Would you accept this AZ map as a compromise, or urge your team fight on?

[Sbane]

The swing districts need to be made about 4 points Mccain for me to agree to it. Those are lean Republican districts. Like R+2. Especially that Tucson district. Get rid of that northeast county, add more of Tucson. And the 5th can pick up a bit more of inner city Phoenix, and less northern exurbs.

[Sbane]

Well, there is still Hispanic territory to be picked up west of Phoenix that you put into other districts. Not that it's particularly Democratic territory, but lots of Hispanics around. And you can do that without going into Phoenix. And if that isn't enough population to bring AZ-1 out of Graham and Grenlee county, then so be it. I would prefer a Cochise and Pima county map. You seem intent on giving the mustachioed man Tuscon liberals for some reason.

As for the Phoenix area, I wouldn't mess with the Hispanic 7th district. Just swap areas in north phoenix for the ones bordering the 7th district. Though I am not sure if this would lead to an appreciable change in partisanship. I am way more concerned about the Tucson district. A moderate (to liberal on certain issues) dem should be elected from Tucson and if a Republican is elected, he should have to be a moderate as well. I don't care about making sure Grijalva is safe, as long as the VRA is followed. If Grijalva is an idiot who can't get elected, that's his fault.

And if the Republicans just use this whole crap about Mathis to get a favorable map drawn for them by some corrupt judge, then shame on them. They should let the commission do it's work. If Mathis needs to be replaced, then so be it.

[Sbane]

Who has drawn up this plan? The map should be drawn by the commission, end of discussion. It shouldn't be drawn by the courts. That's a bunch of crap, and is worse than anything the commission did. And you know it. And if the Republicans just keep impeaching people till they get exactly what they want, then F them! Seriously these people need to grow the F up. What a bunch of complaining children. Impeaching someone once is fine, but if they just keep doing it....ugh. Will you denounce it?

Impeaching someone has to be something done as a last resort. Clinton's impeachment comes to mind now...seems to be a pattern with Republicans? Anyways, the last map was crap and hopefully things are sensibly resolved. This map isn't too far from what I would draw except for Tuscon of course. Phoenix looks fine more or less.

Again we don't know what will happen, but if Republicans just start impeaching people unless they get what they want, what is the point of a commission in the first place? This needs to be taken out of the hands of the politicians. It just has to be. Even this whole Mathis mess is of their own making. Politicians recommend the independent who is on the commission right? Obviously a Phoenix Dem had a deal with her.....

[Sbane]

I guess I am an odd dem... I would take the bate. Mainly because I have the feeling that Arizona will be trending left for the next ten years and that by the time 2020 rolls around I could see a 6D 3R delegation as a possibility (by the way this is pure speculation, not really based on facts or anything). Using 2008 numbers to redistrict Arizona is a huge gamble.  Although obviously the map still is biased in favor of the Rs.

I just think Tuscon should have a greater say in that district. Way too much cutting in the above map. And one of the Phoenix districts should be made more swing if the other criteria are followed. And above all it should be done by a commission instead of the legislature by proxy with the threat of endless impeachments! It's not right and it doesn't set the right precedent. I can't believe people don't have more of a problem with it. Has the political culture really degraded that much?

Though in a way I do see what you are saying. It seems like there are about 5 districts that could be classified as swing district of sorts and with demographic changes, might become true swing districts rather than lean rep swing districts. Maybe a Dem might actually vote for a map like this.

[Sbane]

Phoenix area I would have to draw out myself to see what is reasonable or not. Obviously the only reason to switch the areas, and not keep the districts elongated as you have drawn them, would be to make it more competitive. And that is the last criteria the commission gets to look at, so if everything else is met they should be able to do it without some Hayworth impersonators impeaching them for it.

Now we shouldn't be so hasty, Mathis drew a bad map, and she got thrown out. Can't assume it will happen to someone who draws a more reasonable map, but not something that pleases every Republican out there. I mean should the Dems in Washington take on the map being drawn in their state? Should the Dems in California get rid of the commission map and try to see if they can get the Republican delegation into the single digits? Where does it stop?

It's not a matter of getting a better deal, it's a matter of the legislature not being able to blackmail the commission.

Anyways, a Dem might actually approve this map due to their being so many potential swing districts. Politicians are greedy bastards.

[Sbane]

The 7th here is 54.5% VAP, and it doesn't go into Phoenix or Glendale. It does take in the suburbs on the west side of Phoenix, but it has to for it to be a real Hispanic district. It also goes in and takes in the Hispanic areas of Pinal county and gets rid of the non Hispanic areas around Yuma. I didn't even catch how low the Hispanic % was in your 2nd Hispanic district. That map is certainly unacceptable.

And your Tucson cut is pretty hilarious as well. It includes some precincts that are like 70% white, but had another characteristic that would make them "appropriate" to put in the mustachioed man's district as you saw it.

[Sbane]

I made a few changes, got rid of most of the Pinal County areas and added more marginal Hispanic territory in Tuscon to the 7th. But since the area in Pinal was marginally Hispanic anyways, it didn't change the racial numbers. What this ensured was that some of the Tuscon district would go into Cochise. Actually I had a good mind not to enter Cochise at all, but I did it as a compromise. That is what a real compromise looks like.

I still need to draw all of Phoenix, but I suspect the numbers won't change much from Torie's map. And that is appropriate. A dem leaning swing district in Tuscon and a rep leaning swing district in Phoenix. Anything else is just crap, and as bad as any map drawn by Mathis. And if the Republicans would impeach someone over a map like that, they can go to hell. I think Washington state Democrats should start impeaching people on their commission as well. What do you guys think?

[Sbane]

This is the best map I would give to the Republicans in Tuscon. I am almost giving away too much. Should be more like an even Obama-Mccain district.

[Sbane]

You make no sense. First of all the Tuscon district is not the 7th, its the 8th (as in my map). Now that we have decided on that, can you draw me a district that is about 60% Hispanic, and 54% VAP Hispanic without picking up those areas west of Phoenix? If you can't, I don't see how you even follow the VRA. Pretty sure that is pretty up there on the criteria. You drew a GOP map, just admit it. You will feel better.

An unbiased commissioner will do exactly what I have said. Unless you have a weird definition of the word "unbiased". Typical lawyers.

[Sbane]

Here's the Tucson cut by the way: clean as a whistle. Good luck playing with it, and keeping it pretty, and meeting the VRA.

What are the Hispanic standards for the VRA in AZ. Your CD 2 is at 50.1% if I'm reading it correctly, which would come under fire in many jurisdictions as too dilute. Just dropping La Paz from the existing CD 7 puts it above that. With some manipulation of the current CD-7/4 boundary and moving CD 4 into west Mesa, I can get two districts with HVAPs of 58-59%. Wouldn't a court find that a better fit for the VRA?

The VRA does not require more than 50.1%, and after the VRA is met, the balance of the law is driven by other criteria. There is no retrogression. To get AZ-02 to a higher Hispanic percentage requires it going into the Phoenix metro area.  I don't think that comports with the law's parameters very well, and I doubt a court would do that. I did the best I could to get the Hispanic percentage maximized in AZ-02 while avoiding Phoenix (or creating erosity in Tucson for the sole purpose of getting the Dem percentage up, which I don't think a court will do or should do).  To get AZ-02 a lot more Dem, requires dumping quite heavily Hispanic precincts in Tucson into it with AZ-02 making up the lost Hispanics in Phoenix. If the Dems demand that, as a Pubbie I would litigate.

Well anyway, I did round up a few Dem votes here. Not bad! I do think there is a real risk the Dems will get a worse deal if they reject this one. Yes I do. We shall see what happens. It should be interesting. 

This is even more ridiculous. You were the one going around picking up 70% white precincts and putting it in the Hispanic district for fun. And you accuse Dems of doing the opposite. You think my map does that? You really need to go back and look at the Tuscon area a bit more closely.

This is absolutely ludicrous what is going on here. Maybe the Dems should retaliate in California. You seem to think the California map isn't "fair" either, but you ain't seen nothing yet!

[Sbane]

This is basically all the Hispanic districts in Tuscon. If a second Hispanic district needs to be made, it needs to be done where the Hispanics actually live!

[Sbane]

Yes, and thus the AZ-02 CD goes to Yuma to comport with the VRA. It does not need to go to Phoenix as well as a wandering gypsy just to get its Dem percentage up. I know it sucks sbane. I feel your pain.  Get the AZ law rewritten.

It doesn't go to Phoenix to get it's Dem percentage up lol. It does that by taking in white liberals in Tuscon! Completely unacceptable, and it shouldn't be drawn by a commission. Tuscon should get it's own district. And it's funny how your district does pick up some areas west of Phoenix, but not more. You are just picking and choosing your debate points. You should completely get it out Maricopa then, and perhaps pick up the extra voters in Pinal. Our disagreement is over how many people it should be able to pick up in Phoenix? Look, you were trying to make a map favorable to the GOP, and you should admit that. If this map is fair, then so was Mathis's map. You know that, right?

[Sbane]

Haha, I win.

[Sbane]

Yes, and thus the AZ-02 CD goes to Yuma to comport with the VRA. It does not need to go to Phoenix as well as a wandering gypsy just to get its Dem percentage up. I know it sucks sbane. I feel your pain.  Get the AZ law rewritten.

It doesn't go to Phoenix to get it's Dem percentage up lol. It does that by taking in white liberals in Tuscon! Completely unacceptable, and it shouldn't be drawn by a commission. Tuscon should get it's own district.

AZ-02 goes to Phoenix to grab Hispanics, so that it can afford to hand over to AZ-01 in Tucson some liberal precincts with significant Hispanic minorities, without dropping below 50% Hispanic VAP. So yes, in effect it does go to Phoenix for purely Dem partisan reasons, thereby violating the AZ law in my opinion.

No, my AZ-02 does not go into the Phoenix metro area. It just wings it, and does the minimum necessary to meet the VRA, thereby minimizing its wandering around trashing the AZ law's paramount parameters after the VRA is met. Heck, absent the VRA, AZ-02 would not be going to either Yuma or the dusty sand towns south of the Phoenix metro area. In my view, the AZ law mandates that one do only the minimum necessary to meet the VRA in order to otherwise preserve its other loadstars. And no, I don't view this map as one drawn by a Pubbie to max the Pubs agenda. I view it as a map a non partisan court would draw. I know you disagree. Fine. That is why we litigate! 

No, the way I look at it, you do as much as you can to pick up as many white liberal precincts in Tuscon so you can send the 8th (as i numbered it) into the desert and the mountains to pick up Republicans. And as my map above shows, you can just pick up all of the Casa Grande area, and give a map more favorable to Hispanics. Your map just tries to ensure a Republican will be elected in Tuscon, and that is not what the law is intended for.

BTW, the above map is 52.5% VAP Hispanic as it is quite hard to read. And the 8th remains about a 2 point Mccain district. Now I wonder what sort of silly excuses you will find to say why Casa Grande shouldn't be put in a district with Tuscon. You're a good lawyer. I would hire you.

[Sbane]

I wouldn't accept it. See you in court Lewis.

Would you accept what Krazen drew, or would you see him in court too?

[Sbane]

Let me add a potential table for all to accept or reject. I'll use the Torie PVI which I understand is the McCain fraction of the two party vote minus 52.3%. The districts are ordered from most D to most R. Help me out by explaining the reason for rejection.

A: -16.4%, HVAP 58.1%
B: -11.1%, HVAP 59.1%
C: -2.2%
D: +2.2%
E: +3.2%
F: +4.7%
G: +5.9%
H: +7.0%
I: +9.4%

I am more interested in making sure that Tucson is not cracked for partisan purposes. A Hispanic district in AZ has much better areas to pick up voters than 70% white precincts in Tuscon. If the areas west of Phoenix can't be touched, then it can pick up the Casa Grande area, which isn't far from Tuscon at all. And I don't see the problem of going into the Phoenix area in any case. It let's you form a heavily Hispanic district, and Maricopa needs about 30% of another district to come in and pick up population in addition to 5 that can be drawn wholly within it. Some district that would have nothing to do with the Phoenix area has to do this, so why not the Hispanic district? Especially when it let's you form a district that will for sure elect a candidate of the Hispanics choice. So in conclusion, if you make sure a district is drawn that is almost wholly in the Tuscon area, I will support it. Competitiveness in the Phoenix area is the last thing I would look at, and if it doesn't work out that is perfectly fine. The Tuscon area district must be drawn though.

[Sbane]

I drew a district using Tempe, Chandler, the areas of Phoenix south of the mountain park and like 5-10,000 people from Mesa. It was about a 4 point Mccain district. I do think Scottsdale was split way to the north though, and it is ugly as hell. What Krazen drew earlier with Mesa instead of Scottsdale, and with about the same partisan breakdown, is the way to go. Along with the Tuscon district. I think both sides should be able to agree with that.

The Mathis map drew an actual Obama district in the Phoenix area. And it drew a northern AZ district that was only 6 points Mccain. What I am proposing and what Krazen drew is much more reasonable.

[Sbane]

Interesting...looking forward to seeing the whole map. Why the need for putting Cochise in the 8th? I doesn't really affects the partisan numbers, but why not just put all of Pima in the 8th and the 7th?