjourn a special session () the map was struck down by the courts, and then the VA legislature couldn't draw a map (due to GOP incompetence, not the dems...) and the courts ended up drawing the maps.

The map drawn in 2001 was not the same as the map drawn in 2010.

Considering Hillary won Virginia by 5 points I would definitely not call a 4th Dem seat "stolen".  

It's really a moot point anyway - an 8-3 map just flat out isn't possible anymore.   Hillary won 5 seats by double digits and came within 2 and 6 points in another two (both in the east).    The only way to cram all that down into 3 districts would be to draw crazy bacon-strip districts across the state.    The only packed districts Republicans really have left are VA-6 and VA-9, both of them are on the western edge of the state.  

If the GOP takes it too far they can easily draw themselves a dummymander.

That is wholly ridiculous!



First, It was Terry Mcauliffe who called a special session to rectify the 3rd district.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe plans to call the Virginia General Assembly into special session next month to redraw the state's congressional map, his press office said Tuesday afternoon.




After that bizarro court ruling, which might not survive Justice Pryor, Virginia Republicans in the House of Delegates called a special session to redraw the 3rd district.


“While we still strongly believe the defendants should have the opportunity to pursue their appeal, the House of Delegates fully intends to exercise its legal right to remedy the flaws with the current 3rd Congressional District,” said House Speaker William J. Howell, R-Stafford.



What happened? Virginia Democrats, and a single cuckservative, ended the special session! So when you say the VA legislature could not draw a map, it is because Democrats made it so by a 21-20 vote.



And then 4th circuit judges appointed special masters to redraw the 3rd district, and while they did that, they stole the 4th district.

The Senate has 40 members, it was a 21-19 vote.

Considering even Obama won Virginia by about 4 points, I hardly call the Democrats winning a whole 4 of 11 seats "stealing".    More like unpack African Americans from one dem vote sink.

[Nyvin]

They didn't adjourn a special session () the map was struck down by the courts, and then the VA legislature couldn't draw a map (due to GOP incompetence, not the dems...) and the courts ended up drawing the maps.

The map drawn in 2001 was not the same as the map drawn in 2010.

Considering Hillary won Virginia by 5 points I would definitely not call a 4th Dem seat "stolen".  

It's really a moot point anyway - an 8-3 map just flat out isn't possible anymore.   Hillary won 5 seats by double digits and came within 2 and 6 points in another two (both in the east).    The only way to cram all that down into 3 districts would be to draw crazy bacon-strip districts across the state.    The only packed districts Republicans really have left are VA-6 and VA-9, both of them are on the western edge of the state.  

If the GOP takes it too far they can easily draw themselves a dummymander.

That is wholly ridiculous!



First, It was Terry Mcauliffe who called a special session to rectify the 3rd district.

Gov. Terry McAuliffe plans to call the Virginia General Assembly into special session next month to redraw the state's congressional map, his press office said Tuesday afternoon.




After that bizarro court ruling, which might not survive Justice Pryor, Virginia Republicans in the House of Delegates called a special session to redraw the 3rd district.


“While we still strongly believe the defendants should have the opportunity to pursue their appeal, the House of Delegates fully intends to exercise its legal right to remedy the flaws with the current 3rd Congressional District,” said House Speaker William J. Howell, R-Stafford.



What happened? Virginia Democrats, and a single cuckservative, ended the special session! So when you say the VA legislature could not draw a map, it is because Democrats made it so by a 21-20 vote.



And then 4th circuit judges appointed special masters to redraw the 3rd district, and while they did that, they stole the 4th district.

The Senate has 40 members, it was a 21-19 vote.

Considering even Obama won Virginia by about 4 points, I hardly call the Democrats winning a whole 4 of 11 seats "stealing".    More like unpack African Americans from one dem vote sink.

That is not at all what happened! It's right there in the article.

Watkins, who is retiring this year, also voted with Democrats to end the session. Lt. Gov. Ralph Northam broke the ensuing 20-20 tie.

Normally, it should be the legislature that passes a map. And they did in early 2012, with the support of many Democrats such as Gerry Connolly. And your courts and judges then enacted something close to M. Locke's plan which could not even pass the legislature.

I will point out this article from February 2012, written by a liberal, that complained that the legislature enacted a certain map and instead insisted on a map like the one proposed by M. Locke. So basically the court enacted a plan proposed by activist liberals.


I give the thieves credit. Live and die by the sword.

Maybe the Courts enacted the map because *gasp* it better represents the interests of the people of Virginia?  Maybe the court picked the more fair map?   Crazy thought huh? 

I'm sure you think an 8-3 map in a state the Democrats consistently win is "fair"

[Nyvin]

How about NC and VA?  Is 11R/3D viable in NC, or will the legislature have to concede the new seat?  I would presume 8R/3D is no longer viable in VA with what is happening in Richmond and outer NOVA.  If it meets court standards, Republicans would probably want to draw the second black opportunity seat from Richmond to Woodbridge along I-95 to shore up VA-10 and VA-07.

Of course not. Another 8/3 map could and would have been drawn if the Democrats had not adjourned the special session to do so this year. First order of business if a Republican is elected in 2017 would be to take back the stolen 4th district. The 2001 iteration of the 3rd and 4th districts were already cleared by the 4th circuit court in 2004.

They didn't adjourn a special session () the map was struck down by the courts, and then the VA legislature couldn't draw a map (due to GOP incompetence, not the dems...) and the courts ended up drawing the maps.

The special session met, and some story was concocted about McAuliffe making a recess appointment, they flipped one senator, and the Democratic Lieutenant Governor broke a tie for the Senate to adjourn.

The board of elections was the formal defendant. It declined to submit a map, and then endorsed the plan drawn by the special master, who went way out of bounds.

What happened? Virginia Democrats, and a single cuckservative, ended the special session! So when you say the VA legislature could not draw a map, it is because Democrats made it so by a 21-20 vote.

The Senate has 40 members, it was a 21-19 vote.

The vote to adjourn was 20-20, the Lieutenant Governor broke the tie.

Gee, thanks for rehashing everything that's already been said.  Does that make you feel better little child?  Grow up.

And then 4th circuit judges appointed special masters to redraw the 3rd district, and while they did that, they stole the 4th district.

Maybe the Courts enacted the map because *gasp* it better represents the interests of the people of Virginia?  Maybe the court picked the more fair map?   Crazy thought huh?  

It is certainly not the job of a federal court to represent the interests of the people of Virginia.

They have a legislature for that.

Yeah,  just let the Republicans pack all the African Americans into one  district.   Who need the VRA?  Let's just go back to Jim Crow.

[Nyvin]

Yeah,  just let the Republicans pack all the African Americans into one  district.   Who need the VRA?  Let's just go back to Jim Crow.

What is this malarkey?


The VA-03 district as designed in 1991, mainly by Democrats, had a black VAP of over 61%. The VA-03 district as designed in the 2001 plan had a black VAP of about 53% by the time 2011 rolled around. The VA-03 district  in the 2012 redistricting plan had a black VAP of 56.3%, which is really not much more than 53%. And that district had to add population. But in doing so, they didn't even take it close to the Democrats own figure.

In 2012, the legislature naturally had an interest in drawing an appropriate district to gain S5 preclearance, and they tried to do so. Why would they not?

It was argued before the courts that it didn't properly represent the African American community, and the Republicans lost.    Republicans drew the congressional map and they intentionally increase the BVAP in VA-3, which was clearly not needed.

Well, no. It is completely odd to describe a map as a particular type of gerrymander based on who won the seats rather than who drew the map. The Arkansas congressional districts are a Democratic gerrymander, as they were drawn by Democrats. Just like this current Virginia congressional districting plan.

Well that would make every map everywhere a  gerrymander thus rendering the term pretty much useless.   Unless there is a district map drawn somewhere that has absolutely no partisan influence whatsoever (pretty much impossible, since even court drawn maps don't count).

[Nyvin]

Fighting over what the various sides motives were in a section 5 state hardly matters now that section 4 was cleared out. That decision in Shelby County v Holder was decided by the 5 conservative justices alone, so one can't place that on the liberals. As soon as that decision was made, it is all about section 2. Whether a state drew a map to comply with the unconstitutional application of section 5 doesn't matter. The question is what section 2 requires to make sure that minorities have the opportunity to elect their candidates of choice.

The new VA map elected two candidates of choice for the black minority, which makes up 19% of the population - 2/11 in terms of CDs. Arguably the new map satisfies the VRA requirements better than the old map. It's hard to blame the Dems for taking advantage of a conservative SCOTUS decision and forcing the change to their benefit.

Going forward to 2020 the same scrutiny of section 2 will need to apply to maps produced by either party.

This is very true. If anything, the blame should go to Cuccinelli for blowing the 2013 election.

But, this can be fixed. If we win the 2017 election I propose immediately bringing back my map.

image upload

African Americans are nearly 20% of the state and with the current map elect the candidate of their choice in 18% of the districts.   Your map would allow them the candidate of their choice in 9% of districts.

Why do you want to deny them representation in the state?

[Nyvin]

I'm probably being overly optimistic, but it seems like the Republicans are going to have to lose a seat in Ohio. All the incumbent Democrats seem safe, and if we get lucky, we'll finally get a Democratic seat in Hamilton County. It's going to split it up and not look monstrous.

Though shame hasn't stopped gerrymanders before.

Also Ohio has a bipartisan commission that draws the districts now.  Although it's really a half-assed redistricting reform, it is something.   

If they draw OH-9 "normal" and draw Hamilton county's district "normal" then I think there's at least some chance of a 5th Dem seat.