US House Redistricting: North Carolina

[dpmapper]

Well, then 3 districts (whomever beats Kissell, Ellmers, and Jones) are all weaker.

Not that much weaker.  You can spread out the hit across all of the GOP districts with the right domino effect.  Average 56-57% to 55-56%, basically.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, with 240 Republicans it really doesn't matter whether there is a 241st.  But you still try, right?    (And there are only 240 Republicans this congress.  Who knows what happens later in the decade?)  

McIntyre is actually more conservative than the average representative (GOP *or* Dem)  one would get from this district, according to 538's rough calculations.  

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/12/2009s-most-valuable-democrat-is.html  

I'm also of the opinion that it's pretty useful to have Democrats that vote conservative more often than not, since it gives a bipartisan veneer to things.  Having Boren and McIntyre voting for repeal of the PPACA would be much bigger than if they were replaced by two GOP members that also voted for repeal.  

[muon2]

I thought it would be interesting to put my 9-4 map side by side with JLT's 9-4 version. My guess is that the similarities offer a good clue as to the eventual map from the legislature.

This was mine:

and here's Johnny's:

Here's the partisan numbers, mine in italics and JLT's in bold. I've matched districts that correspond to the same general area.

CD 1: 74% Obama, 54% black; 67% Obama, 51% black
CD 2: 57% McCain; 58% McCain (JLT CD-7)
CD 3: 59% McCain; 57% McCain
CD 4: 64% Obama; 70% Obama
CD 5: 58% McCain; 57% McCain
CD 6: 57% McCain; 56% McCain (JLT CD-13) not a great match between the two areas, but his 13 doesn't really match any of mine.
CD 7: 67% Obama, 61% Obama (JLT CD-8)
CD 8: 57% McCain; 57% McCain (JLT CD-6) also a weak match, since our CD-6's are similar, and here my CD 8 has no good match in his map.
CD 9: 56% McCain; 54% McCain
CD 10: 57% McCain; 57% McCain
CD 11: 57% McCain; 57% McCain
CD 12: 79% Obama, 52% black; 76% Obama, 48% black
CD 13: 56% McCain; 57% McCain (JLT CD-2)
[/quote]

[Torie]

Oh dear. My rule of thumb is that you have to get up to 53% black to be confident that you are up to 50% black VAP. 51% won't cut it. Thanks for the comparison Muon2.

[minionofmidas]

North Carolina is not a preclearance state. Suits based purely on what the last DOJ wanted aren't going to get far past the "laughed out" stage of court proceedings. Besides, the previous districts were roughly 51% Black too.

[Torie]

North Carolina is not a preclearance state. Suits based purely on what the last DOJ wanted aren't going to get far past the "laughed out" stage of court proceedings. Besides, the previous districts were roughly 51% Black too.

No pre clearance does not mean no lawsuit, but I guess it is pretty clear with NC that a map with a 50% VAP CD that ties together communities of interest probably cannot be drawn anyway. Still, the 50% VAP figure should be kept in mind, in case such a potential CD is lurking out there.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Oh dear. My rule of thumb is that you have to get up to 53% black to be confident that you are up to 50% black VAP. 51% won't cut it. Thanks for the comparison Muon2.

The current NC-01 is only 50.7% black, so I don't think maintaining 51% will engender a successful challenge.

[muon2]

North Carolina is not a preclearance state. Suits based purely on what the last DOJ wanted aren't going to get far past the "laughed out" stage of court proceedings. Besides, the previous districts were roughly 51% Black too.

NC has individual counties that require preclearance. Therefore a congressional map is subject to section 5 since it affects the counties requiring preclearance. Map makers and the DOJ will operate in this cycle with the Bartlett decision. It set for the first time a clear threshold below which the VRA does not have an effect. That threshold applies to areas where a district with over 50% VAP may be drawn. Jurisdictions wishing to reduce their exposure to litigation will draw 50%+ districts, where < 50% would have been fine 10 years ago.

[dpmapper]

I got my NC-01 up to 53%.  

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=127790.msg2731457#msg2731457

[krazen1211]

Oh dear. My rule of thumb is that you have to get up to 53% black to be confident that you are up to 50% black VAP. 51% won't cut it. Thanks for the comparison Muon2.

The current NC-01 is only 50.7% black, so I don't think maintaining 51% will engender a successful challenge.

It's easy to bump up NC-01. Just dump it into both Raleigh and Durham.

[Torie]

North Carolina is not a preclearance state. Suits based purely on what the last DOJ wanted aren't going to get far past the "laughed out" stage of court proceedings. Besides, the previous districts were roughly 51% Black too.

NC has individual counties that require preclearance. Therefore a congressional map is subject to section 5 since it affects the counties requiring preclearance. Map makers and the DOJ will operate in this cycle with the Bartlett decision. It set for the first time a clear threshold below which the VRA does not have an effect. That threshold applies to areas where a district with over 50% VAP may be drawn. Jurisdictions wishing to reduce their exposure to litigation will draw 50%+ districts, where < 50% would have been fine 10 years ago.

In playing for a few minutes with an NC map, and looking at the nearby black percentages to the existing black CD's, it seems pretty clear to me, that no CD tying together what could even remotely be called communities of interest can really be drawn. Was that your experience Muon2?

[muon2]

North Carolina is not a preclearance state. Suits based purely on what the last DOJ wanted aren't going to get far past the "laughed out" stage of court proceedings. Besides, the previous districts were roughly 51% Black too.

NC has individual counties that require preclearance. Therefore a congressional map is subject to section 5 since it affects the counties requiring preclearance. Map makers and the DOJ will operate in this cycle with the Bartlett decision. It set for the first time a clear threshold below which the VRA does not have an effect. That threshold applies to areas where a district with over 50% VAP may be drawn. Jurisdictions wishing to reduce their exposure to litigation will draw 50%+ districts, where < 50% would have been fine 10 years ago.

In playing for a few minutes with an NC map, and looking at the nearby black percentages to the existing black CD's, it seems pretty clear to me, that no CD tying together what could even remotely be called communities of interest can really be drawn. Was that your experience Muon2?

NC seems to lack the large defined areas that one gets in VA, SC, or GA. They aren't quite as populated, so a district always requires linking separate areas. For instance, CD-1 can link to Raleigh or Durham to add enough black pop, but those aren't really the same community of interest as the rural black counties and smaller town centers.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Careful about giving Foxx too much Democratic territory, she seems like a relatively weak incumbent.  Aside from 2010, she has always underperformed about as much as a Republican can in the current 5th district.  I could easily see her losing to a strong, blue-dog type opponent if her district became, say R +8 (or even R+10 in a bad year for the GOP), even with Obama on the ballot (although that would certainly help her).  Her current district is a Southern, R+15, 89.5% white, rural district and she was only able to get more than 59% in 2010.  She also has a bad case foot-in-mouth, albeit one that thus far hasn't received a huge amount of attention.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't think preclearance is the real obstacle but rather section 2, which would be violated if there was an attempt to dilute the black population.

[dpmapper]

Now that the House vote on repeal of the PPACA is in, a few things clear up:

* Larry Kissell really can't make up his mind whether he's more afraid of the wrath of Pelosi (and/or a primary challenger) or a GOP opponent (he switched his vote in the middle of the vote).  I'm sure the Republicans will try to make him pay dearly. 

* Shuler will be in hot water once Asheville is removed from his district and he's left with just rural, white counties.  They might be ancestrally Democratic, but not enough to be pro-ObamaCare. 

* If there is to be a fourth Dem left standing beyond Price, Watt, and Butterfield, the GOP should want it to be McIntyre. 

* McIntyre will almost certainly get a strong primary challenge if his district is made safe Dem. 

With all that, I'm even more firmly convinced that it's best for Pubbies to leave McIntyre's district at around 50-1% McCain.  There's no reason to give liberals one more seat in exchange for bumping a few GOP seats from 55 to 56.  Besides, it makes the map look reasonably respectable. 

[dpmapper]

If you don't mind a really ugly NC-01, this is about the best pack you can get:



NC-01, in green, is 53% black, 72% Obama.  That figure isn't the absolute best possible, but not including Raleigh or Durham allows NC-04, in reddish brown, to go up to 74% Obama (32% black).  Watt's NC-12 is 78% Obama with just a shade over 50% black.  

The other districts:
Jones, in purple: 57-42 McCain
Ellmers, in tan: 57-42 McCain
McIntyre, in blue: 53-46 McCain.
Kissell, in orange: 56-43 McCain.  
open district in pink: 56-43 McCain.
Coble, in yellow: 56-43 McCain.
Foxx, in red: 58-41 McCain.
Myrick, in light green: 55-44 McCain (this is actually better than her current district)
McHenry, in grey: 55-43 McCain.
Shuler, pink: 58-40 McCain.  

Whether Fayetteville + other small cities + rural north is a valid community of interest, I have no idea...

[dpmapper]

Ack, forgot to use the new populations again!  Thankfully it doesn't change all that much.  



Jones (tan) 56-43
McIntyre (dark blue) 53-46
Ellmers  (light blue) 56-43
open (pink) 55-44
Coble (yellow) 56-43
Kissell (orange) 56-43
Foxx (red) 57-42
Myrick (grey) 55-44
McHenry (green) 57-42
Shuler (purple) 58-41

Dem districts are at 80% Obama (Watt), 75% (Price), 69% (Butterfield), with black percentages at 52, 32, 51 respectively.  Has anyone gotten better than 75+69?  

[krazen1211]

A slightly different NC take with some new census figures. 9-4, drawn with the 2010 population totals.




NC-01 is 50.2% black. I really don't like these kinds of districts.

The purple CD-8 is sort of incoherent, but its mostly a 'leftovers' district.

CD-13 is obliterated and relocated; it's meant to be a Research Triangle vote sink in the fastest growing areas of the state that conveniently includes McIntyre's home.

CD-2 salvages the Republican areas of Wake County; I think it's safe to include them here for the next 10 years.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

You know something I've realized from the app is that in the state legislature the Republicans are probably somewhat screwed even with total control because this is an odd state where the fastest growing areas are actually Democratic. The urban centers of Raleigh and Charlotte grew as fast as the exurbs and will get more influence, while the rural areas in the west did the worst population-wise. Do the Democrats even hold any seats west of Charlotte and Winston-Salem outside of Asheville?

[JohnnyLongtorso]

They've actually got two in the House:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Rapp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R._Phillip_Haire

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/03/04/2109106/congressional-redistricting-could.html

http://www.southerncoalition.org/news-coverage/public-weighs-in-on-congressional-redistricting-process

[JohnnyLongtorso]

I don't get it, why would they want to end NC-12? It's a Dem vote sink; if they contract it to Charlotte, they still have to do something with Greensboro and Winston-Salem.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

That local affairs crap.


Maybe Rucho wants to sink Coble.

[JohnnyLongtorso]

Coble's like 900 years old, it would be just as easy to wait a few years.

[dpmapper]

I don't get it, why would they want to end NC-12? It's a Dem vote sink; if they contract it to Charlotte, they still have to do something with Greensboro and Winston-Salem.

I don't think they can get 50% black by just staying in Mecklenburg...

However, it is possible to expand NC-12 more into East Charlotte (taking in Kissell's Charlotte areas) while still preserving the strip up to W-S/Greensboro.  Right now the connecting precincts are unnecessarily wide (probably because the Dems were trying to use it to soak up Republicans).  My guess is that's what they're doing, and using the talk of "only two districts in Mecklenburg" as cover.  

ETA: something like this should work: 50.3% black VAP.  



The Winston-Salem areas should shrink since Foxx's district probably won't have much else to worry about.  Watt takes most of Miller's Greensboro precincts and Kissell's Charlotte precincts instead.  Of course, now you're splitting a lot of the connector counties three ways rather than two.  But maybe you can convince some friendly county clerks to chop some precincts so that you can snake it up there via touch-point contiguity (and low-population connecting precincts, so that little is wasted). 

[JohnnyLongtorso]

The district wasn't majority-black when they drew it.