2020 New York Redistricting

[100% pro-life no matter what]

What I find somewhat ridiculous about this is that the Dems passed a really ugly gerrymander, but they could easily have passed a pretty map serving the same purpose, for example

In which a few seats could be vulnerable in a bad year (18th and 20th are Biden+8, 19th is Biden+13, 22nd is Biden+11) but on the other hand the 23rd would be a potential pickup (only Trump+2).

Something like that surely wouldn't have been prone to a court strike-down and would generally have functioned as a 22-4 map anyway- but instead the Dems decided to go for ridiculous stuff like the 24th's narrow snake shape, the 19th's protrusions into Utica and Vestal, etc, all for the relatively small gain of incumbents being shored up a bit more. May backfire if the courts do feel inclined to strike it down.

Right, a normal person looking at this map would say it is fair. In fact tbh I would say it is within the realm of fair - anything that is close to maximally compact that follows county lines I’m ok with, and the legislature gets to decide which party the map advantages within those bounds. NYS should pass the most D-favored map possible that looks fairly clean, just like OH should pass the most R favored map under those same restrictions.

As a Dem, this is what part of what gets me annoyed about our gerrymanders.

They’re often unnecessarily messy (IL, NY, MD, MA, ect) when the GOP is able to create very effective gerrymanders that are harder to argue against because they’re clean (FL) and it’s not necessarily because of Geography

I'd argue that the shape of the new TN-5 was unnecessarily messy, especially if they were willing to go town to the Trump +10 range.  There were certainly incumbent demands and a desire to avoid trends in Rutherford County at play, but it was certainly messier than it needed to be.

[ProgressiveModerate]

What I find somewhat ridiculous about this is that the Dems passed a really ugly gerrymander, but they could easily have passed a pretty map serving the same purpose, for example

In which a few seats could be vulnerable in a bad year (18th and 20th are Biden+8, 19th is Biden+13, 22nd is Biden+11) but on the other hand the 23rd would be a potential pickup (only Trump+2).

Something like that surely wouldn't have been prone to a court strike-down and would generally have functioned as a 22-4 map anyway- but instead the Dems decided to go for ridiculous stuff like the 24th's narrow snake shape, the 19th's protrusions into Utica and Vestal, etc, all for the relatively small gain of incumbents being shored up a bit more. May backfire if the courts do feel inclined to strike it down.

Right, a normal person looking at this map would say it is fair. In fact tbh I would say it is within the realm of fair - anything that is close to maximally compact that follows county lines I’m ok with, and the legislature gets to decide which party the map advantages within those bounds. NYS should pass the most D-favored map possible that looks fairly clean, just like OH should pass the most R favored map under those same restrictions.

As a Dem, this is what part of what gets me annoyed about our gerrymanders.

They’re often unnecessarily messy (IL, NY, MD, MA, ect) when the GOP is able to create very effective gerrymanders that are harder to argue against because they’re clean (FL) and it’s not necessarily because of Geography

I'd argue that the shape of the new TN-5 was unnecessarily messy, especially if they were willing to go town to the Trump +10 range.  There were certainly incumbent demands and a desire to avoid trends in Rutherford County at play, but it was certainly messier than it needed to be.

TN, KS, and OH are the main offenders considering none are maximal gerrymanders.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

What I find somewhat ridiculous about this is that the Dems passed a really ugly gerrymander, but they could easily have passed a pretty map serving the same purpose, for example

In which a few seats could be vulnerable in a bad year (18th and 20th are Biden+8, 19th is Biden+13, 22nd is Biden+11) but on the other hand the 23rd would be a potential pickup (only Trump+2).

Something like that surely wouldn't have been prone to a court strike-down and would generally have functioned as a 22-4 map anyway- but instead the Dems decided to go for ridiculous stuff like the 24th's narrow snake shape, the 19th's protrusions into Utica and Vestal, etc, all for the relatively small gain of incumbents being shored up a bit more. May backfire if the courts do feel inclined to strike it down.

Right, a normal person looking at this map would say it is fair. In fact tbh I would say it is within the realm of fair - anything that is close to maximally compact that follows county lines I’m ok with, and the legislature gets to decide which party the map advantages within those bounds. NYS should pass the most D-favored map possible that looks fairly clean, just like OH should pass the most R favored map under those same restrictions.

As a Dem, this is what part of what gets me annoyed about our gerrymanders.

They’re often unnecessarily messy (IL, NY, MD, MA, ect) when the GOP is able to create very effective gerrymanders that are harder to argue against because they’re clean (FL) and it’s not necessarily because of Geography

That's mostly geography-based, drawing clean looking R gerrymanders is much easier than clean looking D ones. Also while the MA map is messy looking it's not really a gerrymander, any fair and clean looking map there would still result in a 9-0 D majority, so who knows what those people were thinking.

One consideration in Massachusetts was shoring up Neal against future primary challenges from the left, which is why McGovern's district got extended further into the heavily Berniecrat Hill Towns in the western parts of Hampshire and Franklin Counties.

[lfromnj]

What I find somewhat ridiculous about this is that the Dems passed a really ugly gerrymander, but they could easily have passed a pretty map serving the same purpose, for example

In which a few seats could be vulnerable in a bad year (18th and 20th are Biden+8, 19th is Biden+13, 22nd is Biden+11) but on the other hand the 23rd would be a potential pickup (only Trump+2).

Something like that surely wouldn't have been prone to a court strike-down and would generally have functioned as a 22-4 map anyway- but instead the Dems decided to go for ridiculous stuff like the 24th's narrow snake shape, the 19th's protrusions into Utica and Vestal, etc, all for the relatively small gain of incumbents being shored up a bit more. May backfire if the courts do feel inclined to strike it down.

Right, a normal person looking at this map would say it is fair. In fact tbh I would say it is within the realm of fair - anything that is close to maximally compact that follows county lines I’m ok with, and the legislature gets to decide which party the map advantages within those bounds. NYS should pass the most D-favored map possible that looks fairly clean, just like OH should pass the most R favored map under those same restrictions.

As a Dem, this is what part of what gets me annoyed about our gerrymanders.

They’re often unnecessarily messy (IL, NY, MD, MA, ect) when the GOP is able to create very effective gerrymanders that are harder to argue against because they’re clean (FL) and it’s not necessarily because of Geography

That's mostly geography-based, drawing clean looking R gerrymanders is much easier than clean looking D ones. Also while the MA map is messy looking it's not really a gerrymander, any fair and clean looking map there would still result in a 9-0 D majority, so who knows what those people were thinking.

One consideration in Massachusetts was shoring up Neal against future primary challenges from the left, which is why McGovern's district got extended further into the heavily Berniecrat Hill Towns in the western parts of Hampshire and Franklin Counties.

Also they split up the Portugese towns. Regarding the 1st point the main purpose is primary gerrymandering although it does coincidentally prevent even a slightly competitive D seat.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Why doesn’t the legistlature just submit a cleaner map like the one above that still achieves simillar partisan goals if the Appeals court doesn’t rule their way?

The real sticker for them is NY-01 because there’s not really a way to draw a clean variant that’s very effective due to Long Island Geography. NY-11 isnt really any more or less clean than the old map tbf. Plus as the map above shows, they could get a bonus competitive district upstate.

I think the real issue is the legislature wants to protect Tanko who was already a team player and hence wouldn’t unpack the seat to the point where he’s actually vulnerable in 2022.

[BoiseBoy]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1517893932407046145?s=21&t=x5Yp67tfLZq9Jp6W...

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1517893932407046145?s=21&t=x5Yp67tfLZq9Jp6W...

Seems like a GOP gerry light the way they did South Brooklyn and Long Island. By my estimate it looks like 7 or 8 Trump districts. Still better than the Dem map from a COI and visual standpoint. If gerrymandering nationally were banned I'd take this map any day.

As another sidenote, seems like they slightly hurt black influence in Brooklyn in exchange for a more Jewish community based seat.

[cinyc]

The initial NYS Court of Appeals Briefs in the NY Redistricting case:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hfuD5k_OuAbZimaRuAD-m1LHfIzBv0GC/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Nri78l4NJ0OYl9kdUU2M8QAk3bzGamUM/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NUAF-t2JGSPEV6IUFIyq4DP9EdwrriXV/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I1pTEVbrLOgQCIjTEb618mryJACCUgNf/view?usp=sharing

Reply briefs:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z6cCef2X-2zYmzMbVFyyG7rhMryJqsUW/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/15UjtbimKndSYo8clO_mJdlTSH0yVFmku/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1F_dDLJpED0r6-Afc3Q2XANjfc4MxFzn4/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1C69L2ysRi3OiggwA8UlOWrcx_-ev7P32/view?usp=sharing

Oral arguments are set for Tuesday at 11AM.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

https://twitter.com/RRHElections/status/1518665171337682945

18-8 based on 2020 numbers.  With a uniform swing to a R+6 national ballot, it would just be 14-12 in 2022, though.  This map getting adopted would be a major shift.

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://twitter.com/RRHElections/status/1518665171337682945

18-8 based on 2020 numbers.  With a uniform swing to a R+6 national ballot, it would just be 14-12 in 2020, though.  This map getting adopted would be a major shift.

The map seems like an R ferry lite that uses geography to its advantage. NYC metro getting 4 outfought R districts is eh…

[Sol]

The worst bit imo of that Republican map is the weird trans-Jamaica bay configuration of NY-04. Pretty silly to have Coney Island in a district with the Five Towns, though I suppose you could make a bong smoke argument for a Jewish CoI.

In practice a fair NYC is probably going to give you one safe R district and one safe D to Likely D district, depending on where you put the Republican enclaves in Southern Brooklyn. Personally I'm sympathetic to a Dem Staten Island/Republican Brooklyn configuration, since it makes making two Black VRA seats in Brooklyn easier and seems more logically aligned with communities.

The inclusion of Amsterdam in 20 and the retaining of the Velazquez snake are both bad too but they're clearly designed to appeal to judges who will be reluctant to rock the boat with designs that will offend incumbents. Still, if I were them I would at least make 7 into a clearly Latino-dominated seat if possible since you get a good VRA argument out of it.

Upstate is clearly designed to favor Republicans but they don't do anything egregious up there except maybe some of the wonky lines in the Hudson Valley; everything else is just the most plausibly Republican choice of equally good outcomes.

[lfromnj]

The worst bit imo of that Republican map is the weird trans-Jamaica bay configuration of NY-04. Pretty silly to have Coney Island in a district with the Five Towns, though I suppose you could make a bong smoke argument for a Jewish CoI.

In practice a fair NYC is probably going to give you one safe R district and one safe D to Likely D district, depending on where you put the Republican enclaves in Southern Brooklyn. Personally I'm sympathetic to a Dem Staten Island/Republican Brooklyn configuration, since it makes making two Black VRA seats in Brooklyn easier and seems more logically aligned with communities.

The inclusion of Amsterdam in 20 and the retaining of the Velazquez snake are both bad too but they're clearly designed to appeal to judges who will be reluctant to rock the boat with designs that will offend incumbents. Still, if I were them I would at least make 7 into a clearly Latino-dominated seat if possible since you get a good VRA argument out of it.

Upstate is clearly designed to favor Republicans but they don't do anything egregious up there except maybe some of the wonky lines in the Hudson Valley; everything else is just the most plausibly Republican choice of equally good outcomes.

The weird thing is the Hudson Valley is arguably slightly D friendly?

[ProgressiveModerate]

The worst bit imo of that Republican map is the weird trans-Jamaica bay configuration of NY-04. Pretty silly to have Coney Island in a district with the Five Towns, though I suppose you could make a bong smoke argument for a Jewish CoI.

In practice a fair NYC is probably going to give you one safe R district and one safe D to Likely D district, depending on where you put the Republican enclaves in Southern Brooklyn. Personally I'm sympathetic to a Dem Staten Island/Republican Brooklyn configuration, since it makes making two Black VRA seats in Brooklyn easier and seems more logically aligned with communities.

The inclusion of Amsterdam in 20 and the retaining of the Velazquez snake are both bad too but they're clearly designed to appeal to judges who will be reluctant to rock the boat with designs that will offend incumbents. Still, if I were them I would at least make 7 into a clearly Latino-dominated seat if possible since you get a good VRA argument out of it.

Upstate is clearly designed to favor Republicans but they don't do anything egregious up there except maybe some of the wonky lines in the Hudson Valley; everything else is just the most plausibly Republican choice of equally good outcomes.

The weird thing is the Hudson Valley is arguably slightly D friendly?

They seemed to have basically kept Dems config for NY-19 more or less just without it taking in Albany. The map seems to bank on the idea these narrow Biden seats upstate would squally vote R.

[Sol]

The worst bit imo of that Republican map is the weird trans-Jamaica bay configuration of NY-04. Pretty silly to have Coney Island in a district with the Five Towns, though I suppose you could make a bong smoke argument for a Jewish CoI.

In practice a fair NYC is probably going to give you one safe R district and one safe D to Likely D district, depending on where you put the Republican enclaves in Southern Brooklyn. Personally I'm sympathetic to a Dem Staten Island/Republican Brooklyn configuration, since it makes making two Black VRA seats in Brooklyn easier and seems more logically aligned with communities.

The inclusion of Amsterdam in 20 and the retaining of the Velazquez snake are both bad too but they're clearly designed to appeal to judges who will be reluctant to rock the boat with designs that will offend incumbents. Still, if I were them I would at least make 7 into a clearly Latino-dominated seat if possible since you get a good VRA argument out of it.

Upstate is clearly designed to favor Republicans but they don't do anything egregious up there except maybe some of the wonky lines in the Hudson Valley; everything else is just the most plausibly Republican choice of equally good outcomes.

The weird thing is the Hudson Valley is arguably slightly D friendly?

Yeah no clue what the deal with that is. Maybe an attempt to undercut Jones/shore up Maloney (thereby winning over crummy D machine people).

[lfromnj]

The worst bit imo of that Republican map is the weird trans-Jamaica bay configuration of NY-04. Pretty silly to have Coney Island in a district with the Five Towns, though I suppose you could make a bong smoke argument for a Jewish CoI.

In practice a fair NYC is probably going to give you one safe R district and one safe D to Likely D district, depending on where you put the Republican enclaves in Southern Brooklyn. Personally I'm sympathetic to a Dem Staten Island/Republican Brooklyn configuration, since it makes making two Black VRA seats in Brooklyn easier and seems more logically aligned with communities.

The inclusion of Amsterdam in 20 and the retaining of the Velazquez snake are both bad too but they're clearly designed to appeal to judges who will be reluctant to rock the boat with designs that will offend incumbents. Still, if I were them I would at least make 7 into a clearly Latino-dominated seat if possible since you get a good VRA argument out of it.

Upstate is clearly designed to favor Republicans but they don't do anything egregious up there except maybe some of the wonky lines in the Hudson Valley; everything else is just the most plausibly Republican choice of equally good outcomes.

The weird thing is the Hudson Valley is arguably slightly D friendly?

Yeah no clue what the deal with that is. Maybe an attempt to undercut Jones/shore up Maloney (thereby winning over crummy D machine people).

I mean Maloney basically asked for a 23-3 and isn't really part of the NY D machine. I doubt the NY GOP has much love for him. I guess it just makes all 3(NY17/18/19) competitive? The lines are weird and yuck although I still can't see any nefarious intent behind them?

[lfromnj]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1518969388178759680

[ProgressiveModerate]

Governor Hochul seems to be pulling a DeSantis through all this, and wants a Dem Gerry at p much all costs even mentioning changing the primary. I honetasty wish others of them could mutually agree to fair maps but not gonna happen

[Torie]

Well I have not listened to all of the oral argument yet, but I have a prediction.
What do you think that it is?  

I found one of the justices intolerable. Any guesses who that might be?  

[ProgressiveModerate]

Well I have not listened to all of the oral argument yet, but I have a prediction.
What do you think that it is?  

I found one of the justices intolerable. Any guesses who that might be?  

Lol it was funny how one was a screen while the rest were in person

[lfromnj]

Well I have not listened to all of the oral argument yet, but I have a prediction.
What do you think that it is?  

I found one of the justices intolerable. Any guesses who that might be?  

Lol it was funny how one was a screen while the rest were in person

Iirc she's unvaccinated

[ProgressiveModerate]

Well I have not listened to all of the oral argument yet, but I have a prediction.
What do you think that it is?  

I found one of the justices intolerable. Any guesses who that might be?  

Lol it was funny how one was a screen while the rest were in person

Iirc she's unvaccinated

Ik even though she doesn’t seem particularly right wing by her way of questioning; infact she seemed very skeptical of the rebuttal

[MillennialModerate]

Let’s be real. Everything goes against the Dems in these kinds of situations….

Even though it’s a 6-0-1 court. NY will have the only truly non partisan judges in the nation…

[Torie]

https://twitter.com/mcpli/status/1518969388178759680

Where does this 2% concept come from? I can't find it in the redistricting law myself.

[cinyc]

Where does this 2% concept come from? I can't find it in the redistricting law myself.

I think it's from a law the legislature passed a while back. I can't find a cite either. They might have repealed it in the interim.

Edit: It's Section 3 of the bill passed in 2012 establishing the commission:

§  3. Any amendments by the senate or assembly to a redistricting plan
    31  submitted by the independent redistricting commission, shall not  affect
    32  more  than  two  percent  of the population of any district contained in
    33  such plan.  If two or more plans for districts in the  same  legislative
    34  house or for congressional districts are submitted by the commission and
    35  voted  upon  by the legislature, such plans shall be considered individ-
    36  ually and not combined.

See Assembly bill A 9557 (2012) here:
http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/navigate.cgi?NVDTO:

[Torie]

Where does this 2% concept come from? I can't find it in the redistricting law myself.

I think it's from a law the legislature passed a while back. I can't find a cite either. They might have repealed it in the interim.

Edit: It's Section 3 of the bill passed in 2012 establishing the commission:

§  3. Any amendments by the senate or assembly to a redistricting plan
    31  submitted by the independent redistricting commission, shall not  affect
    32  more  than  two  percent  of the population of any district contained in
    33  such plan.  If two or more plans for districts in the  same  legislative
    34  house or for congressional districts are submitted by the commission and
    35  voted  upon  by the legislature, such plans shall be considered individ-
    36  ually and not combined.

See Assembly bill A 9557 (2012) here:
http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/navigate.cgi?NVDTO:

I can't find it in the Constitution itself. Where the F is it? And it makes no sense. If the legislature cannot reject the commission maps by more than 2% solution (you can't even get high on that anemic percentage), it has been castrated. We seem to live in a clueless, disingenuous, irrational madhouse.