2020 Oregon Redistricting

[lfromnj]

According to my calculations (based on 2016 Pres), the new GOP proposed map would be a 3.39D-2.61R map on average, with a competitiveness score of 38.14 (would be considered one of the highest in the nation), with a bias of R + 16.03 (one of the most offensive in the nation). For reference states like GA and SC have bias scores of about R + 16 currently.

The issue with that measure is this
 

Now you can say that Eastern OR is an R vote sink but its more a vote sink comparable to Washington County. After that the rest of Oregon is relatively evenly distributed at Trump +1.

[ProgressiveModerate]

According to my calculations (based on 2016 Pres), the new GOP proposed map would be a 3.39D-2.61R map on average, with a competitiveness score of 38.14 (would be considered one of the highest in the nation), with a bias of R + 16.03 (one of the most offensive in the nation). For reference states like GA and SC have bias scores of about R + 16 currently.

The issue with that measure is this
 

Now you can say that Eastern OR is an R vote sink but its more a vote sink comparable to Washington County. After that the rest of Oregon is relatively evenly distributed at Trump +1.

Ye this is very much a Wisconsin-esq situation where Dems are naturally packed. The intentended bias is prolly less, but the objective partisan bias is quite a lot.

[lfromnj]

According to my calculations (based on 2016 Pres), the new GOP proposed map would be a 3.39D-2.61R map on average, with a competitiveness score of 38.14 (would be considered one of the highest in the nation), with a bias of R + 16.03 (one of the most offensive in the nation). For reference states like GA and SC have bias scores of about R + 16 currently.

The issue with that measure is this
 

Now you can say that Eastern OR is an R vote sink but its more a vote sink comparable to Washington County. After that the rest of Oregon is relatively evenly distributed at Trump +1.

Ye this is very much a Wisconsin-esq situation where Dems are naturally packed. The intentended bias is prolly less, but the objective partisan bias is quite a lot.

Yeah and Washington County vs Eastern Oregon is basically about a few thousand net votes D. Also just to note the rest of Multnomah only is net 3k Hillary.

[Mr.Phips]

2 Safe R, 3 Safe D, one Likely D (Clinton +8):

I think Dems should be fine with this.

I feel like Democrats don’t understand the urgency of maximizing their advantage during this process. These maps last 10 years and Republicans in Texas, Florida, Ohio, etc, are going to be ruthless. One seat can make a difference in the balance of power.

5-1 or bust in Oregon. 14-3 in Illinois.

5-1 won’t happen unless Dems refuse to compromise, which would result in a walkout.  

What would happen if the ORGOP does quorum bust? Ballotpedia seems to think it falls to the Secretary of State and the ORSC; obviously the SoS is a Democrat, and all the justices on the court were appointed by Democratic governors. Do Democrats have any incentive to compromise if the ORGOP is proposing stuff like Plan B and they likely have a favorable court anyway?

Basically same process as TX, Legislative goes to a statewide official while congressional goes to courts. Unlike the Texas Democrats the Oregon GOP actually knows that a quorum bust isn't a vacation time. Not sure how far said court goes. For example people can mention the PA court but they also didn't do stuff like split Bucks county. If you are restricted to a PA court style map you can keep Defazio about mostly the same at Clinton +0. and shore up Schrader to a Safe D district while leaving a new middle district at Trump +1 to 3. The best strategy for OR democrats is to offer a legislative compromise map that keeps the GOP at above 1/3 in exchange for a congressional gerrymander. Other than that they could push for a mid decade redistricting after accepting said court map/compromise map.

I don’t know if the Oregon constitution allows mid decade redistricting.  Few states do.

[BoiseBoy]

PlanScore ratings for the three state house map proposals:

A (37-23 D)



B (30-30 D)



C (37-23 D)

[lfromnj]

2 Safe R, 3 Safe D, one Likely D (Clinton +8):

I think Dems should be fine with this.

I feel like Democrats don’t understand the urgency of maximizing their advantage during this process. These maps last 10 years and Republicans in Texas, Florida, Ohio, etc, are going to be ruthless. One seat can make a difference in the balance of power.

5-1 or bust in Oregon. 14-3 in Illinois.

5-1 won’t happen unless Dems refuse to compromise, which would result in a walkout.  

What would happen if the ORGOP does quorum bust? Ballotpedia seems to think it falls to the Secretary of State and the ORSC; obviously the SoS is a Democrat, and all the justices on the court were appointed by Democratic governors. Do Democrats have any incentive to compromise if the ORGOP is proposing stuff like Plan B and they likely have a favorable court anyway?

Basically same process as TX, Legislative goes to a statewide official while congressional goes to courts. Unlike the Texas Democrats the Oregon GOP actually knows that a quorum bust isn't a vacation time. Not sure how far said court goes. For example people can mention the PA court but they also didn't do stuff like split Bucks county. If you are restricted to a PA court style map you can keep Defazio about mostly the same at Clinton +0. and shore up Schrader to a Safe D district while leaving a new middle district at Trump +1 to 3. The best strategy for OR democrats is to offer a legislative compromise map that keeps the GOP at above 1/3 in exchange for a congressional gerrymander. Other than that they could push for a mid decade redistricting after accepting said court map/compromise map.

I don’t know if the Oregon constitution allows mid decade redistricting.  Few states do.

I mean if it isn't forbidden I don't see why its illegal? Then again mid decade gerrymandering is controversial and only TX has done it so far(Georgia did not really gerrymander in 2005 as it mostly just cleaned up the Roy Barnes gerrymander)

[ProgressiveModerate]

PlanScore ratings for the three state house map proposals:

A (37-23 D)



B (30-30 D)



C (37-23 D)

30-30 in a Safe D state doesn’t seem fair in any way. 37-23 (I assume on 2016 numbers) is actually about a fair map from a partisan standpoint; maybe a seat or 2 D biased though.

[lfromnj]

Note Plan Scores ratings are really bad. IIRC their congressional showed the suburban district as red while the other 2 were blue.

[Nyvin]

The House Plan B tactics are pretty simple - Vote sink all the liberal cities and spread everything else out to avoid any lean D seats.   They have a Eugene seat that voted 78% Clinton next to a Trump+4 district.

[lfromnj]

The House Plan B tactics are pretty simple - Vote sink all the liberal cities and spread everything else out to avoid any lean D seats.   They have a Eugene seat that voted 78% Clinton next to a Trump+4 district.

Eugene has some weird population but lets look at a relatively similar county across the nation where population fits better. Asheville. Buncombe county can fit into 3 districts with +3% population variance.
 

How should Buncombe be split then?. This seems fairly natural. Draw 1 district with most of Asheville besides 1 or 2 weirder appendages and then one that encompasses the more exurban areas of the county that still have a moderate influence from Asheville itself. Or should Asheville just be split in 3 for 3 Safe Districts as it is right now as part of incumbency protection deals.  Lane County doesn't fit as well as Asheville but its an interesting notion nonetheless. Eugene should probably have 4 D seats along with Springfield though. I think I see only 3 there? This results Trump +12 and Trump +0.5 map in 2016 and Trump +5/Biden +8 in 2020. The blue district here is Clinton +60 as welp.

[Nyvin]

The House Plan B tactics are pretty simple - Vote sink all the liberal cities and spread everything else out to avoid any lean D seats.   They have a Eugene seat that voted 78% Clinton next to a Trump+4 district.

Eugene has some weird population but lets look at a relatively similar county across the nation where population fits better. Asheville. Buncombe county can fit into 3 districts with +3% population variance.
 

How should Buncombe be split then?. This seems fairly natural. Draw 1 district with most of Asheville besides 1 or 2 weirder appendages and then one that encompasses the more exurban areas of the county that still have a moderate influence from Asheville itself. Or should Asheville just be split in 3 for 3 Safe Districts as it is right now.  Lane County doesn't fit as well as Asheville but its an interesting notion nonetheless. Eugene should probably have 4 D seats along with Springfield though. I think I see only 3 there? This results Trump +12 and Trump +0.5 map in 2016 and Trump +5/Biden +8 in 2020. The blue district here is Clinton +60 as welp.

I mean, try to tell me that isn't deliberate -

[/url]

They didn't just make any old Eugene-centered district, they went out of their way to capture all the MOST democratic precincts they could find in that district.   

Oh geez, just noticed they split Hood River to make two Trump districts too, lol,  man they didn't let anything by in this map.

[lfromnj]

The House Plan B tactics are pretty simple - Vote sink all the liberal cities and spread everything else out to avoid any lean D seats.   They have a Eugene seat that voted 78% Clinton next to a Trump+4 district.

Eugene has some weird population but lets look at a relatively similar county across the nation where population fits better. Asheville. Buncombe county can fit into 3 districts with +3% population variance.
 

How should Buncombe be split then?. This seems fairly natural. Draw 1 district with most of Asheville besides 1 or 2 weirder appendages and then one that encompasses the more exurban areas of the county that still have a moderate influence from Asheville itself. Or should Asheville just be split in 3 for 3 Safe Districts as it is right now.  Lane County doesn't fit as well as Asheville but its an interesting notion nonetheless. Eugene should probably have 4 D seats along with Springfield though. I think I see only 3 there? This results Trump +12 and Trump +0.5 map in 2016 and Trump +5/Biden +8 in 2020. The blue district here is Clinton +60 as welp.

I mean, try to tell me that isn't deliberate -

[/url]

They didn't just make any old Eugene-centered district, they went out of their way to capture all the MOST democratic precincts they could find in that district.  

Oh geez, just noticed they split Hood River to make two Trump districts too, lol,  man they didn't let anything by in this map.

Honestly nothings wrong with the super sink.
3 should however should probably be divided with those 2 r districts that crack those parts of Eugene so there can be 4 dem districts

[Nyvin]

I mean, try to tell me that isn't deliberate -

[/url]

They didn't just make any old Eugene-centered district, they went out of their way to capture all the MOST democratic precincts they could find in that district.  

Oh geez, just noticed they split Hood River to make two Trump districts too, lol,  man they didn't let anything by in this map.

Honestly nothings wrong with the super sink.
3 should however probably be divided with those 2 r districts that crack those parts of Eugene so there can be 4 dem districts

There aren't even any road connections between the eastern and western parts of 3, there aren't any bridges in that part of the river.   The district in the southeast wraps around to the northern part of the city too.   

2 is Clinton+68, 3 is Clinton+31, the district to the east is Trump+4 and the district to the west is Trump+5.   Cracking and Packing at it's finest.

[lfromnj]

I mean, try to tell me that isn't deliberate -

[/url]

They didn't just make any old Eugene-centered district, they went out of their way to capture all the MOST democratic precincts they could find in that district.  

Oh geez, just noticed they split Hood River to make two Trump districts too, lol,  man they didn't let anything by in this map.

Honestly nothings wrong with the super sink.
3 should however probably be divided with those 2 r districts that crack those parts of Eugene so there can be 4 dem districts

There aren't even any road connections between the eastern and western parts of 3, there aren't any bridges in that part of the river.   The district in the southeast wraps around to the northern part of the city too.   

2 is Clinton+68, 3 is Clinton+31, the district to the east is Trump+4 and the district to the west is Trump+5.   Cracking and Packing at it's finest.

I literally said 3 was bad in how it packs unnaturally. However 2 is absolutely fine. Its where all the students related to OSu and all that stuff live.

[CityofSinners]

The most rational play for both parties would be to trade a fair state house+senate map against a dem congressional gerrymander.
Can't hurt if a brutal gerrymander for the state legislature gets leaked to show what the dem SOS can do.

Also dems should really put up a ballot measure in 2024 that abolishes the  quorum busting. This is wrong when TX dems did it and is wrong now.

[I’m not Stu]

I drew a nasty 3R-3D GOP gerrymander of Oregon. Bonamici and Blumenauer get sinks in the Portland area. Bentz gets a few precincts in Portland to make Blumenauer's district even bluer after losing Bend and Ashland. DeFazio gets a sink of Salem, Eugene, Corvallis, and Bend. Schrader's district is converted to safe R. The new rural southwestern district is also safe R.



Partisanship by 2018 gubernatorial election.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I drew a nasty 3R-3D GOP gerrymander of Oregon. Bonamici and Blumenauer get sinks in the Portland area. Bentz gets a few precincts in Portland to make Blumenauer's district even bluer after losing Bend and Ashland. DeFazio gets a sink of Salem, Eugene, Corvallis, and Bend. Schrader's district is converted to safe R. The new rural southwestern district is also safe R.



Partisanship by 2018 gubernatorial election.

That is a quite effective 3R-3D map.

[bagelman]

snip

share link?

[I’m not Stu]

snip

share link?

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::9305cb25-043e-4072-afeb-f57f73cd1b3e

[bagelman]

snip

share link?

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::9305cb25-043e-4072-afeb-f57f73cd1b3e

That share link doesn't work. You have to click on share map and copy that link.

[I’m not Stu]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/bc8d9e92-ebf1-4ddd-be57-94180235f7ac

[Nyvin]

Been watching the public testimony during the live redistricting meeting today.   A good majority are speaking in favor of Congressional Map B, mostly that it keeps counties intact and doesn't include districts with Portland.

There hasn't been much discussion on the legislative maps, but the few comments out there seem to be split in number between supporting C and B.

I kinda think the OR Dems were a bit too aggressive with Congressional map A.

[NOVA Green]

Been watching the public testimony during the live redistricting meeting today.   A good majority are speaking in favor of Congressional Map B, mostly that it keeps counties intact and doesn't include districts with Portland.

There hasn't been much discussion on the legislative maps, but the few comments out there seem to be split in number between supporting C and B.

I kinda think the OR Dems were a bit too aggressive with Congressional map A.

Where do people go to comment, since I strongly suspect the PUB kooks are the ones raising the most objections, something which will likely slip under the radar of most OR DEMs despite being a +15% DEM State at the Federal Level.

[Nyvin]

Been watching the public testimony during the live redistricting meeting today.   A good majority are speaking in favor of Congressional Map B, mostly that it keeps counties intact and doesn't include districts with Portland.

There hasn't been much discussion on the legislative maps, but the few comments out there seem to be split in number between supporting C and B.

I kinda think the OR Dems were a bit too aggressive with Congressional map A.

Where do people go to comment, since I strongly suspect the PUB kooks are the ones raising the most objections, something which will likely slip under the radar of most OR DEMs despite being a +15% DEM State at the Federal Level.

This is the website -

https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/redistricting

I don't see anything about public comments but you can submit your own maps.

Oregon residents can sign up to give testimony at the public hearings too.

[David Hume]

2 Safe R, 3 Safe D, one Likely D (Clinton +8):

I think Dems should be fine with this.

I feel like Democrats don’t understand the urgency of maximizing their advantage during this process. These maps last 10 years and Republicans in Texas, Florida, Ohio, etc, are going to be ruthless. One seat can make a difference in the balance of power.

5-1 or bust in Oregon. 14-3 in Illinois.

5-1 won’t happen unless Dems refuse to compromise, which would result in a walkout.  

What would happen if the ORGOP does quorum bust? Ballotpedia seems to think it falls to the Secretary of State and the ORSC; obviously the SoS is a Democrat, and all the justices on the court were appointed by Democratic governors. Do Democrats have any incentive to compromise if the ORGOP is proposing stuff like Plan B and they likely have a favorable court anyway?

Basically same process as TX, Legislative goes to a statewide official while congressional goes to courts. Unlike the Texas Democrats the Oregon GOP actually knows that a quorum bust isn't a vacation time. Not sure how far said court goes. For example people can mention the PA court but they also didn't do stuff like split Bucks county. If you are restricted to a PA court style map you can keep Defazio about mostly the same at Clinton +0. and shore up Schrader to a Safe D district while leaving a new middle district at Trump +1 to 3. The best strategy for OR democrats is to offer a legislative compromise map that keeps the GOP at above 1/3 in exchange for a congressional gerrymander. Other than that they could push for a mid decade redistricting after accepting said court map/compromise map.

I don’t know if the Oregon constitution allows mid decade redistricting.  Few states do.

Which state constitution explicitly forbid mi decade redistricting?