2020 New York Redistricting

[Torie]

A court holding that the "unduly favors" language in the NYS Constitution is to be applied on a national basis would be well, novel. The Dem Florida Supreme Court I believe did tank the Pubmander there applying those words.

In the Florida thread, I thought those words would preclude the Tampa CD going to St. Pete. and chopping it to grab the black hoods.

[Torie]

A court holding that the "unduly favors" language in the NYS Constitution is to be applied on a national basis would be well, novel. The Dem Florida Supreme Court I believe did tank the Pubmander there applying those words.

In the Florida thread, I thought those words would preclude the Tampa CD going to St. Pete. and chopping it to grab the black hoods.

I thought this was the key language in the Amendment that led to revisions: “where feasible must make use of existing city, county and geographical boundaries”

Are you talking about Florida or NY, and the "key" in what context?

The Florida decision can be accessed at the link below. It is the League of Women Voters case issued in July of 2014. It focuses on the intent to draw districts favoring one party metric. The chopping was a sideshow to trash the Brown CD, FL-05. I am sure the Pubs will be extensively referring to this decision, when they sue in NYS. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.  If the NYS judges are going to be hacks, make them sweat and embarrass themselves, and be reviled by their peers.


https://www.floridasupremecourt.org/search?query=redistricting&searchtype=opinions

[Torie]

That's pretty vague language honestly, as "feasible" and "make use of" are highly subjective terms. A gerrymandering-friendly court seems like it can easily make a mockery of them.

Really, the rule should be laid out clearly:
1. Any county and any municipality (in states where municipal boundaries make sense) must have as many districts fully contained within it as the lower integer of its population divided by the population of the average district.
2. The total number of counties and municipalities with a population smaller than the average district to be split between multiple districts must not exceed the total number of districts in the state minus one.

These are rules with actual teeth that make intuitive sense and are effective at ensuring respect of existing boundaries.

That has teeth, but may end up with a hideously erose map, and such strictures do not stop gerrymandering.


Muon2 has concocted the best algorithm that I have seen. You have a series of metrics: 1) minimizing chops, 2) minimizing population inequality, 3) minimizing erosity (however defined, he uses highway cuts between county seats), and 4) partisan proportionality or fairness, with maybe, as  between maps that are close to "fair," however defined, the one which has the most swing districts, however swing is defined, preferred, and then as long as a map is the best beating out all of the other maps as to one of the metrics, it is legal to adopt under a pareto optimality regime. That takes egregious gerrymanders off the table using objective criteria that have no subjective factor at all.

Another way to put it, is that a black box generates the maps, and then the legislature picks one from the 4 or 5 maps the black box generates that are legal. Notice that when using this algorithm, maps with a higher population inequality must have offset that by such inequality creating fewer chops, reducing erosity, or improving fairness however defined. Among maps with exactly equal population, ones that are the very best on another metric must be chosen, so the max a gerrymander can do is one that has the fewest chops, the least erosity, or is the most fair. I suspect in NYS, that means the Dems would have to minimize chops. Muon2 tries in large jurisdictions, where you have more than 5% of the size of a CD, to then use sub-jurisdictions, say within NYC boroughs, community planning districts.

The only subjectivity left would be defining what is legal under the VRA, where most of the ambiguity revolves around what is compact enough to trigger Gingles. And, as you know, federal law has constraints on the degree of population inequality.

[Torie]

It looks like NYS is headed for an interesting lawsuit. I assume the Pubs are busy drafting it up for prompt filing, and a stay of the primary date if need be ala NC.

[Torie]

I would be surprised if the Dems do something extreme assuming that the high court in NYS will be far more hackish than the Ohio high court when it comes to interpreting what the words "unduly" mean. I assume that the Dems are watching what happens in FL and OH, which have the some "unduly" stricture. They certainly should be.

[Torie]

I would be surprised if the Dems do something extreme assuming that the high court in NYS will be far more hackish than the Ohio high court when it comes to interpreting what the words "unduly" mean. I assume that the Dems are watching what happens in FL and OH, which have the some "unduly" stricture. They certainly should be.

Is there any precedent for a Dem court striking down its party's gerrymander? There is certainly a different attitude from Red and Blue avs on the forum about gerrymandering. In my experience, Democrats often justify gerrymandering as a moral imperative to counter Republican gerrymandering and ensure that extremist Republican policies are not instituted. Republican justification is more "because we can". This makes me think that a Dem court is much more likely to uphold a gerrymander if a similar situation arises to Ohio.

The "not unduly favor" a particular party requirement is in the Constitution of both states, and it cannot just be blown off on the premise that screwing a party out of seats through twisting the law into a pretzel is justified because that party is demonic. In my opinion, if lines fail to hew to neutral redistricting principles and under any reasonable evaluation deprives a party of its fair share of seats in the state, you instantly have a real problem under the "unduly favor" standard. I look forward if a high court goes there, to parse just what recipe it used to make the pretzel. In the meantime, I suspect the Dems are really sweating this one out, as to how fat they can go, assuming they otherwise have the two thirds vote, which itself is an not obvious.

If anything remotely close to what is being hypothesized here is done by the Dems because they secure their two thirds vote, there will be the mother of all lawsuits, particularly if under the same language the OH high court tanks the Pub map.

[Torie]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/543265da-88d8-4369-8c80-28c131885afa
Thoughts on this map?

-I prefer to maintain a north-south split of Long Island, which necessitates splitting Brookhaven (though that's actually an asset here because it dilutes the GOP raw votes coming out of there).
-It's an asset in a Dem gerry, but for COI reasons I would keep the whitest parts of Hempstead with the rest of Nassau separate from the most minority-heavy parts which go with the Rockaways, JFK, etc.
-Ulster and Orange can go together whole, with a parallel seat stretching up the Hudson from Dutchess.
-I don't see the utility of the three-way split of Oneida. None of the Dem votes there are worth drawing tendrils outwards for.
-For COI purposes, I'd rather make up Monroe's deficit with a chunk of Wayne or Ontario than Genesee.

Apologies, I was trying to draw a clean-looking Dem gerrymander and forgot to say so.

Your map is very skillfully done, particularly the way it screws the Pubs out of a Brooklyn seat under the guise of uniting the Orthodox Jews of Borough Park with those of Williamsburg. You also handled NY-17 and 18 very well, given that the issue of finding a seat for the way too far left for the area Mondaire Jones to thrive and prosper is basically unsolvable.  But what are your talking points justifying all those chops and erosity upstate to prop up Delgado (who by the way is campaigning non stop these days and has not uttered a progressive thought in months), and ax Katko? I think you have an issue there. See the map below. What is the rationale for not drawing that map versus the one you drew other than for partisan reasons?  The whole Dem dream of giving Katko Thompkins County just lacks any talking points that are worth a damn imo. Ditto giving it to Delgado. The best one can do is give Katko, Utica (yes, Katko, not Delgado, but nice try though )

https://davesredistricting.org/join/36d04a1b-2371-4210-a7b5-7e7d9e0dd0ac

[Torie]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/543265da-88d8-4369-8c80-28c131885afa
Thoughts on this map?

-I prefer to maintain a north-south split of Long Island, which necessitates splitting Brookhaven (though that's actually an asset here because it dilutes the GOP raw votes coming out of there).
-It's an asset in a Dem gerry, but for COI reasons I would keep the whitest parts of Hempstead with the rest of Nassau separate from the most minority-heavy parts which go with the Rockaways, JFK, etc.
-Ulster and Orange can go together whole, with a parallel seat stretching up the Hudson from Dutchess.
-I don't see the utility of the three-way split of Oneida. None of the Dem votes there are worth drawing tendrils outwards for.
-For COI purposes, I'd rather make up Monroe's deficit with a chunk of Wayne or Ontario than Genesee.

Apologies, I was trying to draw a clean-looking Dem gerrymander and forgot to say so.

Your map is very skillfully done, particularly the way it screws the Pubs out of a Brooklyn seat under the guise of uniting the Orthodox Jews of Borough Park with those of Williamsburg. You also handled NY-17 and 18 very well, given that the issue of finding a seat for the way too far left for the area Mondaire Jones to thrive and prosper is basically unsolvable.  But what are your talking points justifying all those chops and erosity upstate to prop up Delgado (who by the way is campaigning non stop these days and has not uttered a progressive thought in months), and ax Katko? I think you have an issue there. See the map below. What is the rationale for not drawing that map versus the one you drew other than for partisan reasons?  The whole Dem dream of giving Katko Thompkins County just lacks any talking points that are worth a damn imo. Ditto giving it to Delgado. The best one can do is give Katko, Utica (yes, Katko, not Delgado, but nice try though )

https://davesredistricting.org/join/36d04a1b-2371-4210-a7b5-7e7d9e0dd0ac

The chops aren't all that exceptional. If anything, they are not that many, especially when compared to the 2003-2013 map (just one look at the district of John E. Sweeney will tell you why), and just about as numerous as the 2013-2023 one.

Back then, there was no "no unduly law," and you have not answered the question as to why you drew the lines the way you drew them other than to screw the already underrepresented Pubs out of more seats. If you don't have talking points, you don't have much of a defense.

[Torie]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/543265da-88d8-4369-8c80-28c131885afa
Thoughts on this map?

-I prefer to maintain a north-south split of Long Island, which necessitates splitting Brookhaven (though that's actually an asset here because it dilutes the GOP raw votes coming out of there).
-It's an asset in a Dem gerry, but for COI reasons I would keep the whitest parts of Hempstead with the rest of Nassau separate from the most minority-heavy parts which go with the Rockaways, JFK, etc.
-Ulster and Orange can go together whole, with a parallel seat stretching up the Hudson from Dutchess.
-I don't see the utility of the three-way split of Oneida. None of the Dem votes there are worth drawing tendrils outwards for.
-For COI purposes, I'd rather make up Monroe's deficit with a chunk of Wayne or Ontario than Genesee.

Apologies, I was trying to draw a clean-looking Dem gerrymander and forgot to say so.

Your map is very skillfully done, particularly the way it screws the Pubs out of a Brooklyn seat under the guise of uniting the Orthodox Jews of Borough Park with those of Williamsburg. You also handled NY-17 and 18 very well, given that the issue of finding a seat for the way too far left for the area Mondaire Jones to thrive and prosper is basically unsolvable.  But what are your talking points justifying all those chops and erosity upstate to prop up Delgado (who by the way is campaigning non stop these days and has not uttered a progressive thought in months), and ax Katko? I think you have an issue there. See the map below. What is the rationale for not drawing that map versus the one you drew other than for partisan reasons?  The whole Dem dream of giving Katko Thompkins County just lacks any talking points that are worth a damn imo. Ditto giving it to Delgado. The best one can do is give Katko, Utica (yes, Katko, not Delgado, but nice try though )

https://davesredistricting.org/join/36d04a1b-2371-4210-a7b5-7e7d9e0dd0ac

The chops aren't all that exceptional. If anything, they are not that many, especially when compared to the 2003-2013 map (just one look at the district of John E. Sweeney will tell you why), and just about as numerous as the 2013-2023 one.

Back then, there was no "no unduly law," and you have not answered the question as to why you drew the lines the way you drew them other than to screw the already underrepresented Pubs out of more seats. If you don't have talking points, you don't have much of a defense.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/5afddbc1-4b19-4d35-a9df-4fe8c97d2b5b
I've removed the arm to Utica and reconfigured all but one of the districts in Central and Northern NY in this alternate version.

Counsel, what is the reason for that NY-21 chop into Madison County? Please be specific. And what do northern Washington County and Binghamton have in common? Why is NY-19 going up there?

[Torie]

My request is that you come up with your talking points in advance. You know what I will pounce on like a batter who sees a slow hanging curve ball drift over the middle of the plate. Otherwise the game is just not very fun.

[Torie]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/543265da-88d8-4369-8c80-28c131885afa
Thoughts on this map?

-I prefer to maintain a north-south split of Long Island, which necessitates splitting Brookhaven (though that's actually an asset here because it dilutes the GOP raw votes coming out of there).
-It's an asset in a Dem gerry, but for COI reasons I would keep the whitest parts of Hempstead with the rest of Nassau separate from the most minority-heavy parts which go with the Rockaways, JFK, etc.
-Ulster and Orange can go together whole, with a parallel seat stretching up the Hudson from Dutchess.
-I don't see the utility of the three-way split of Oneida. None of the Dem votes there are worth drawing tendrils outwards for.
-For COI purposes, I'd rather make up Monroe's deficit with a chunk of Wayne or Ontario than Genesee.

Apologies, I was trying to draw a clean-looking Dem gerrymander and forgot to say so.

Your map is very skillfully done, particularly the way it screws the Pubs out of a Brooklyn seat under the guise of uniting the Orthodox Jews of Borough Park with those of Williamsburg. You also handled NY-17 and 18 very well, given that the issue of finding a seat for the way too far left for the area Mondaire Jones to thrive and prosper is basically unsolvable.  But what are your talking points justifying all those chops and erosity upstate to prop up Delgado (who by the way is campaigning non stop these days and has not uttered a progressive thought in months), and ax Katko? I think you have an issue there. See the map below. What is the rationale for not drawing that map versus the one you drew other than for partisan reasons?  The whole Dem dream of giving Katko Thompkins County just lacks any talking points that are worth a damn imo. Ditto giving it to Delgado. The best one can do is give Katko, Utica (yes, Katko, not Delgado, but nice try though )

https://davesredistricting.org/join/36d04a1b-2371-4210-a7b5-7e7d9e0dd0ac

The chops aren't all that exceptional. If anything, they are not that many, especially when compared to the 2003-2013 map (just one look at the district of John E. Sweeney will tell you why), and just about as numerous as the 2013-2023 one.

Back then, there was no "no unduly law," and you have not answered the question as to why you drew the lines the way you drew them other than to screw the already underrepresented Pubs out of more seats. If you don't have talking points, you don't have much of a defense.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/5afddbc1-4b19-4d35-a9df-4fe8c97d2b5b
I've removed the arm to Utica and reconfigured all but one of the districts in Central and Northern NY in this alternate version.

That I think is absolutely the best one can do for the Dem case to get that partisan payoff, but with losing about a point in margin, one can do the below and make it seem less obvious that putting Tompkins, all of it, in the Katko CD, was job one. Now you have a talking point, that Thompkins was the most logical county to chop, given CD compactness, and given leaving un-chopped, the "core" county, Onandago,  and its metro area, was paramount. Securing that talking point, which is also easy on the eyes, is well worth the price in partisan spoils lost, imo.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/3904a151-ce14-439d-b708-25ed6f7efa5a

Well done!

[Torie]

I look forward to the lawsuit on this one. I thin NY-18 and NY-19 were made somewhat marginal due to the need to get a 2/3's vote and make Mondaire Jones happy. As it is though, the chops there to prop up both CD's in the south, with the Dems to the west being unavailable since they were used to weaken Katko, are going to be hard to explain away as not "unduly" favoring one party.

[Torie]

For gerrymandering to reach its full potential, districts really need to cross state lines. Think of it, all those panhandle Pubs in TX could be deployed into NM, and do something useful. Actually, why should CA have the most populated, and Wyoming the least, come to think of it?

[Torie]

I guess the Dems assume the NYS high court is hack city, and the NYS Constitutional  provision that maps should not unduly favor one party is a dead letter. They are also assuming that the Dems in the state senate other than the false flag Simcha Felder perhaps, will vote unanimously for the map.

It becomes ever more clear to me that humans should not draw maps. The species is just too flawed to handle it. Black boxes should based on tight algorithms.

[Torie]

I guess the Dems assume the NYS high court is hack city, and the NYS Constitutional  provision that maps should not unduly favor one party is a dead letter. They are also assuming that the Dems in the state senate other than the false flag Simcha Felder perhaps, will vote unanimously for the map.

It becomes ever more clear to me that humans should not draw maps. The species is just too flawed to handle it. Black boxes should based on tight algorithms.

It's not hard to imagine applying the Ohio SC's dissent ruling onto the New York map adjusted for state laws and come up with the same legal BS philosophies they used over there (Proportionality not mentioned anywhere so don't use it, what really is a competitive district, these words are so mysterious we should just ignore them, etc).

All of which degrades the very basis of a society ruled by laws fairly applied as opposed to the persons who happen to have the power. It weakens the very foundations of a democratic society. This is a nadir period of all three branches of government, although obviously Biden was an uptick from Trump, but then that is a very low bar.  

[Torie]

If the maps are even remotely like those that have been floated, it is going straight to the NYS Appellate Division of the Appellate Court. It will be interesting to find out how the Democrats will explain that their butt ugly facially obvious gerrymander does not "unduly" favor one party.
It will be even more interesting to read the court decision.

[Torie]

If the maps are even remotely like those that have been floated, it is going straight to the NYS Appellate Division of the Appellate Court. It will be interesting to find out how the Democrats will explain that their butt ugly facially obvious gerrymander does not "unduly" favor one party.
It will be even more interesting to read the court decision.

As Maloney (or whoever he got to write the memo) lucidly explained in the memo, the map was not drawn to favor one party - and in particular not to "unduly" favor one such party. Insofar as it favors any one party, such favoritism is "due."

The real rationale for drawing the districts he proposes is all about communities of interest. As with, for example, a district combining the lakefront communities, such as the district he proposes be drawn stretching from Buffalo to Rochester.

Question: Why would you want to split up lakefront communities?
Answer: You wouldn't, unless you didn't care about the community of interest that is lakefront communities and wished to oppress their community. And that would be a disgraceful neglect of fair, neutral, non-partisan redistricting principles. And that is not something we can stand for.

Now, maybe drawing a district based on communities of interest turns out to favor the Democratic Party. But honestly, who is to say - maybe it won't end up favoring the Democratic Party. After all, voting patterns change and will be different in 2022 than they were in 2020. And naturally we haven't even looked at partisan data from 2020 and know nothing whatsoever about such things.

So even if it does favor one particular political party, it is a mere coincidence that flows naturally from drawing a map that respects communities of interest in New York State such as what Maloney has proposed. Just one of those things.

LOL. I actually did.    If the Court swallows that load of sh*t, they all should be disbarred. Following COI's in NYS creates Pub districts. You can write that down for future reference.

In other news, I just finished my "fair" map for NYS that follows COI's and all the other appropriate metrics, and NY-11 does go to lower Manhattan, after taking in Bay Ridge and Sunset Park. And of course a map that hews to COI's gives the Orthodox Jews their CD in Brooklyn. Any map that does not is a joke if it claims to be anything other than a gerrymander under any reasonable set of metrics.

[Torie]

Well I guess the legislature is confident the high court is packed with hacks. We shall see. That map really does give the finger to the NYS law. 

[Torie]

The NYS Dems seem to hate Orthodox Jews. They get screwed in every cycle.

Yes, Delgado in NY-19 has been working his butt off (I seem to get about 3 emails a week from him touting his accomplishments, always with a moderate and non partisan theme), so I would say the seat is a pretty strong lean Dem. That assumes this map actually becomes law. The Dems need a two thirds vote and an uber hack high court to get to the finish line.

[Torie]

The NYS Dems seem to hate Orthodox Jews. They get screwed in every cycle.

Given Simcha Felder's behavior, you can see why the relationship may have some tension. Orthodox Jewish leaders have been, at best, highly transactional with NYS Dems.

Sure, but screwing an ethnic group like that because they tend to oppose you, looks really bad, at least to me. But then, they are not good with the media, and do seem to take it laying down. They could take to the streets protesting in front of high visibility venues. It also is too damn cold at the moment, and the dog hates walking on salty sidewalks. So he is carried to snow banks to cavort and do his business. No sun came through the skylights today due to being covered with snow.

[Torie]

Sure, but screwing an ethnic group like that because they tend to oppose you, looks really bad, at least to me.

It seems like many things in New York's redistricting look really bad to you, above and beyond events in the other 49 states, tbh.

TX was bad, Illinois was bad, but in those states there is nothing but the VRA to constrain the gerrymanderers. What makes NYS uniquely terrible is that by referendum a provision was added to the NYS Constitution, and the Dems are putting it on ignore, apparently confident that the high court is that hackish. That is one way to make governance the rule of "men" rather than law. In any event, that is the source of my dyspepsia. In Ohio and Florida the Pubs made a reasonable  effort to follow the law (which has similar provisions), coming up a bit short in Ohio, and looked bad with Hamilton County, but NYS is in a class by itself.

[Torie]

Sure, but screwing an ethnic group like that because they tend to oppose you, looks really bad, at least to me.

It seems like many things in New York's redistricting look really bad to you, above and beyond events in the other 49 states, tbh.

TX was bad, Illinois was bad, but in those states there is nothing but the VRA to constrain the gerrymanderers. What makes NYS uniquely terrible is that by referendum a provision was added to the NYS Constitution, and the Dems are putting it on ignore, apparently confident that the high court is that hackish. That is one way to make governance the rule of "men" rather than law. In any event, that is the source of my dyspepsia. In Ohio and Florida the Pubs made a reasonable  effort to follow the law (which has similar provisions), coming up a bit short in Ohio, and looked bad with Hamilton County, but NYS is in a class by itself.

It's totally fair to say that there are general outlines and NY is breaking them - I get that - it's the outrage about NYS Dems breaking up an Orthodox Jewish community because it votes against them as if it were unusually bad, when it's exactly what happens in every other state, usually to African-Americans at the hands of Republicans, and everyone acknowledges it's BAU and good politics. And also, there's at least some deniability about violating mushy guidelines about unduly favoring etc. vs. outright ignoring actual directives as in Ohio. Both are bad but the latter isn't even plausibly deniable.

The VRA protects other groups, and in this day and age, I tend to doubt the Pubs would crack an otherwise protected VRA seat. I also don't think the Pubs outright ignored the Ohio law, and I think a reasonable argument could be made that the law did not demand outright proportionality, that forces ugly gerrymanders. And that requirement does not apply to CD's. There the court applied mushy guidelines to blow the Pubs out, in a way that I think went too far actually outside the Hamilton seat.

On this one we will just have to agree to disagree. Have a nice evening.

[Torie]

Will SI secede if a Afro Latina DSA wins? You think they will put up with that?

It’s a congressional seat so they’d have to secede from the U.S.!

A more "modest proposal" is that it could "secede" from NY and become part of NJ, to which it is closer to anyway. I know all the uber nerds on the forum already know this, but Todt Hill on SI is the highest point on the coastal plain that runs from Florida to Montawk, aka the tidewater and back when the slave belt (with supposedly Long Island having the highest percentage of slaves anywhere circa 1700 or some such date). And decorating the top of that hill, is a set of perhaps the gaudiest gates in America.

[Torie]

You can also take in Bayonne if you want to go both ways. The Bayonne Bridge is quite spectacular to go over by the way.

I added a CD to NJ since I think giving NJ another 500K gives it another CD as a guess.

[Torie]

My father says the bridge itself was ruined when they raised the roadway, but that’s if you’re looking at it rather than from it.

Correct.