US House Redistricting: General

[You Code 16 bits- What do you get?]

If you drawing a fair map you should draw it using 2016 and then estimate with the boundaries for 2010.

Population change is pretty big.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

If you drawing a fair map you should draw it using 2016 and then estimate with the boundaries for 2010.

Population change is pretty big.

I know, I couldn't find the 2016 files though. So I basically left the urban seats underpopulated roughly 60k each.

And Republicans are hurt big time by geography I realized, particularly in Harris County. The Republicans are mostly clustered in northwest Harris County and the eastern part of the county. You basically have to gerrymander the county to give them more than two seats.

[Skill and Chance]

Currently making a fair map of Texas that respects county lines and communities of interests as much as possible. Basically it would get really ugly for Republicans really quick based on population estimates. Democrats would have four seats in Dallas County alone, another safe seat in Tarrant County, a second swing seat in Tarrant County that voted for Trump and O'Rourke, three seats in the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA. Five seats in Harris County (two light blue, Dem-trending seats), one seat in Fort Bend County, two in Bexar County, one in El Paso County, and three south Texas Democratic seats (I cleaned up the ugly bacon strips and gave Hidalgo County its own seat, another seat is Cameron plus the remainder of Hidalgo, and another is Webb to southern Bexar). Another light blue seat in the Corpus Christi MSA plus the south Texas rurals. Only seat Republicans would gain is the successor to TX-23.

And the Collin County seat I'm drawing would have only been Trump +9. O'Rourke almost definitely won that.

So that's 20 Democratic seats and another 3 swing seats that are also trending Dem fast. Republicans better hope that they control the map drawing process indefinitely here since when the time comes that they don't, they're gonna lose a ton of seats in the metros

The way the process works in Texas, Republicans are already assured of being able to gerrymander the state legislature in 2021.  If Democrats flip the lower house (where a majority of seats were won by Beto and more than 3% left of the state), they can force a court map for congress for 2022, but the lower house would be favored to flip back R under the new map (there are limitations on county splits so it's not a sure thing) unless 2022 is a Dem wave.  Mid-decade congressional redistricting is legal in Texas and has been done before.  Republicans would just gerrymander the congressional map in 2023 instead of 2021 unless Democrats flipped TX-GOV in 2022.

The best medium/long term recourse for TX Dems would be through the state supreme court, which is elected statewide R vs. D and 3/9 seats are up every 2 years.  If they are routinely winning statewide while losing the legislature due to gerrymandering/equal CVAP districting, taking control of the state supreme court and getting an PA/NC style decision throwing out the maps sometime during 2023-27 is plausible.   

[Oryxslayer]

TX is going to be weird because there there is a contingent of the statee GOP party, who like the AR dems of 2010, think that 2018 was a one  off. Unless the dems flip the lower chamber or do something else  seriously scary like win court seats or get the 38 EVs (requires a wave) that contingent has just as much a chance of deciding the fate of the  maps as the 'fear' contingent, who would probably surrender a few more seats to the dems than they currently have (24, 22, new 37 in Austin) to lock down the other 22 even as the state continues to move  leftward. the fear contingent would want to draw something similar to the CA Map from 2000 which works with the incumbent dems to produce a map that can survive the incoming demographic transformation while giving incumbents  what they want.

[Skill and Chance]

TX is going to be weird because there there is a contingent of the statee GOP party, who like the AR dems of 2010, think that 2018 was a one  off. Unless the dems flip the lower chamber or do something else  seriously scary like win court seats or get the 38 EVs (requires a wave) that contingent has just as much a chance of deciding the fate of the  maps as the 'fear' contingent, who would probably surrender a few more seats to the dems than they currently have (24, 22, new 37 in Austin) to lock down the other 22 even as the state continues to move  leftward. the fear contingent would want to draw something similar to the CA Map from 2000 which works with the incumbent dems to produce a map that can survive the incoming demographic transformation while giving incumbents  what they want.

That's a good point, and they might very well make a deal on an NJ 2011/CA 2001 style incumbent protection map in the House (and this group also might block CVAP redistricting for fear of driving Dem turnout through the roof in the 2022 midterm. 

The interesting part is the state legislature.  Any deadlock, whether because of a Dem lower house or because the GOP can't agree on a map in either chamber, sends redistricting to a backup commission of the Speaker of the TX House, the Land Commissioner, the Comptroller, the AG, and the LG with majority rule to adopt a map.  So this commission is guaranteed to be at least 4R/1D, but 4 of them are  facing statewide reelection in just 2 years in what could be a worse than 2018 environment in TX if Trump has been reelected.  They will have a strong incentive to be less explicitly partisan in drawing districts than the state legislature was in 2011.

I don't think a serious R gerrymander is getting through lower house even if Republicans retain a narrow majority there.  There will be a group that wants to go for broke and thinks they can get back to 2/3rds, and there will be a group that wants to make a deal with enough Dems to override an Abbott veto and look bipartisan for the statewide voters and for the state courts that may flip by mid-decade.  IDK who wins.  Worth noting the Republican speaker was elected with some Dem support and some Tea Party R opposition.

In the state senate, a hard R gerrymander is much easier as 1. the districts are yuge, bigger than US House seats, and 2. the state constitutional restrictions don't apply there.     

[Oryxslayer]

TX is going to be weird because there there is a contingent of the statee GOP party, who like the AR dems of 2010, think that 2018 was a one  off. Unless the dems flip the lower chamber or do something else  seriously scary like win court seats or get the 38 EVs (requires a wave) that contingent has just as much a chance of deciding the fate of the  maps as the 'fear' contingent, who would probably surrender a few more seats to the dems than they currently have (24, 22, new 37 in Austin) to lock down the other 22 even as the state continues to move  leftward. the fear contingent would want to draw something similar to the CA Map from 2000 which works with the incumbent dems to produce a map that can survive the incoming demographic transformation while giving incumbents  what they want.

That's a good point, and they might very well make a deal on an NJ 2011/CA 2001 style incumbent protection map in the House (and this group also might block CVAP redistricting for fear of driving Dem turnout through the roof in the 2022 midterm. 

The interesting part is the state legislature.  Any deadlock, whether because of a Dem lower house or because the GOP can't agree on a map in either chamber, sends redistricting to a backup commission of the Speaker of the TX House, the Land Commissioner, the Comptroller, the AG, and the LG with majority rule to adopt a map.  So this commission is guaranteed to be at least 4R/1D, but 4 of them are  facing statewide reelection in just 2 years in what could be a worse than 2018 environment in TX if Trump has been reelected.  They will have a strong incentive to be less explicitly partisan in drawing districts than the state legislature was in 2011.

I don't think a serious R gerrymander is getting through lower house even if Republicans retain a narrow majority there.  There will be a group that wants to go for broke and thinks they can get back to 2/3rds, and there will be a group that wants to make a deal with enough Dems to override an Abbott veto and look bipartisan for the statewide voters and for the state courts that may flip by mid-decade.  IDK who wins.  Worth noting the Republican speaker was elected with some Dem support and some Tea Party R opposition.

In the state senate, a hard R gerrymander is much easier as 1. the districts are yuge, bigger than US House seats, and 2. the state constitutional restrictions don't apply there.     

Agree with you on the state senate. Hell, if dems take the lower state house, then things may get even weirder, with situations like Dems trading away their voice on congressional and senate maps for unilateral action to gerry up the state house, similar to what VA dems did in 2010 in regards to the state senate. TX has a lot of potential map outcomes, depending on how the state votes in 2020 and who is elected to each of the three chambers.

But I seriously think people undervalue the 'one off' or ignorant contingency of the TX GOP right now. Like how the party drove a minority local Tarrant legislator out of the party, and how some  people are pushing for a primary of pro-Choice Sarah Davis, despite the fact that she's the only reason why her state house seat is still red.

[Skill and Chance]

TX is going to be weird because there there is a contingent of the statee GOP party, who like the AR dems of 2010, think that 2018 was a one  off. Unless the dems flip the lower chamber or do something else  seriously scary like win court seats or get the 38 EVs (requires a wave) that contingent has just as much a chance of deciding the fate of the  maps as the 'fear' contingent, who would probably surrender a few more seats to the dems than they currently have (24, 22, new 37 in Austin) to lock down the other 22 even as the state continues to move  leftward. the fear contingent would want to draw something similar to the CA Map from 2000 which works with the incumbent dems to produce a map that can survive the incoming demographic transformation while giving incumbents  what they want.

That's a good point, and they might very well make a deal on an NJ 2011/CA 2001 style incumbent protection map in the House (and this group also might block CVAP redistricting for fear of driving Dem turnout through the roof in the 2022 midterm. 

The interesting part is the state legislature.  Any deadlock, whether because of a Dem lower house or because the GOP can't agree on a map in either chamber, sends redistricting to a backup commission of the Speaker of the TX House, the Land Commissioner, the Comptroller, the AG, and the LG with majority rule to adopt a map.  So this commission is guaranteed to be at least 4R/1D, but 4 of them are  facing statewide reelection in just 2 years in what could be a worse than 2018 environment in TX if Trump has been reelected.  They will have a strong incentive to be less explicitly partisan in drawing districts than the state legislature was in 2011.

I don't think a serious R gerrymander is getting through lower house even if Republicans retain a narrow majority there.  There will be a group that wants to go for broke and thinks they can get back to 2/3rds, and there will be a group that wants to make a deal with enough Dems to override an Abbott veto and look bipartisan for the statewide voters and for the state courts that may flip by mid-decade.  IDK who wins.  Worth noting the Republican speaker was elected with some Dem support and some Tea Party R opposition.

In the state senate, a hard R gerrymander is much easier as 1. the districts are yuge, bigger than US House seats, and 2. the state constitutional restrictions don't apply there.     

Agree with you on the state senate. Hell, if dems take the lower state house, then things may get even weirder, with situations like Dems trading away their voice on congressional and senate maps for unilateral action to gerry up the state house, similar to what VA dems did in 2010 in regards to the state senate. TX has a lot of potential map outcomes, depending on how the state votes in 2020 and who is elected to each of the three chambers.

I don't think that's likely.  Why wouldn't Abbott just veto and send it to the 4R/1D backup commission?  They would get another swing at the congressional map in 2023 after contesting the lower house on an R drawn map.  It's more plausible that the commission draws a polite, compact R leaning map for fear of statewide blowback in 2022, but it just isn't enough for them to take it back because the state is changing too fast and they get divided control for the decade and a court map that sticks.  Or they do narrowly get the lower house back, only for Governor Allred to veto the 2023 congressional gerrymander.  Or 1 side gets a trifecta in 2023 but the state supreme court blocks mid decade redistricting.

[DeSantis2024]

Republicans are going to draw TX-32 as a vote sink in 2021,TX-23 is going to remain largely the same but a more republican piece of El Paso will be added,IF republicans somehow hold TX-23 they’re planning on screwing Chip Roy,but since it seems TX-23 will flip they’ll lock up Roy,and finally Travis county will be getting a dem vote sink.........

[Skill and Chance]

Actually, I'm not sure I like the AR Dems comparison.  Romney got >60% in AR in 2012.  If the 2024 Dem candidate got >60% in Texas while losing the election, how the maps are drawn will be completely irrelevant and Dems would control everything there by the 2026 election at the latest. 

[#PACK THE COURTS]

Actually, I'm not sure I like the AR Dems comparison.  Romney got >60% in AR in 2012.  If the 2024 Dem candidate got >60% in Texas while losing the election, how the maps are drawn will be completely irrelevant and Dems would control everything there by the 2026 election at the latest.  

Still possible to draw a D+4 seat in Arkansas that would have voted for both Obama12 and Clinton16 with whole Counties, and a D+5 or D+6 seat by splitting a County. I think it was more the psychological aspect of drawing a gerrymander where you intend your party to still not win a majority of seats that made AR Dems feel like they had to risk it big.

[Sen. Mark Meadows]

Currently making a fair map of Texas that respects county lines and communities of interests as much as possible. Basically it would get really ugly for Republicans really quick based on population estimates. Democrats would have four seats in Dallas County alone, another safe seat in Tarrant County, a second swing seat in Tarrant County that voted for Trump and O'Rourke, three seats in the Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos MSA. Five seats in Harris County (two light blue, Dem-trending seats), one seat in Fort Bend County, two in Bexar County, one in El Paso County, and three south Texas Democratic seats (I cleaned up the ugly bacon strips and gave Hidalgo County its own seat, another seat is Cameron plus the remainder of Hidalgo, and another is Webb to southern Bexar). Another light blue seat in the Corpus Christi MSA plus the south Texas rurals. Only seat Republicans would gain is the successor to TX-23.

And the Collin County seat I'm drawing would have only been Trump +9. O'Rourke almost definitely won that.

So that's 20 Democratic seats and another 3 swing seats that are also trending Dem fast. Republicans better hope that they control the map drawing process indefinitely here since when the time comes that they don't, they're gonna lose a ton of seats in the metros

> 20 democratic seats

> fair

[Sen. Mark Meadows]

Republicans are going to draw TX-32 as a vote sink in 2021,TX-23 is going to remain largely the same but a more republican piece of El Paso will be added,IF republicans somehow hold TX-23 they’re planning on screwing Chip Roy,but since it seems TX-23 will flip they’ll lock up Roy,and finally Travis county will be getting a dem vote sink.........

That would be pretty stupid, considering it's pretty easy to draw a map where those districts are all safe (at least with 36 districts, idk about 39)

[The Mikado]

Republicans are going to draw TX-32 as a vote sink in 2021,TX-23 is going to remain largely the same but a more republican piece of El Paso will be added,IF republicans somehow hold TX-23 they’re planning on screwing Chip Roy,but since it seems TX-23 will flip they’ll lock up Roy,and finally Travis county will be getting a dem vote sink.........

That would be pretty stupid, considering it's pretty easy to draw a map where those districts are all safe (at least with 36 districts, idk about 39)

You're not factoring in population shifts re: reapportionment. Also, the GOP needs to draw a map that has at least a chance of still holding through the 2020s. No one in 2011 thought TX-07 or TX-32 were anything less than Safe R.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

With the new Census estimates, my estimates for redistricting numbers are

Same general northeastern and rust belt drain to the south.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

1 - D+23 (48% BVAP)
2 - D+22 (48% BVAP)
3 - D+6
4 - D+26 (57% HVAP)
5 - D+21
6 - D+16 (39% HVAP)
7 - D+22 (48% BVAP)
8 - D+8
9 - D+8
10 - D+7
11 - D+6
12 - R+19
13 - D+6
14 - D+12
15 - R+19
16 - R+13
17 - D+4

A different take on an Illinois Dem gerrymander. All sitting dem congressmen keep their own seperate
districts.

[You Code 16 bits- What do you get?]

Not acceptable because a Gary to indy district isn't for some reason.(jk both parties will do this)

[I Grew Up On A Farm BEEP Radical Liberal Raphael Warnock 👁️]

1 - D+23 (48% BVAP)
2 - D+22 (48% BVAP)
3 - D+6
4 - D+26 (57% HVAP)
5 - D+21
6 - D+16 (39% HVAP)
7 - D+22 (48% BVAP)
8 - D+8
9 - D+8
10 - D+7
11 - D+6
12 - R+19
13 - D+6
14 - D+12
15 - R+19
16 - R+13
17 - D+4

A different take on an Illinois Dem gerrymander. All sitting dem congressmen keep their own seperate
districts.

There should be more districts going into Chicagoland, but you are on the right track.

[Roll Roons]

1 - D+23 (48% BVAP)
2 - D+22 (48% BVAP)
3 - D+6
4 - D+26 (57% HVAP)
5 - D+21
6 - D+16 (39% HVAP)
7 - D+22 (48% BVAP)
8 - D+8
9 - D+8
10 - D+7
11 - D+6
12 - R+19
13 - D+6
14 - D+12
15 - R+19
16 - R+13
17 - D+4

A different take on an Illinois Dem gerrymander. All sitting dem congressmen keep their own seperate
districts.

I feel like a map this messy would backfire hard in some way. Either it ends up becoming a dummymander or it gets thrown out by a court. 

[I Grew Up On A Farm BEEP Radical Liberal Raphael Warnock 👁️]

I feel like a map this messy would backfire hard in some way. Either it ends up becoming a dummymander or it gets thrown out by a court.  

If it were to get thrown out by a court, that would be a plus, because it would set precedent against partisan gerrymandering that would also throw out GOP gerrymandering. So Dems should be super-aggressive, with the goal of disenfranchising every Republican in Illinois (or else coming as close to that as possible). Likewise in states like MD they should draw an 8-0 map to rig the elections.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

There should be more districts going into Chicagoland, but you are on the right track.

You can already draw 2 Dem seats downstate (the 2 squiggles). You can't really get up to a 15-2 map without far worse boundaries and annoying a lot of incumbent D congressmen.

[I Grew Up On A Farm BEEP Radical Liberal Raphael Warnock 👁️]

There should be more districts going into Chicagoland, but you are on the right track.

You can already draw 2 Dem seats downstate (the 2 squiggles). You can't really get up to a 15-2 map without far worse boundaries and annoying a lot of incumbent D congressmen.

I was trying to say what should happen (as egregious as possible of a gerrymander should be drawn, and if it gets struck down for partisan gerrymandering, that is win-win), not what would necessarily in fact happen.

I wouldn't trust that downstate Dem districts will necessarily stay Dem - it is safer to draw them into Chicagoland than to assume that they won't become more Republican (in particular Cheri Bustos' district).

You can draw 15-2 though, i.e. https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=294399.msg6543428#msg6543428

[AustralianSwingVoter]

There should be more districts going into Chicagoland, but you are on the right track.

You can already draw 2 Dem seats downstate (the 2 squiggles). You can't really get up to a 15-2 map without far worse boundaries and annoying a lot of incumbent D congressmen.

I was trying to say what should happen (as egregious as possible of a gerrymander should be drawn, and if it gets struck down for partisan gerrymandering, that is win-win), not what would necessarily in fact happen.

I wouldn't trust that downstate Dem districts will necessarily stay Dem - it is safer to draw them into Chicagoland than to assume that they won't become more Republican (in particular Cheri Bustos' district).

You can draw 15-2 though, i.e. https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=294399.msg6543428#msg6543428

My two downstate districts are still D+4 and D+6. The 13th voted for Clinton by 12 points. In 2016 it actually swung about half a point to Clinton. You can argue the 17th could be vulnerable, however Clinton still won it by 5 points. If you're really concerned about the 17th you can simply give it Rockford as well to shore it up, though that does make all the Chicagoland districts a bit weaker.

[Non Swing Voter]

for those rustbelt states that are losing population or have stagnant population, is there any pattern to what's losing population?  e.g., if it's mostly in rural areas in states that republicans have gerrymandered anyways, is it the case that Dems probably will keep the few seats they have and GOP will lose the bulk of these seats?

[AustralianSwingVoter]

1 - D+22 (48% BVAP)
2 - D+25 (48% BVAP)
3 - D+6 (Clinton+16)
4 - D+34 (71% HVAP)
5 - D+20
6 - D+6 (Clinton+16)
7 - D+37 (48% BVAP)
8 - D+6 (Clinton+19)
9 - D+6 (Clinton+22)
10 - D+6 (Clinton+19)
11 - D+6 (Clinton+18)
12 - R+20
13 - D+1 (Trump+1)
14 - D+2 (Clinton+6)
15 - R+20
16 - R+4 (Trump+6)
17 - D+1 (Trump+4)

A more realistic map of Illinois.

[Epaminondas]

Have there been any maps of Michigan redistricting on here? I can't find any.