U.S. House Redistricting 2020: Nevada

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh my f**king God what is this mess

This utterly fails both as a gerrymander and as a fair map. Wow.

[Antonio the Sixth]

This follows a trend that's been seen elsewhere - Democrats spreading out their support to maximize winnable seats, while Republicans mostly just consolidate the seats they have (except in Ohio and North Carolina).

Sure, there are 3 "winnable" seats, but at least 2 of those could easily fall even in a neutral year. The obvious move from a partisan standpoint would be to hardcore pack Amodei's district (which as many have pointed out, would be pretty easy to do by removing Reno and putting in more of the rurals). Hell, this can even be defended from a COI standpoint: keep all of rural Nevada together instead of cracking it in half. But this map doesn't even do that. As I said, it sucks from both a Democratic and a nonpartisan perspective.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I hate to say it but the GOP map is honestly better. At least it doesn't crack Las Vegas so egregiously.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I hate to say it but the GOP map is honestly better. At least it doesn't crack Las Vegas so egregiously.

Party not in power proposes a better map than the party in power.

Tbf that’s almost always the case these days

That's the point.

That's usually the case, but not always. See Washington for example, the Democratic maps don't even go as far as a fair map probably would, whereas Republican maps are obvious gerrymanders.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Slightly prettier but still huge dummymander potential

How is it prettier? All that's changed is a few weird protrusions were added to the boundary between the two Northern districts.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I seriously doubt that a Democrat in Reno would prefer to be represented by a Republican from Reno (or from the Northern Rurals) than by a Democrat from Clark. This kind of localism almost never trumps partisanship in practice.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Stupidest state Democratic party in this redistricting cycle so far.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Stupidest state Democratic party in this redistricting cycle so far.

I agree that leaving Reno in the vote sink was dumb, but I saw people on Twitter comparing it to Arkansas 2010, which, like, come on, people, let's be realistic here. 3/4 seats are like Biden+7-8 in a state Biden won by 2.5ish. Unless the state is voting for the Republican by like 5 point (which isn't impossible but is definitely not the modal outcome) Democrats should be favored in all three of those districts.

Regardless of the partisanship of these seats, diluting minority influence for partisan purposes is also generally Bad, Actually, regardless of whether or not Titus' seat was ever VRA-protected as such. Racial gerrymandering isn't any less heinous when the Dems do it, as some Bitecoferian types have cynically suggested.

Yeah, exactly. This is the rare map that is actually worse, on nonpartisan grounds, than EITHER the most extreme Democratic or the Republican gerrymanders (since both of them probably at least keep most of Las Vegas contained within two districts and thus will have at least one be a Hispanic opportunity seat). The Reno-Clark connection and the 2D-2R plan that the GOP proposed are both more defensible CoI-wise.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Stupidest state Democratic party in this redistricting cycle so far.

I agree that leaving Reno in the vote sink was dumb, but I saw people on Twitter comparing it to Arkansas 2010, which, like, come on, people, let's be realistic here. 3/4 seats are like Biden+7-8 in a state Biden won by 2.5ish. Unless the state is voting for the Republican by like 5 point (which isn't impossible but is definitely not the modal outcome) Democrats should be favored in all three of those districts.

Regardless of the partisanship of these seats, diluting minority influence for partisan purposes is also generally Bad, Actually, regardless of whether or not Titus' seat was ever VRA-protected as such. Racial gerrymandering isn't any less heinous when the Dems do it, as some Bitecoferian types have cynically suggested.

Yeah, exactly. This is the rare map that is actually worse, on nonpartisan grounds, than EITHER the most extreme Democratic or the Republican gerrymanders (since both of them probably at least keep most of Las Vegas contained within two districts and thus will have at least one be a Hispanic opportunity seat). The Reno-Clark connection and the 2D-2R plan that the GOP proposed are both more defensible CoI-wise.

This was my own map, though surely Horsford and Lee would never let it pass:



Most of Las Vegas itself is combined with Sunrise Manor and the most minority-heavy parts of Paradise and North Las Vegas in NV-01 (44% Hispanic VAP, Biden +27), while NV-04 (Biden +2) stretches a bit further southwest to Spring Valley and NV-03 (Biden +0.5) takes in whiter parts of Paradise. NV-02 (Trump +11) has no county splits, as in one of the earlier legislative proposals that was then mutilated for unknown reasons.

I don't really like this map tbh (the rurals split feels really artificial, and the two swingy districts are de-facto Lean R in a neutral years) but it's definitely better than what we got, can't argue with that.

Really, I guess the problem will not fully solved until Nevada gets a 5th seat and we can have a district properly anchored in Reno.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'll just bite the bullet and say that I think a Reno snake and rural pack is the fairest configuration we can have with the current number of districts. The Rurals are a natural CoI that is about right for one district. Reno + parts of Clark would not be a natural CoI of course, but neither is Reno + Northern rurals, and I don't think it should be preferred just because it looks neater. I'd go with the option that minimized the Bad CoI districts - in the current map that's basically all 4, in yours it would be 2 or 3 our of 4, while in the Reno snake option it would be just 1.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Hmmm. Okay, that's a fair point. I guess I didn't realize just how unpopulated the Southern Rurals were. I know NV is pretty empty but DAMN that's really empty. I think I'd still argue that it's still better to have two districts fully contained in the core LV area, though. That might result in a very Republican-friendly map, but in that case I'd bite the bullet that Republican-friendly is the right way to go.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Okay, from a quick look at DRA, the LV area (as in, cities of decent size clustered around Las Vegas, not the entire Clark couty) has enough population for 2.8 districts. The rest of Clark adds another 0.1, and the remaining 0.1 is all those Southern rurals. That's such a terrible configuration honestly. God I hope Nevada picks up another seat next decade so that problem will resolve itself.

That being the case, though, I do have to argue for two seats contained fully within the LV area proper. The 3-way crack Democrats did is still indefensible. Honestly, you could make a case for slight malapportionment, by splitting Clark into 3 districts and leaving the remaining one slightly overpopulated. That wouldn't be acceptable under OMOV, of course, but oh well.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Okay, from a quick look at DRA, the LV area (as in, cities of decent size clustered around Las Vegas, not the entire Clark couty) has enough population for 2.8 districts. The rest of Clark adds another 0.1, and the remaining 0.1 is all those Southern rurals. That's such a terrible configuration honestly. God I hope Nevada picks up another seat next decade so that problem will resolve itself.

That being the case, though, I do have to argue for two seats contained fully within the LV area proper. The 3-way crack Democrats did is still indefensible. Honestly, you could make a case for slight malapportionment, by splitting Clark into 3 districts and leaving the remaining one slightly overpopulated. That wouldn't be acceptable under OMOV, of course, but oh well.

Very unwise.  Dems start down that road and if it gets upheld, you end up with one Atlanta CD, one DFW CD, and one Houston CD at the next census.

I mean obviously it wouldn't get upheld, so your point is moot. But even then, that's an incredibly stupid comparison. Rounding Clark up from 2.9 districts to 3 isn't the same thing as arbitrarily bringing Dallas County down from like 3.5 to 1. One follows a clear principle of approximate fairness, the other obviously doesn't.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Gov. Lombardo has called for the creation of an independent redistricting commission in Nevada:
https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1617941809354936320?s=20

Nevada Dems should say "we'll do it if Utah does the same". It would be a fair trade since they're similarly sized states.