2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Louisiana

[Idaho Conservative]

Republicans would be dumb to draw a 2nd vra district.  If JBE won't sign a map unless it has one, then it goes to courts who likely will draw a better map anyways.  R's have nothing to lose in that case.  They should try for a clean, compact map like this: https://davesredistricting.org/join/74e52397-8e06-45d0-b6a4-9340c8618304

[Idaho Conservative]

It occurs to me that Justice Thomas is basically a sure vote to strike the current version of LA-02 or a 2021 district resembling it if he gets the opportunity, so I do think there will be separate NOLA and BR districts one way or another.  The 5th circuit likely makes a sweeping ruling that the VRA does not apply to redistricting at all, this gets appealed to SCOTUS, and then Roberts and Kavanaugh narrow it.

However, if the end result is VRA doesn't apply to redistricting at all and JBE's veto holds, LA gets a 4R/2D map, but AL/MS/SC/TN/MO would then all have free reign to draw a clean GOP sweep if they wanted to.  The total number of Dem districts in Texas and Florida could plausibly be cut in half if drawn aggressively using CVAP and state courts look the other way.  On the other hand, Maryland would easily be a Dem sweep and Virginia could draw a hard 8D/3R if they wanted too.

I also wonder if this would lead to a test case with a state legislature voting to elect its congressional delegation at large?  I think national Dems would push California, New York, and Illinois (CA and NY have commissions, but IDK could they just not give the commission anything to draw?) to try that in VRA doesn't apply to redistricting world.  The Texas and Georgia GOP could try the same, but I think they would decide it was unwise to do that after 2018.     

Only Alabama would be a sure goner, Mississippi is only a +15 Trump state and I doubt they would cut it up perfectly when you have parochial concerns.
TN is in a nice little corner and its super D so Cohen should be safe,
Lacy Clay is in a similar situation and Missouri needs atleast 1 D sink to avoid a dummymander
SC- i mean its Trump +15 and the R's just lost SC 1 so why would they want to risk a dummymander here especially when upstate won't represent low country.

Can't talk about Florida or Texas.

Yeah AL is the obvious one where the black seat could be cut up if that's allowed.  MS could get away with it.  TN and SC would be risky (due to political geography and TN will already be cracking Nashville and SC-1 needs shoring up) and MO is out of the question.  As for FL, maybe the northern fl AA seat could go.  Crack Jacksonville.  In TX, eliminating a majority minority seat wouldn't be smart, but TX gop could increase Hispanic percentages in some seats to 90% which could really help in southern texas. 

[Idaho Conservative]

It occurs to me that Justice Thomas is basically a sure vote to strike the current version of LA-02 or a 2021 district resembling it if he gets the opportunity, so I do think there will be separate NOLA and BR districts one way or another.  The 5th circuit likely makes a sweeping ruling that the VRA does not apply to redistricting at all, this gets appealed to SCOTUS, and then Roberts and Kavanaugh narrow it.

However, if the end result is VRA doesn't apply to redistricting at all and JBE's veto holds, LA gets a 4R/2D map, but AL/MS/SC/TN/MO would then all have free reign to draw a clean GOP sweep if they wanted to.  The total number of Dem districts in Texas and Florida could plausibly be cut in half if drawn aggressively using CVAP and state courts look the other way.  On the other hand, Maryland would easily be a Dem sweep and Virginia could draw a hard 8D/3R if they wanted too.

I also wonder if this would lead to a test case with a state legislature voting to elect its congressional delegation at large?  I think national Dems would push California, New York, and Illinois (CA and NY have commissions, but IDK could they just not give the commission anything to draw?) to try that in VRA doesn't apply to redistricting world.  The Texas and Georgia GOP could try the same, but I think they would decide it was unwise to do that after 2018.     

Only Alabama would be a sure goner, Mississippi is only a +15 Trump state and I doubt they would cut it up perfectly when you have parochial concerns.
TN is in a nice little corner and its super D so Cohen should be safe,
Lacy Clay is in a similar situation and Missouri needs atleast 1 D sink to avoid a dummymander
SC- i mean its Trump +15 and the R's just lost SC 1 so why would they want to risk a dummymander here especially when upstate won't represent low country.

Can't talk about Florida or Texas.

Yeah AL is the obvious one where the black seat could be cut up if that's allowed.  MS could get away with it.  TN and SC would be risky (due to political geography and TN will already be cracking Nashville and SC-1 needs shoring up) and MO is out of the question.  As for FL, maybe the northern fl AA seat could go.  Crack Jacksonville.  In TX, eliminating a majority minority seat wouldn't be smart, but TX gop could increase Hispanic percentages in some seats to 90% which could really help in southern texas. 

Would TX R's try to elect all its seats at large if it had the option?  Not as much of a slam dunk as CA/NY/IL anymore, but the odds would still favor a Republican sweep 6-8 out of 10 years, right?

That would be a huge mistake, could MASSIVELY backfire, considering how TX is trending.  It would be a good idea in: UT, NE, OK, LA, MS, AL, TN, SC, KY, IN, and MO.  For Texas, it would be smart to use a combo of smds and mmds.  Create 4 multi member districts that elect their representatives proportionally, 1 district along the mexican border (5 reresentatives) 1 district from urban San Antonio to urban Austin (3 represenatives), 1 district containing the blue parts of DFW (4 representatives) and 1 district with the blue parts of Houston (4 represenatives).  The remainder of the state is divides into 23 single member districts, all of which are Republican.  BUT the delegation wouldn't be 23-16.  Republicans would win 3-5 seats in the multi member districts meaning Texas would get a 26-13 delegation at worst or a 28-11 delegation at best. 

[Idaho Conservative]

Anyway heres my fair LA map, 1 Safe R, 1 Likely R and 4 Safe R. Baton Rouge district is Trump +7.3 and trending left but is still deep south.



Obviously crossed the lake and took in East Jefferson Parish which is quite different from West Jefferson Parish.

Fair map? That’s an illegal map.

How is it illegal?

No AA seat. Is that a 6-0 map?

Oh my bad the green seat is Safe D. 50.5% black by 2018 pop and 63% D. Purple is Lean to Likely R at Trump +7.

Would an AA candidate likely win the green one?

Do the math. 50.5% black and 63.5% D. The answer is yes.

I still think it might elect a white Democrat in a midterm.

No. African-Americans are monolitically Democratic, so even a 35-40% AA VAP district would probably be functional (AAs would make up 35-40% of the voting population but >60% of the Democrats, and could thus elect their candidate of choice).

In Louisiana, only 35% or 40% black would vote gop

[Idaho Conservative]

Anyway heres my fair LA map, 1 Safe R, 1 Likely R and 4 Safe R. Baton Rouge district is Trump +7.3 and trending left but is still deep south.



Obviously crossed the lake and took in East Jefferson Parish which is quite different from West Jefferson Parish.

Fair map? That’s an illegal map.

How is it illegal?

No AA seat. Is that a 6-0 map?

Oh my bad the green seat is Safe D. 50.5% black by 2018 pop and 63% D. Purple is Lean to Likely R at Trump +7.

Would an AA candidate likely win the green one?

Do the math. 50.5% black and 63.5% D. The answer is yes.

I still think it might elect a white Democrat in a midterm.

No. African-Americans are monolitically Democratic, so even a 35-40% AA VAP district would probably be functional (AAs would make up 35-40% of the voting population but >60% of the Democrats, and could thus elect their candidate of choice).

In Louisiana, only 35% or 40% black would vote gop

well New Orleans + Jefferson is like 40% black and almost exactly 1 district and still about Safe D.

Better to go 50% to avoid litigation