New PA Maps In Effect

[Oryxslayer]

As Dave Wasserman puts it, this map is simply a less aggressive GOP gerrymander that sacrifices PA-07. Aka, this is an auto-veto. I also don't see any reason why the Dems would side with the Republicans to break Wolf's veto for this map, there is a 100% chance they get something better from the special master.

If Brady was still around I could see him rounding up some machine Democrats in Philly by the security of 3 Philly based seats, but as it is....

Would he though? In 2011, he was facing a R trifecta - cooperation was to only way to get anything from the pubs. If there are going to be three dem packs in Philly, Brady would seek them to be to his liking. However, now with the potential to get something better, Brady might hold the line.

But with him gone, and the machine in tatters from the corruption cases, yeah Dems probably are holding the line here.

[Gass3268]

I just read that this puts Lamb's home into Doyle's PA-14.

[Nyvin]

It's obvious they're trying to placate the Philly dems with 3 seats.    PA-7 is just basically drawn as the Dem vote sink for everything outside of Philly that's left.

The Republicans seem extremely hellbent on keeping Harrisburg and Cumberland separated, even though it's really no threat whatsoever till 2022 redistricting.

I agree splitting Allegheny three ways and MontCo four ways is entirely unneeded.   

The Dauphin-Luzerne district just seem pointless too.

All of that is pretty non-issue though partisan-wise though.    The real sticking point will obviously be what they did to PA-6.  They put way too much of Chester into PA-7 and intentionally snaked around Reading.    There's absolutely zero chance that Wolf approves that part.

[King Lear]

Can anyone calculate the PVI of PA-07 in this new map?

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

[muon2]

What is especially curious is that there is essentially no intersection between this opinion and the Gill v. Whitford case.

The PA Court opinion holds that congressional districts are unconstitutional under a provision of the state constitution that has no equivalent in the US constitution.  Their reasoning is almost entirely on the basis that they are non-compact (as judged by both geometric measures or splitting of existing subdivisions).  They put very little weight on the resulting partisan split of the delegation nor any reliance on constitutional provisions that have a federal equivalent, and they considered no evidence about the partisan motivation of the gerrymander.

The Whitford plaintiffs argue that state assembly districts are unconstitutional under several provisions of the federal constitutions (which have equivalents in the PA constitution, but are ignored by the PA court).  Their argument is based entirely on the claim that the partisan split of the delegation is biased, combined with qualitative evidence of partisan motivation.  Compactness is not at issue at all; indeed the plaintiffs acknowledge that the existing districts are reasonably compact.

Yet Alito rejected the stay without even referring it to the full court. That is what makes me think there is something in the PA ruling that lines up with the direction SCOTUS is taking in Whitford.

We know for a fact it was not referred to the Court?

This is from Scotusblog:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I agree the Alito's denial should not have been a close call, and I'm glad to see that apparently it wasn't.

But I don't see how this suggests anything about the ultimate disposition of Whitford.  The cases are based on totally different arguments along every relevant dimension.

[muon2]

I count 19 chops in 2 regions:

Western Region - 11 CDs, 11 chops
Crawford
Allegheny (2)
Washington
Fayette
Mifflin
Lycoming
Cumberland
Dauphin
Luzerne
Carbon

Philly Region - 7 CDs, 8 chops
Berks
Chester
Delaware
Montgomery (3)
Philadelphia (2)

In the western region there is only one excess chop. The fact that there are 2 CDs in both Allegheny and Washington shows that there is an excess. In the eastern region there are two excess chops. One is due to 2 CDs in both Chester and Montgomery. The other is due to a loop of CDs connecting chopped counties: Philadelphia-Delaware-Chester-Montgomery.

[muon2]

I agree the Alito's denial should not have been a close call, and I'm glad to see that apparently it wasn't.

But I don't see how this suggests anything about the ultimate disposition of Whitford.  The cases are based on totally different arguments along every relevant dimension.

Perhaps there's another reason and I'm grasping at straws, but this doesn't strike me as something Alito would normally dismiss so readily. Whitford is the only insider info related to redistricting he has that he could use to go straight for a dismissal, given that Roberts stayed NC.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

That map still sucks. Sorry, but I don't see Wolf signing off on this one.

[Oryxslayer]

So I think I have the full map - I can't be too sure without a zoom to Philly or Pittsburgh. However, after a complete draw, I don't see how this map has any chance of A. - Passing the Veto, and B. - passing the Court. The 7th isn't even chucked as originally thought, the Pubs kept it competitive in their greed. They also appear incredibly scared of Lamb, pushing the 18th several points to the right and putting his home outside the new seat. The only thing that Pubs didn't do way draw out Cartwright, but he still has a bunch of ancestral Republican Territory attached to what should be Lakawanna+Luzurne+Monroe.

PA-01: D+30.79 -> D+32.86
PA-02: D+40.09 -> D+41.19
PA-03: R+11.49 -> R+9.82
PA-04: R+11.11 -> R+16.8
PA-05: R+13.05 -> R+16.4
PA-06: R+1.98 -> R+3.59
PA-07: R+1.35 -> D+1.64
PA-08: R+1.56 -> R+1.64
PA-09: R+19.38 -> R+20.29
PA-10: R+16.32 -> R+16.61
PA-11: R+10.11 -> R+8.06
PA-12: R+11.55 -> R+7.33
PA-13: D+15.42 -> D+13.06
PA-14: D+17.02 -> D+16.66
PA-15: R+4.24 -> R+0.71
PA-16: R+4.94 -> R+7.49
PA-17: R+1.07 -> R+0.84
PA-18: R+10.76 -> R+12.93

That map still sucks. Sorry.

I give this map a 100% change of a wolf veto, and even if it somehow finds its way over (I doubt, anything would be better than this for dems, philly machine is dead) the court would reject this simply because of the number of cuts, not even needing to go into the partisan data. When Republicans said that they were going to do a redraw there was an actual chance of them drawing a fair map that tilted right, which would be acceptable to the court so Wolf would have to approve in order to avoid looking like a partisan. But this map? This map is just handing power over to the special master.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Wolf is going to veto this map. It still looks pretty choppy around the SW and SE and the fact that the GOP put Conor Lamb's hometown in PA14 doesn't improve its chances.

[Brittain33]

I ask this question not to be a smart-ass, but because while many state constitutions don't have explicit language about redistricting, they do have language about guaranteeing a right to vote, equal and fair access to suffrage, a republican form of government, democracy, and other broad and variably interpreted principles which Americans adhere to in theory. If you gerrymander a map so that a majority of voters choose Democrats, or a majority choose Republicans, or maybe they split, but you keep getting the same Republicans no matter what, it's not hard to see how you are violating the principles of democracy embodied in those constitutional provisions. That may not satisfy a literal search for the words "district" but it serves the purpose of the courts and the constitution well.

If you go to the polls and are told you can't vote because you have two t's in your name you are denied the right to vote. If you go to vote and don't like the candidates that is not denying you a right to vote.

If you have a government that does not reflect the will of the voters and does not change even as the vote totals change significantly from one election to the next, you no longer have a democracy or a representative government.

I believe you understand exactly the point I am making, Jim, even if you don't personally find it the most compelling argument for yourself.

[Brittain33]

Oryxslayer, I can't believe you did that.

[Gass3268]

Lol, so they actually packed more Democrats into PA01 and PA02?

[LimoLiberal]

Wait, PA-15 got more Republican?!?

[Gass3268]

Wait, PA-15 got more Republican?!?

I think it was a mislabel: R+4.24->R+0.71

[Oryxslayer]

Wait, PA-15 got more Republican?!?

I think it was a mislabel: R+4.24->R+0.71

Yep fixed

[Virginiá]

I give this map a 100% change of a wolf veto, and even if it somehow finds its way over (I doubt, anything would be better than this for dems, philly machine is dead) the court would reject this simply because of the number of cuts, not even needing to go into the partisan data. When Republicans said that they were going to do a redraw there was an actual chance of them drawing a fair map that tilted right, which would be acceptable to the court so Wolf would have to approve in order to avoid looking like a partisan. But this map? This map is just handing power over to the special master.

In trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, I think maybe they want to punt to it to the special master under the assumption that that any map they are capable of producing will have the same result. When the special master draws it, maybe they try to bring it to federal court as the state court usurping their power after not being given enough time to go through the motions. I think that was the basis of their SCOTUS appeal but I'm wondering if they can have another crack at it if the court has to draw the map.

Although one way or the other I still believe my addict metaphor ties into this. I do not believe they are capable of just letting go of partisan games and drawing a reasonable map, so this map is the natural result of this idea + them not really believing any of their maps will be accepted.

[King Lear]

Can anyone calculate weather Clinton or Trump won PA-06 under this Republican map?

[Torie]

Can anyone calculate weather Clinton or Trump won PA-06 under this Republican map?

Trump almost certainly won it, and probably by a few points. Almost all the towns in Chester that voted for Trump are in PA-06, the Montco portion is almost all blue, and the Dem node of Reading in Berks is not in the CD.

[Nyvin]

That map is god awful and completely ignores the court order.   19 county splits???  That's absurd.

And the courts wanted more competitive districts and they make PA-1 and PA-2 into even HEAVIER dem vote sinks?

This is a slap in the face

[Torie]

That map is god awful and completely ignores the court order.   19 county splits???  That's absurd.

And the courts wanted more competitive districts and they make PA-1 and PA-2 into even HEAVIER dem vote sinks?

This is a slap in the face

The Pubs should have just copied and pasted what I did below (no extra chops), and hoped that Wolff and/or the court showed mercy to them. Now they will probably end up with not only a safe Dem PA-07, but a lean Dem PA-06 on top of that (rather than a marginal tilt GOP PA-06). Silly greedy fools they are, methinks.

[Oryxslayer]

That map is god awful and completely ignores the court order.   19 county splits???  That's absurd.

And the courts wanted more competitive districts and they make PA-1 and PA-2 into even HEAVIER dem vote sinks?

This is a slap in the face

The Pubs should have just copied and pasted what I did below (no extra chops), and hoped that Wolff and/or the court showed mercy to them. Now they will probably end up with not only a safe Dem PA-07, but a lean Dem PA-06 on top of that (rather than a marginal tilt GOP PA-06). Silly greedy fools they are, methinks.

Yeah something they could have done was make a fair - albeit right leaning map. The court shouldn't have any problems with it, and Wolf would have to approve or else he comes of as the partisan. It could have been a way for pubs to gain the upper hand.

Such a map would have compacted PA-15 like on their map (and everyone else's, I think everyone agrees this is the best PA-15) PA-07 becomes a Delaware pack, PA-06 becomes a right leaning Berks county + Chester cut, the 8th maintains its republican towns from Montgomery, the 17th is the LKW/LUZ/MON grouping, and the Southwest corner is something like I did on my first map with two cds that chop into Allegheny and a D pack. This map would be 9-5-4, and pretty much all of the 4 would have slight R tilts. No a bad map for pubs. 

But no, this map is DOA. So this begs the question - whats the plan? This map as I said earlier doesn't seem all that professional, cuts could easily be reduced everywhere. It seems this maps job is to die, but why? If the plan was to deprive the court of legitimacy, this map is not the map to do that with. Perhaps we are going to see a volume trick, where the Legislature keeps sending maps to Wolf next week that are bed, but each subsequent one is marginally better. This way, Wolf looks like a partisan constantly vetoing. But this doesn't seen too likely.

[Brittain33]

But no, this map is DOA. So this begs the question - whats the plan? This map as I said earlier doesn't seem all that professional, cuts could easily be reduced everywhere. It seems this maps job is to die, but why? If the plan was to deprive the court of legitimacy, this map is not the map to do that with. Perhaps we are going to see a volume trick, where the Legislature keeps sending maps to Wolf next week that are bed, but each subsequent one is marginally better. This way, Wolf looks like a partisan constantly vetoing. But this doesn't seen too likely.

Couldn't this just be explained by too many people + running out of time = mediocre, rushed job that everyone could sort of agree on?