2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: California

[SevenEleven]

How come you are all keeping the CA-21 gerrymander largely intact?

You have to have a district here that can elect a candidate of choice for the Latino community.

I made sure of that in the IE as well (I gave Torres and Aguilar majority-HCVAP seats as well). This is why I took Mono out of the Rural San Bernardino district and added Redlands to it.

It's not as necessary to do that in places that already elect Latinos. The Central Valley has never sent a Latino to Congress.

[SevenEleven]

Speaking of Valadao, why didn’t Costa stay in his original district in 2012? It barely changed. Did he want a whiter seat because he didn’t want to face a primary challenge?

CA-16 is safer for Democrats.

[SevenEleven]

Speaking of Valadao, why didn’t Costa stay in his original district in 2012? It barely changed. Did he want a whiter seat because he didn’t want to face a primary challenge?

CA-16 is safer for Democrats.

If Costa had decided not to jump ship for CA-16, does that mean one less Central Valley seat for Rs throughout the 2010s?

Not necessarily, as Costa has never been a particular strong performer in the area. In all likelihood, however, that would be the case.

[SevenEleven]

Speaking of Valadao, why didn’t Costa stay in his original district in 2012? It barely changed. Did he want a whiter seat because he didn’t want to face a primary challenge?

CA-16 is safer for Democrats.

If Costa had decided not to jump ship for CA-16, does that mean one less Central Valley seat for Rs throughout the 2010s?

Not necessarily, as Costa has never been a particular strong performer in the area. In all likelihood, however, that would be the case.

Who do you think would run for and win CA-16?

Cardoza.

[SevenEleven]

So one thing that needs noted is that not only are 2020 numbers practically guaranteed to have higher Hispanic%, these areas also we're the most underestimated pre-2010 census and I believe much of that was due to Hispanic population growth.

[SevenEleven]

That CA-27 might be the single most frustrating district I have ever seen.

[SevenEleven]

The two AA ‘access’ seats. I have already spoken a bit about the AA seats, but the basic summary goes something like this. Looking at the demographic breakdown of the potential commissioners, it is possible if not likely the AA community gets more representation that it should get by population percentage. Last time the commission, recognizing that CA’s AA community is dispersing and will be unable to elect a candidate of choice in many of the areas with respectable levels of AA settlement, decided to draw seats that the AA community could access, even though they were not close to the population or even CVAP thresholds. AAs vote at high rates compared to their Hispanic neighbors, and they still have control of many non-AA majority cities thanks to political inertia. The commission was swayed not just to create two AA seats in west LA, but they also drew CA44 in a way that could facilitate an AA comeback at the start of the decade. Of course, this didn’t happen and Hahn held the seat until the Hispanics could get their candidates elected via a Dem v Dem general election.



In 2020 I suspect the commission will do something similar EVEN THOUGH a natural or even partisan map would likely ax CA43. Waters is going to retire soon, so Dems would prefer to destroy her seat and spread her dem voters through cascades outwards to OC and fortify the dems there. However, the commission will protect those legacy AA local leaders who will speak before the commission. Maybe the commission will draw another CA44 where Hispanics have a sizable majority but AAs could get their candidate elected, but the creation of a new HVAP seat probably requires every HVAP seat in the LA area going East – West. I just preserved the seats as part of the decision to protect all the minority seats in LA.

The Harbor Region and South Bay seats are rather inflexible once you commit to the twin AA seats.

At first, I thought this was perhaps where you went wrong, but I checked my map and I have a 46.5% AA seat by CVAP and was able to comfortably draw a 28% AA CVAP seat right next to it while preserving the Hispanic seats.

So I'm kind of thinking the reason you have LA butchered so badly (Beverly Hills with Burbank, El Monte with Norwalk, etc) is because you kept the LA city portion of the SFV intact. The district that should get the axe is CA-44, just like the last round of redistricting. Coming in over 100k short of a district and having no noteworthy of COI to represent makes this one an easy decision.

They might go for two AA districts, but they aren't going to settle for two that are that weak. And the NAACP will make sure of that.

[SevenEleven]

If you're going for two AA seats, they should look something like this.

CA-43 is a 41.4% AA-plurality district. CA-37 is a 33.5% AA-plurality district. There's absolutely no justification for your highest AA% district being less than either of these districts.

[SevenEleven]

The only problem with that layout is it'll force an ugly split of Long Beach

[SevenEleven]

The only problem with that layout is it'll force an ugly split of Long Beach

Changed a few things around:


Purple at 34% black, orange at 44% black.

I like this. Nice and clean looking, compact, respects COI. If we were given free reign to ignore municipal boundaries, this would be the way to go. Mine is probably a better fit for what Oryx is doing (minimizing splits of cities). You can get rid of the downtown section of CA 37 and still have it likely to elect an AA candidate, though its impossible to maintain a plurality without it (and Westlake belongs with East LA, imo).

Overall, though, no reason to have the AA district less than 40% CVAP in LA, whether you go for two or one. I do think the commission would cut an AA opportunity district before connecting Burbank to Beverly Hills, though. Absolutely no chance that would ever happen.

[SevenEleven]

Also re: Santa Clarita, there's no reason to put it with Ventura, ever. You'd be better off drawing the coastal monstrosity out to Ventura and putting Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks with Santa Clarita to make a suburban commuter district

[SevenEleven]

Can I get a link or local line map? Then I will provide criticism from my perspective. Anyway, the immediate takeaways right now are the destruction of the Diamond Bar Asian suburb region, which is an ethnic COI. Also how CA33 doesn't really work - if it's an AA seat it has way too many wealthy whites, if its a white seat it has too many low income inner southside cities. There is a reason why the present CA33 is as it is, like I described in the multiposts.

The main difference between my map and Blairite's is that I follow city lines much more closely and I pursued the second AA seat as you did in your map (though my weaker AA seat is still more AA than either of yours). There's still a few edges I'd like to clean up (I literally just swapped Santa Monica into district 30, for example), but your map seems to take the approach that "LA doesn't really have communities of interest", which I certainly have to disagree with.

[SevenEleven]

SNIP

I mean I also obsesses over municipality cuts if there isn't an ethnic community in play. I think what we view differently is the LA city as a whole. Since LA is larger than a district, I view it as inevitably cut and therefore if a seat cuts into it, it is fine as long as they obeserve the neighborhoods.

Yes, it is inevitably cut. That doesn't mean you can go ahead and mutilate it though. There's "approximately" zero chance that any Southern California commissioners would sign on to such a map.

Also...is that 26 even connected? There are three highways out of Santa Clarita to my knowledge: one west to the Oxnard Plain, on east to the Antelope Valley, and one north-southeast to LA and Bakersfield.  All other roads head some combination of north or east. 

Yes, its connected by Balboa Blvd via I-5: a route traveled by far more Santa Clarita residents than 126 west.

[SevenEleven]

So in effect, LA is trapped right now by it's ethnic COIs. Microchange is possible between San Gabrial, the Asian seat, and their neighbors, but them and the San Fernando valley are locked under this pop arrangement unless I get some way to cycle pop from one side of LA to another.

It's really not. The only decision that needs made is whether you want one or two AA-based seats. By looking at the population statistics we know which area is losing a seat. Putting El Monte with Fullerton, or Beverly Hills with Burbank, or Santa Clarita with Oxnard, these aren't viable solutions.

[SevenEleven]

So in effect, LA is trapped right now by it's ethnic COIs. Microchange is possible between San Gabrial, the Asian seat, and their neighbors, but them and the San Fernando valley are locked under this pop arrangement unless I get some way to cycle pop from one side of LA to another.

It's really not. The only decision that needs made is whether you want one or two AA-based seats. By looking at the population statistics we know which area is losing a seat. Putting El Monte with Fullerton, or Beverly Hills with Burbank, or Santa Clarita with Oxnard, these aren't viable solutions.

I have one plurality-AA seat (CA-31) and another AA access seat (CA-33).

What are the numbers?

[SevenEleven]

So in effect, LA is trapped right now by it's ethnic COIs. Microchange is possible between San Gabrial, the Asian seat, and their neighbors, but them and the San Fernando valley are locked under this pop arrangement unless I get some way to cycle pop from one side of LA to another.

It's really not. The only decision that needs made is whether you want one or two AA-based seats. By looking at the population statistics we know which area is losing a seat. Putting El Monte with Fullerton, or Beverly Hills with Burbank, or Santa Clarita with Oxnard, these aren't viable solutions.

We also know that statistically any map will not be passed without satisfying all minority groups, since they are going to be over-represented on the commission. So cutting a minority seat is out of the cards.

Why would any AA group be satisfied with what your map does to their communities? It's fairly obvious that you can either cut a black seat in LA, or a Hispanic seat in LA.

[SevenEleven]

I actually am fairly fond of the purple/red Monterey County districts.

You can't get a meaningful Hispanic seat out of SB.

[SevenEleven]

So in effect, LA is trapped right now by it's ethnic COIs. Microchange is possible between San Gabrial, the Asian seat, and their neighbors, but them and the San Fernando valley are locked under this pop arrangement unless I get some way to cycle pop from one side of LA to another.

It's really not. The only decision that needs made is whether you want one or two AA-based seats. By looking at the population statistics we know which area is losing a seat. Putting El Monte with Fullerton, or Beverly Hills with Burbank, or Santa Clarita with Oxnard, these aren't viable solutions.

We also know that statistically any map will not be passed without satisfying all minority groups, since they are going to be over-represented on the commission. So cutting a minority seat is out of the cards.

Why would any AA group be satisfied with what your map does to their communities? It's fairly obvious that you can either cut a black seat in LA, or a Hispanic seat in LA.

The dominant community is race, as defined by LAW. CA Hispanics are projected to go up by 2% since 2010, but they still don't have the 2010 Hispanic majority districts to match even their CVAP. AA's have only gone down by a bit but still would be allotted 3 seats based on statewide pop, meaning there will once again be an incentive to draw 3 seats which can elect AA candidates. So LA must try to keep her seats and force them somewhere else. So lets try to cycle.

CA-44 is 63% Hispanic VAP 2010 and less than 20% AA VAP 2010 in its current iteration. I'm not sure that counts as an AA district at all.

My map has far more minority-majority and minority-access districts than the current map, and I'd not be surprised if it contains more than your map does.

[SevenEleven]

CA-44 is 63% Hispanic VAP 2010 and less than 20% AA VAP 2010 in its current iteration. I'm not sure that counts as an AA district at all.

My map has far more minority-majority and minority-access districts than the current map, and I'd not be surprised if it contains more than your map does.

Applies face to hand. CA44 is a Hispanic seat, and no longer has any chance of AA access. The remaining three (one is in the east bay, remember that) though....

I was referring to comments you made earlier in the thread.

The commission was swayed not just to create two AA seats in west LA, but they also drew CA44 in a way that could facilitate an AA comeback at the start of the decade.

Maybe the commission will draw another CA44 where Hispanics have a sizable majority but AAs could get their candidate elected, but the creation of a new HVAP seat probably requires every HVAP seat in the LA area going East – West. I just preserved the seats as part of the decision to protect all the minority seats in LA.

[SevenEleven]

CA-44 is 63% Hispanic VAP 2010 and less than 20% AA VAP 2010 in its current iteration. I'm not sure that counts as an AA district at all.

My map has far more minority-majority and minority-access districts than the current map, and I'd not be surprised if it contains more than your map does.

Applies face to hand. CA44 is a Hispanic seat, and no longer has any chance of AA access. The remaining three (one is in the east bay, remember that) though....

I was referring to comments you made earlier in the thread.

The commission was swayed not just to create two AA seats in west LA, but they also drew CA44 in a way that could facilitate an AA comeback at the start of the decade.

Maybe the commission will draw another CA44 where Hispanics have a sizable majority but AAs could get their candidate elected, but the creation of a new HVAP seat probably requires every HVAP seat in the LA area going East – West. I just preserved the seats as part of the decision to protect all the minority seats in LA.

Oh that's hypothesizing on the usage of time as an ally to placate both parties. Make CA43 into a Hispanic seat, but have enough AAs to keep electing an AA candidate until like 2026 when it becomes performing. But that doesn't solve our dispute since it still doesn't cut an LA seat.

Anyway, the Ventura seat was plurality Hispanic by pop (49%) and plurality white by CVAP (48% White, 37% Hispanic), however since about half of the whites are taking the republican ballot in the blanket primary, this leaves Hispanics as the largest group taking D ballots. So it's an access seat, not a CVAP seat. However these types of seats are useful if they actually provide access, as seen in CA20 or in VA03/04.

Yeah, I've spent the last few minutes playing around with different iterations of splitting Ventura County but I didn't find any that satisfied me in a way that justified splitting Oxnard. Unfortunately, Hispanics in Santa Maria are averse to citizenship...

[SevenEleven]

Can Riverside be paired with Imperial without splitting San Diego with Riverside?

Yep. Just look at Oryx's map on page 19.

I hate that district almost as much as the Burbank-Beverly Hills district.

[SevenEleven]

Can Riverside be paired with Imperial without splitting San Diego with Riverside?

Yep. Just look at Oryx's map on page 19.

I saw it, but noticed it contains so many other odd splits. Is there any other way to do it?

Not really, although his, uh, interesting incarnation of outlying San Diego/South OC inspired me to re-do my map. I condensed the near-suburbs of San Diego and tossed the rancher junk in with Temecula.

[SevenEleven]

Oryx, it's your turn to criticize the hell out of my map.



The 0.68% population deviation is within the 0.75% threshold tolerated by the courts.
Four districts lean Republican, 44 lean Democratic, and four fall in the 48–52% competitive range.
There are twenty eight majority-minority districts. (Thirty eight by total population).

[SevenEleven]

Do not connect SF and Marin. Just don't.

I really didn't want to. What's a good work around without disrupting any minority districts?

[SevenEleven]