Illinois Redistricting Megathread

[ProgressiveModerate]

My attempt at a cleanish 14-3 map. There's really no way to avoid the IL-13 and IL-17 snakes, but after that, the Chicago area can be done decently clean.

Just a reminder to everyone this isn't the final map, just an initial proposal. It's extremely likely to be tweaked to be made better; I think the close IL-3 was moreso to send Newman a message but it isn't actually going to stay like taht when it's so easy to shore up at no one elses expense. The key to a good IL gerrymander for Dems is to put as many small blue cities into IL-13 and IL-17 as possible and in Chicagoland, to try and maximize the relative lack of political geography in the entensive Chicago suburbs.

[ProgressiveModerate]

As a fun thought exercise, I sought to draw a fair map to see how many seats Democrats would gain from gerrymandering. The result was pretty surprising, despite Democrats' issue of being packed into Chicago, their strength in the Collars has increased enough to the point where you can draw 5 Dem seats in the Collars in a pretty clean way and also draw 7 seats nested entirely in Cook County. Perhaps I took some D leaning decisions downstate, but I do think any fair map creates some form of competitive seat down there. The end result seems to be roughly 12-4-1, sure some of these Dem seats are vulnerable (Biden+3), but geography is much better for Democrats than meets the eye. You can cleanly draw all current Dems except Bustos as Biden seats, which perhaps makes the lack of Democratic aggression, all the more surprising, needless to say, I wouldn't be surprised if the draft D plan that we've seen undergoes numerous changes before being finalized.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/a50b73aa-d510-4b90-abcb-758e016a91aa


Also this should put to the rest the idea that Democrats benefit from gerrymandering more than Republicans do, a fair map in IL could very well be 13-4 at this point (which would only be a net loss of 1(!) seat over an aggressive Dem gerrymander), on the other hand, in a state like TX, Democrats would probably win a majority of congressional seats on a fair map.

I'll 2nd this. According to my model, Biden would expected to win about 12.5 (72.7%) seats on a fair map, while Trump just 4.5. When you factor in IL's geography though, that prolly becomes more like 11.5 to 2.5.

The issue for Dems is IL is simillar to Rs in Texas; much of the gerrymandering done is just to cancel out their own geography problems. Unless Ds literally bacon strip the entire state (prolly violating VRA), you're always going to have some "hyperpacked" districts in Chicago. Imagine though if Chicago was located more centrally in the state; you could unpack seats like IL-7 and IL-5 to help make a D district and make a 15-2 map that isn't any less safe than a 14-3. It's just the fact Chicago is located in a corner that screws Dems over.

One thing I will say though is while D trending suburbs are definately helping Dems reduce geography issues, seats such as IL-12 and IL-17 that would've "naturally" leaned Dem at the start of the decade are no longer possible at least in a compact form.

One silver lining to gerrymandering this cycle is that Ds and Rs are largely gerrymandering in states where geography is unfavorable to begin (TX, NY, IL, MD, OR just to name a few) or in states that are too small for gerrymandering to really matter, at least on the national level (A lot of southern states, some in the NE, ect). This means many prominent gerrymanders we will see will be 50% just trying to cancel out geography.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Does anyone have a link to the new IL map in DRA or somewhere I can download the shapefiles?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/8072de50-957c-4b3a-86f0-8e71e4f1e451

[ProgressiveModerate]

Could Bobby Rush face primary trouble in this new IL-01?

Probably not too much. Most of the Democratic Parts of IL-01 are the same; the district was underpopulated though so Dems decided to stretch it down into white R rurals and a white Democrat wouldn't have the votes to win a primary with white voters in this district

[ProgressiveModerate]

My proposal for a fair map if Republicans flip the court in 2022 and hence take up the case and likely overturn the map. This map is based on the old district map but cleans a lot up. I'm disappointed by the lack of competitive seats in suburban Illinois, but geography makes it trickier than one might expect, and one really has to go out of their way. Colour is 2020 Pres.

[ProgressiveModerate]

My proposal for a fair map if Republicans flip the court in 2022 and hence take up the case and likely overturn the map. This map is based on the old district map but cleans a lot up. I'm disappointed by the lack of competitive seats in suburban Illinois, but geography makes it trickier than one might expect, and one really has to go out of their way. Colour is 2020 Pres.

What are the chances this happens

A map simillar to this or a new map generally?

[ProgressiveModerate]

My proposal for a fair map if Republicans flip the court in 2022 and hence take up the case and likely overturn the map. This map is based on the old district map but cleans a lot up. I'm disappointed by the lack of competitive seats in suburban Illinois, but geography makes it trickier than one might expect, and one really has to go out of their way. Colour is 2020 Pres.

What are the chances this happens

A map simillar to this or a new map generally?

That Dems lose the court

There are 2 Ds and 1 R not up. 1D and 1R are facing retention. 1R and 1D are retiring.

There's 1 Dem up for retention in Cook County who will safely survive.

The R up is in the 4th district based in Western and Central Illinois. Safe hold.

So far that's 3 seats Dems are basically guarenteed to have and 2 for Rs.

Seat 2 (currently Rep held but retiring) is a Biden + 13 seat based in suburbs North and West of Chicago that are a bit more R downballot historically but realigned relatively early. Not even Kirk won the seat in 2016 despite doing relatively well in this region of the state. If Rs win it'll very much be because of an R wave and ticket splitting. Rs do seem to be taking this race slightly more seriously than Dems rn. I'd say tilt D for now given an R would need to get a pretty diverse coalition of voters they haven't really won over in a while to win, but if they do manage 2022 would be the year to do so.

Seat 3 (currently Dem held but retiring) is based on the South Side of the Chicago metro. This seat is Biden + 8, and really hasn't shifted a ton politically recently with a lot of internal countertrends. Ironically, it seems like this seat despite not being the tipping point has a bit more seriousness on both sides when it comes to the canidates. Once again no R wins this seat on DRA but several come close. However, shifts in the district working in Rs favour have a good chance of accelerating making me rate this as lean R for now.

Overall, Rs will need to sweep both of these seats in order to flip the court and potentially strike down the D gerrymander. Overall, the court prolly leans D for now but I wouldn't be shocked if it flipped and Dems def shouldn't take it for granted and should run a stronger campaign in district 2 focusing on a abortion and a lot of generally supported social ideas without getting too much into the culture war, similalr to how Dems were able to have a massive NC Supreme Court majority back when their elections were non partisan.

[ProgressiveModerate]

So I just happened to be in south Illinois and I took a closer look at the congressional districts cause why not and I noticed Miller’s hometown isn’t actually in the seat she represents. It looks specifically carved out to be in the 15th and not the 12th which took most of her old district.

We’re Illinois Dems trying to carve her out?

I think you're getting your districts messed up cause Miller represents the 15th but Oakland is in the 12th.

Honestly, that does seem somewhat intentional since there's really no partisan reasons for that extra nub, but then again Dems had a ton of unnecessary chops of zig-zags in Chicagoland so it may just be incompetence who whoever was drawing the map.

And the nub was also in all maps from the 2nd one too which is notable (the first proposed map seemed to be a joke)

[ProgressiveModerate]

So I just happened to be in south Illinois and I took a closer look at the congressional districts cause why not and I noticed Miller’s hometown isn’t actually in the seat she represents. It looks specifically carved out to be in the 15th and not the 12th which took most of her old district.

We’re Illinois Dems trying to carve her out?

I think you're getting your districts messed up cause Miller represents the 15th but Oakland is in the 12th.

Honestly, that does seem somewhat intentional since there's really no partisan reasons for that extra nub, but then again Dems had a ton of unnecessary chops of zig-zags in Chicagoland so it may just be incompetence who whoever was drawing the map.

And the nub was also in all maps from the 2nd one too which is notable (the first proposed map seemed to be a joke)

I probably did get the numbers confused but yea, do you have a link to where I can see the first proposed map?

Look up 538 redistricting tracker and click on Illinois

[ProgressiveModerate]

Cross posting this here, because it strikes me as something a GOP-run State Supreme Court would draw. (It was drawn fairly on my end, of course.)

IL.

link



IL-01: 54% B, 29% W, 15% L. Southern Cook county and Eastern Will are fairly Black now, so you can do a Black-influence district which is firmly in the suburbs with just a little bit of the South side. Robin Kelly runs here despite the numbers

IL-02: 57% B, 22% W, 11% L. Has almost all of the South Side, plus the loop. Bobby Rush gets this seat.

IL-03: 69% L, 19% W. Southwest Chicago, plus some western suburbs. Sorry for the snakelike shape. Chuy Garcia runs here.

IL-04: 38% L, 32% B, 27% W. A coalition seat. Although Latinos are the largest group, it probably reelects Davis easily.

IL-05: 56% W, 20% L, 13% A, 10% B. The North Side is always a bit more diverse than I remember, even though this district is very white for a major city. Mike Quigley's seat I think.

IL-06: 64% W, 17% A, 13% L. The lakeshore suburbs of Cook plus a bit inland. Safe D ofc. Schakowsky runs here, though she's a bit liberal for this monied seat.

IL-07: 58% W, 23% L. Somehow manages to be less white than IL-06 despite being only in Lake and McHenry, I assume due to Waukegan? Would have been competitive like 15 years ago but Safe D now. Schneider's district.

IL-08: 70% W, 15% L. Has the NW exurbs and Rockford. Sort of the successor to Underwood's pre-2020 district, and is super competitive. Voted Biden very narrowly but quite Trump in 2016. Tossup, maybe lean R. An interesting seat in that Democrats's stronghold here are outside of the Chicago proper seats. Also interesting how Latino these affluent suburbs are. I guess Underwood would run here but it's not her seat.

IL-09: 55% W, 24% L, 15% A. NW Cook plus several Fox River cities. Safe D these days.

IL-10: 66% W, 17% L, 12% A. Inner Western suburbs. Safe D. Casten's seat.

IL-11: 55% W, 22% L, 12% A. Aurora and Naperville. Safe D, and actually more D than the suburbs closer to city (how common is this?). Foster runs her, Underwood could too because she lives here.

IL-12: 70% W, 17% L. SW Cook, most of Will, and exurban Grundy. Was 50-47 Trump in 2020, so pretty much likely R. Takes in the more Lipinski-ish suburbs. He could maybe run here, or maybe also Kinzinger, but I doubt either would win.



IL-13: 81% W. Has Peoria and LaSalle-Peru. Safe R ofc. LaHood's seat.

IL-14: 80% W, 10% B. Has Springfield and the Quad Cities. Safe R, not clear who'd run here.

IL-15: 74% W, 12% B. Has the colleges and Kankakee (which is surprisingly R given its status as a decently large city on the fringes of a world city) and Danville, so it's consequently the least R seat downstate. Still safe R, though could be vulnerable if Mary Miller runs here as she lives here.

(I switched the numbers for IL-16 and 17 after screenshotting, so teal is 16 and green is 17).

IL-16: 76% W, 16% B. The St. Louis metro area and surrounds. Safe R. Open seat, but Bost could run here since it's closer to his current seat and he wouldn't have to run against Miller.

IL-17: 86% W. Little Egypt, reaching up to Decatur for population. Safe R. It's the obvious successor to Miller's seat but she doesn't live here and Bost does.

I actually like this map a lot. The only issue is it eliminates a black seat (IL-07) which may make a Dem Supreme Court later redraw the map again. Other than that, this map is really hard to argue against.

Secondly I would personally swap Peoria and Davensport but it's not a hgue deal.

Anyone on here know where the IL Supreme Court races stand right now? I haven't heard a lot recently even though the Court is hugely consequential.