North Carolina 2020 Redistricting

[Sol]

This has been a disaster this cycle for the GOP

On the Margin

Midterms have never been determined by redistricting

It hasn't determined which party had a majority, but there is a substantial difference between an R+15-20 majority and an R+30 majority.

This could make it far easier for Democrats to take back the House in 2024.

NC gop will certainly do a mid decade redraw for 2023 unless the court doesn't flip.

I forget if it’s the legislature or Congress, but I think one of those can only be drawn once per decade

Legislature; Congress can and probably will be redrawn post-2022. Legislature might be redrawn too tbh by a Republican controlled court post 2022, but that's a bit vaguer.

Good news, though I'm not a fan of using proportionality standards, which in combination with the county cluster rules will probably result in crummy districts.

[Sol]

RIP to one of Hudson/Bishop

To be fair, there are only seven Republican incumbents running for reelection- it's quite possible to make a 7-7 map shoring up all of them.

Hudson and Bishop both live in the areas that would likely be included in a competitive Charlotte suburban seat though--Hudson lives in Concord and Bishop in South Charlotte.

[Sol]

Oregons map is pretty close to NC. Both were clean but still quite brutal gerrymanders with merely 1 or 2 extra county splits.

Nope, they weren't even comparable.

The gerrymander in OR is tame, if there is one at all. 4-2 in OR is blantantly beneficial to the GOP and would require actively trying to carve a second red seat. Maybe 4-1-1 is fairer than 5-1, but honestly, neither of them are that bad.

NC, on the other hand...If you ask me the maps used in the 2020 elections (8-5) were about fair. Instead, the NCGOP - whose congressional maps have now been struck down thrice by various courts over the past decade - decided to kill the possible fair combinations (8-5-1 or even 8-6) and went with a 10-3-1. The old maps that were twice struck down were 10-3. So this decision is based and completely justified. The NCGOP can keep getting their maps overturned unless and until they get into their heads that blatant partisan gerrymanders aren't flying anymore (and yes, I know blue states like IL, NY and MD have even worse gerrymanders, but NC has a much longer and more inflammatory recent history of gerrymandering).

How is 4-2 blatantly beneficial? Draw a map in Oregon that keeps all of Eastern Oregon whole. It's most likely going to be 2 Safe D 1 Likely D in the Portland suburbs and 1 tossup and finally a Lean D or Lean R in the south. Also of course a Safe R eastern seat.

Lfromnj is correct here. Give girlboss Kotek credit for this beautiful gerrymander, dammit!

Agree with all this, plus I'd also add that the 2020 NC map, while not a horrible gerrymander, has the configuration of 8 and 9 which is pretty underhanded. Plus some of the lines between the other GOP districts are very ugly for sort of unecessary reasons.

[Sol]

Oregons map is pretty close to NC. Both were clean but still quite brutal gerrymanders with merely 1 or 2 extra county splits.

Nope, they weren't even comparable.

The gerrymander in OR is tame, if there is one at all. 4-2 in OR is blantantly beneficial to the GOP and would require actively trying to carve a second red seat. Maybe 4-1-1 is fairer than 5-1, but honestly, neither of them are that bad.

NC, on the other hand...If you ask me the maps used in the 2020 elections (8-5) were about fair. Instead, the NCGOP - whose congressional maps have now been struck down thrice by various courts over the past decade - decided to kill the possible fair combinations (8-5-1 or even 8-6) and went with a 10-3-1. The old maps that were twice struck down were 10-3. So this decision is based and completely justified. The NCGOP can keep getting their maps overturned unless and until they get into their heads that blatant partisan gerrymanders aren't flying anymore (and yes, I know blue states like IL, NY and MD have even worse gerrymanders, but NC has a much longer and more inflammatory recent history of gerrymandering).

How is 4-2 blatantly beneficial? Draw a map in Oregon that keeps all of Eastern Oregon whole. It's most likely going to be 2 Safe D 1 Likely D in the Portland suburbs and 1 tossup and finally a Lean D or Lean R in the south. Also of course a Safe R eastern seat.

You know that Eastern Oregon alone doesn't even have enough people for 1 full congressional district, right?

Here's my very fair map of OR (with East OR all in one seat), where I didn't even look at partisanship and focused on contiguity and compactness: https://districtr.org/plan/110808 .....Okay, never mind, I thought I could view the districts' partisanship when I was done but apparently no, I can't.

I can't say this with absolute certainty since there isn't partisan data, but I suspect that your yellow and sea-green districts would be competitive to Republican-leaning.

(This is why people prefer DRA, btw).

It looks more like 10 GOP seats with a few that are wavering but which are still reddish?

I meant District 8 and District 9, fyi.

[Sol]

tfw the map you drew refutes your own point

[Sol]

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article258300538.html
Torie should love this case.

Really doubt that the court will rule in favor of this--it's just a legal strategy by the NAACP to delay voter ID for as long as possible.

[Sol]

Looks like a map to maximize competitive districts, and uncrack Guilford/Forsyth.

If Republicans manage to win that NC-8 this year, it'll be a two year rental and nothing more.

Except they very likely to redraw post 2022 anyways. I think their goal here is to reduce Ds to 4.5 seats in 2022 (depending upon NC-01), and then redraw to reduce them to 4.

The Guilford/Forsyth district actually keeps the black percentage relatively low, making it easier for any redraw in 2023 just incase.

Yeah this kind of smells like a "bongcloud opening"--either they're doing troll maps to make their lazer maps look good, or this is designed to be struck down by a Republican court.

[Sol]

Here is the proposed new House map.

It really doesn't look like they changed a whole lot, outside of some of the larger metros.

They gave Democrats the Asheville gerrymander back. There isn't a lot you can change when the initial map isn't even a super gerrymander anyway.

Apparently part of the reason why the Asheville split has been fought for so hard is that Buncombe County Commissioners are elected from the same districts as the representatives, which could mean that in an even year Buncombe County would be controlled by Republicans if Asheville was in one district.

[Sol]

more bong smoke

[Sol]

The same story happens here, Buncombe Democrats get 3 Safe seats compared to the 2 Safe or 1 Safe with 2 tossups they should have but Gastonia/Cabarrus Democrats are kept punished.(Yes both Buncombe and Cabarrus have retirements )

I think it's really an issue of institutional strength--places like Buncombe or Washtenaw punch above their weight in Democratic party politics, whereas the Dems in Cabarrus are very weak (and party strength there is new) and in Gaston there's very little Democratic strength at all despite the floor existing due to a non-negligible Black community in Gastonia. So then of course the party is going to be more bothered by a Republican seat in Buncombe rather than one in Cabarrus.

[Sol]

God the Sebate proposed House map is just weird. They seem to really want Chapel Hill in an R district

They're just trolling to be honest--trying to draw compliant maps that would never fly with Democrats due to internal political considerations so then they can spin it as "Democrats rejected perfectly good proportional maps and went to the courts"

[Sol]

what exactly is a tech triad

[Sol]

They're afraid of Cabarrus and Union trending to the Dems so they put the rest of Mecklenburg westward.

No, if that was the motive they would have cracked Mecklenburg differently. This is a matter of giving Tim Moore the district he was fantasizing about, and forcing Cawthorn back to the west.

[Sol]

Is it really too much to ask for this state to be normal in redistricting?

I'm pretty sure they're trolling at this point. Trends look atrocious for the GOP in 13 and 14 and pretty bad in 6 and even 8, so they wouldn't want this map beyond 2022. Probably just aiming for a court drawn map which they can easily redraw in 2022. I do wonder why they didn't do this for the state legislature; maybe they thought restricting the court legislative maps to 2 years might have been unconstitutional.

Is it clear that if the legislature passes a map it does not like under court pressure, it lasts for 10 years, and cannot be changed, but if the court draws the map it only lasts until the legislature can get passed a new map that a court with different justices will uphold?

I think that's the Republican interpretation.

In all likelihood, these maps are only going to last for this year anyway one way or another (a Republican controlled state supreme court is guaranteed to strike anything down), so it's better to have good maps than ugly NCGA bong smoke maps.

[Sol]

The 9-5 CST22-3 map passed committee on a voice vote and will go to the full floor when the senate reconvenes at 12:30.

I personally think this map is ok. I understand people are making an uproar of Guilford getting spilt. But it could be a lot worse.

I don't really understand why so many people are going all in about how Guilford shouldn't be split--if you support a triad district not splitting Guilford means you have to split Winston-Salem, which is objectively way worse than Guilford.

Of course, this specific split is just bong smoke bs and a true disgrace, but Guilford County being split shouldn't be rejected out of hand.

[Sol]

Is it really too much to ask for this state to be normal in redistricting?

I'm pretty sure they're trolling at this point. Trends look atrocious for the GOP in 13 and 14 and pretty bad in 6 and even 8, so they wouldn't want this map beyond 2022. Probably just aiming for a court drawn map which they can easily redraw in 2022. I do wonder why they didn't do this for the state legislature; maybe they thought restricting the court legislative maps to 2 years might have been unconstitutional.

Is it clear that if the legislature passes a map it does not like under court pressure, it lasts for 10 years, and cannot be changed, but if the court draws the map it only lasts until the legislature can get passed a new map that a court with different justices will uphold?

I think that's the Republican interpretation.

In all likelihood, these maps are only going to last for this year anyway one way or another (a Republican controlled state supreme court is guaranteed to strike anything down), so it's better to have good maps than ugly NCGA bong smoke maps.

I don't think under the doctrine of res judicata, a court can reverse its opinion on the same case. So if the Pubs take over the court, the legislature would need to pass a new map, and then the court could uphold that map and reverse its prior decision that equal rights to happiness does not mean that maps must be proportional from a partisan standpoint.

That's fair enough but it doesn't really change the calculus.

So the two scenarios, as I see it for congressional redistricting:
--The court upholds the new maps. Republicans then draw new congressional maps after the 2022 elections, as they are free to do so, and then the maps are upheld in the Republican supreme court.
--The court draws the maps, which are allowed to only last a cycle. Republicans then draw new congressional maps after the 2022 elections, as they are free to do so, and then the maps are upheld in the Republican supreme court.

Of course, there's some legal question about the NCGA's ability to do mid-decade redistricting, but I assume a Republican court won't agree with this interpetation.

[Sol]

Of course, there's some legal question about the NCGA's ability to do mid-decade redistricting, but I assume a Republican court won't agree with this interpetation.

There's an explicit prohibition on mid-decade legislative redistricting, no? So those maps are likely final at least. This is probably why there's such a disparity between the legislative and congressional maps in terms of goofiness.

Well, the legislative maps also have the cluster rule constraining behavior, but yeah.

[Sol]

Alma Adams may not like that configuration as it appears to split the most heavily Black parts of Mecklenburg.

I can tell you this will not be an issue for her.

[Sol]

Alma Adams may not like that configuration as it appears to split the most heavily Black parts of Mecklenburg.

I can tell you this will not be an issue for her.

To elaborate--Adams is a pretty reasonable, generic, progressive Democrat who has been on the record in favor of "unpacking" her district.  

Charlotte doesn't really have the same racially polarized political establishments that you see in other cities--Adams has plenty of appeal among white Democratic voters, and there aren't really enough of them in any plausible version of her district to threaten her anyway. That's not to say that there aren't racial tensions in Charlotte local politics but it's not Philly or Chicago.

Her primary weakness has been the fact that she's from Greensboro, which people seem to have forgotten.

[Sol]

This map is very poorly drawn in a way that doesn't really effect results--for example, Cary, Apex, and Raleigh are sliced down the middle when that cut could be easily shifted to one.

It kind of looks like somebody's first shot ever at making a map, tbh.

[Sol]

That map is almost as awesome as Illinois' and New York's.

Eh Illinois and New York were gerrymanders to maximize Democratic members, whereas this map is a compact fair map. Which you prefer depends on whether you value a pro-Democrat map or a fair map.

A properly compact fair map of NC is probably a bit more like 7-5-2 or something though--slightly better for Republicans.

[Sol]

That map is almost as awesome as Illinois' and New York's.

Eh Illinois and New York were gerrymanders to maximize Democratic members, whereas this map is a compact fair map. Which you prefer depends on whether you value a pro-Democrat map or a fair map.

A properly compact fair map of NC is probably a bit more like 7-5-2 or something though--slightly better for Republicans.

6-3-5. with 1 more likely seat on each side regarding the Western seat and the Black Belt seat.

Ehh, I usually lump likelies in with the safe ones--hard to imagine either one flipping bar special circumstances.

5 safe D seems pretty straightforward then, no? NE, Raleigh, Durham, Triad, Charlotte.

Edit: Unless you're putting Democratic seats at the end, lol.

[Sol]

NC tends to be quite an awkward state to redistrict, especially just with the sizes of various COIs and Cities, they always seem just slightly too large or too small for a district. Here I tried to give a go at drawing the "ideal" NC map that really does it's best to follows COIs in a neat way.



https://davesredistricting.org/join/4fa3a1cb-6788-4c70-ab08-8082d7b3bc67

This is 2020 Pres numbers, though 9 goes to Ds in the 2016-2020 composite and 13 goes R.

Overall while it may be a bit rough around the edges, I feel like this map does a really good job at balancing several considerations of a good map, including COIs, compactness, county splitting, partisan fairness, and competitive districts.

In 2030, I'll be really curious to see who controls redistricting as well as whether NC gains an additional district or not. Regardless, Charlotte and Raliegh districts will likely be overpopulated and hence need to shrink making things a bit easier perhaps since Mecklenburg and Wake Counties would be closer to supporting 2 whole districts within them.

It's always possible to nitpick NC maps a lot, simply because, as you articulated, NC population distribution is pretty awkward and you always have to screw communities over.

That said, I don't think there's good justification for putting anything in Cabarrus County in the 12th district.

You can also realign 1, 3, and 7 to make Discovolante's suggestion easier--basically put Johnston in 7, then some more of Onslow in 3, and then you can easily trade between 1 and 3 to make 1 more Black.

FWIW, as someone from Watauga County, it's really not necessary to put it in with Asheville. Boone and Asheville are both in the same region of the state, and are pretty culturally similar, but doing a district linking Asheville and Boone isn't necessary imo when this is possible and is better CoI:



(Not that your district is bad CoI, but Boone is fine in a seat with Hickory or Winston)

[Sol]

I gotta say, some of these maps have kind of an odd approach to Charlotte. If you're trying to draw for community of interest, imo you really should draw a district that's very decisively central Charlotte and then two clearly suburban districts. The obvious place to remove people from Mecklenburg is the Northern portion (which is more similar to the wealthy communities in southern Iredell and Eastern Lincoln/Catawba), Mint Hill/Matthews, and South Charlotte, in that order.  Unlike the eastern part of the state, it's possible to draw greater Charlotte in a pretty good way because population lays out well for it.

Putting places like Concord in with downtown Charlotte, or drawing an odd suburban donut, doesn't make sense. Just because the current map does it doesn't mean it's ok!

IMO this is my preferred configuration of metro Charlotte--not in the specific lines, but the general plan of one central district (12), one eastern suburban district with southern Meck burbs (9) and one western district with Gastonia and the rich communities along Lake Norman (10). But if you're squeamish about splitting Mecklenburg three times you can do something decent which is similarly structured.

[Sol]

Sol, what are your thoughts on this thing I've just made?
https://davesredistricting.org/join/c5b872ab-3e66-46e6-91dc-4628d8580f66

Not bad at all! The only major gripe I have is the slice of Winston--I'd cut into Guilford County instead of slicing W-S down the middle.