2020 Redistricting in Pennsylvania

[Nyvin]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/bee23a27-3796-4f20-99da-98550eebd85a

[palandio]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/bee23a27-3796-4f20-99da-98550eebd85a

Well, every map has its advantages and disadvantages, but what you are doing to the Allentown area deserves a big penalty under every immaginable metric. It might help you with the rest of the map and I give you credit for exploring the idea, but I think that the price is too high.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Two questions:

1) Why do folks seem to be assuming that Lamb's district won't be made more Democratic by giving it some more Democratic territory in Allegheny County while adding some more Republican turf (ex: taking parts of northern Alleghany County and/or some of southern Butler County) to Doyle's district?  I mean, yes, that'd be something you'd see in a Democratic map, but it's not so unreasonable that it'd be likely to give pause Democratic-leaning court.  I'd argue this is more likely than Lamb's district gaining southern Butler County (assuming it doesn't cause too many issues elsewhere in the map).  When in doubt, the PA SC's map is gonna favor the Democrats and this seems like a perfect example of somewhere that could happen.

2) Does anyone know why the "don't split Bucks County" rule has persisted for so long?  I'm not saying I expect it to change; I'm just curious.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Two questions:

1) Why do folks seem to be assuming that Lamb's district won't be made more Democratic by giving it some more Democratic territory in Allegheny County while adding some more Republican turf (ex: taking parts of northern Alleghany County and/or some of southern Butler County) to Doyle's district?  I mean, yes, that'd be something you'd see in a Democratic map, but it's not so unreasonable that it'd be likely to give pause Democratic-leaning court.  I'd argue this is more likely than Lamb's district gaining southern Butler County (assuming it doesn't cause too many issues elsewhere in the map).  When in doubt, the PA SC's map is gonna favor the Democrats and this seems like a perfect example of somewhere that could happen.

2) Does anyone know why the "don't split Bucks County" rule has persisted for so long?  I'm not saying I expect it to change; I'm just curious.

Wouldn't it be more efficient to give Lamb all the Dem turf directly east of Pittsburgh, remove Butler, and turn his district into a Beaver+all of Allegheny as needed, and then give Doyle parts of Washington County instead?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Two questions:

1) Why do folks seem to be assuming that Lamb's district won't be made more Democratic by giving it some more Democratic territory in Allegheny County while adding some more Republican turf (ex: taking parts of northern Alleghany County and/or some of southern Butler County) to Doyle's district?  I mean, yes, that'd be something you'd see in a Democratic map, but it's not so unreasonable that it'd be likely to give pause Democratic-leaning court.  I'd argue this is more likely than Lamb's district gaining southern Butler County (assuming it doesn't cause too many issues elsewhere in the map).  When in doubt, the PA SC's map is gonna favor the Democrats and this seems like a perfect example of somewhere that could happen.

2) Does anyone know why the "don't split Bucks County" rule has persisted for so long?  I'm not saying I expect it to change; I'm just curious.

Wouldn't it be more efficient to give Lamb all the Dem turf directly east of Pittsburgh, remove Butler, and turn his district into a Beaver+all of Allegheny as needed, and then give Doyle parts of Washington County instead?

That’d also work and just underscores my point about how easy it is to shore up Lamb.

[Sol]

Northern Allegheny is about as GOP as Butler and makes that fairly difficult.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Two questions:

1) Why do folks seem to be assuming that Lamb's district won't be made more Democratic by giving it some more Democratic territory in Allegheny County while adding some more Republican turf (ex: taking parts of northern Alleghany County and/or some of southern Butler County) to Doyle's district?  I mean, yes, that'd be something you'd see in a Democratic map, but it's not so unreasonable that it'd be likely to give pause Democratic-leaning court.  I'd argue this is more likely than Lamb's district gaining southern Butler County (assuming it doesn't cause too many issues elsewhere in the map).  When in doubt, the PA SC's map is gonna favor the Democrats and this seems like a perfect example of somewhere that could happen.

2) Does anyone know why the "don't split Bucks County" rule has persisted for so long?  I'm not saying I expect it to change; I'm just curious.

Wouldn't it be more efficient to give Lamb all the Dem turf directly east of Pittsburgh, remove Butler, and turn his district into a Beaver+all of Allegheny as needed, and then give Doyle parts of Washington County instead?

That’d also work and just underscores my point about how easy it is to shore up Lamb.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f3410140-478f-48b0-ba35-e8acd88c5f2b
thoughts on this map?

[palandio]

Two questions:

1) Why do folks seem to be assuming that Lamb's district won't be made more Democratic by giving it some more Democratic territory in Allegheny County while adding some more Republican turf (ex: taking parts of northern Alleghany County and/or some of southern Butler County) to Doyle's district?  I mean, yes, that'd be something you'd see in a Democratic map, but it's not so unreasonable that it'd be likely to give pause Democratic-leaning court.  I'd argue this is more likely than Lamb's district gaining southern Butler County (assuming it doesn't cause too many issues elsewhere in the map).  When in doubt, the PA SC's map is gonna favor the Democrats and this seems like a perfect example of somewhere that could happen.

2) Does anyone know why the "don't split Bucks County" rule has persisted for so long?  I'm not saying I expect it to change; I'm just curious.

Wouldn't it be more efficient to give Lamb all the Dem turf directly east of Pittsburgh, remove Butler, and turn his district into a Beaver+all of Allegheny as needed, and then give Doyle parts of Washington County instead?

If you go for a "least change" map in Allegheny, you can essentially view Lamb's, Doyle's and Reschenthaler's districts as a chain. All of these districts need to expand, but you can put the options into an order (by geographic similarity and by Dem-friendliness, not necessarily by quality):
a. Like you say, preserve the northern border of Lamb's district (or even remove the small parts of Butler that it contains), give him more areas around Pittsburgh (he can't get all areas to the east of Pittsburgh because otherwise he would have to give up on Mt. Lebanon). Doyle gets areas in Washington or Westmoreland County. Reschenthaler's district would then gain Somerset and Bedford County. This would move Lamb's district ca. 4-5 points to the left (ca. Clinton +2 in 2016).
b. Like I proposed earlier in the thread, roughly preserve the border between Lamb's and Doyle's district. Doyle's district would need to slightly expand into Washington or Westmoreland County. Reschenthaler's district would gain Somerset County. Lamb's district would expand into Butler or Lawrence County. This would move Lamb's district ca. 0.7-2 points to the right.
c. Preserve the border between Doyle's and Reschenthaler's district. Expand Lamb's district to include either Lawrence and minor parts of Butler or most parts of Butler. This would move Lamb's district ca. 10 points to the right (if you want to keep Mt. Lebanon in his district).
c2. Expand Reschenthaler's district to include all of Westmoreland, but also parts of Allegheny, but no parts of Somerset. Not that different from c.

All variants would avoid a county split at some border (a. either at the northern border of Lamb's district or by Reschenthaler's district including all of Somerset and Bedford, b. by Reschenthaler's district including all of Somerset, c. at the border between and Doyle's and Reschenthaler's districts, c1. at the eastern border of Reschenthaler's district).

Going by compactness metrics alone I get why many are proposing c. or c1. But I think that particularly b., but maybe even a. are completely defensible from a "continuity" or "partisan fairness" standpoint.

[palandio]

Northern Allegheny is about as GOP as Butler and makes that fairly difficult.

Maybe a few precincts in Cranberry Township, Butler, are comparable to Northern Allegheny, but overall no. Northern Allegheny has become much more Dem-friendly than Butler.

Two questions:

1) Why do folks seem to be assuming that Lamb's district won't be made more Democratic by giving it some more Democratic territory in Allegheny County while adding some more Republican turf (ex: taking parts of northern Alleghany County and/or some of southern Butler County) to Doyle's district?  I mean, yes, that'd be something you'd see in a Democratic map, but it's not so unreasonable that it'd be likely to give pause Democratic-leaning court.  I'd argue this is more likely than Lamb's district gaining southern Butler County (assuming it doesn't cause too many issues elsewhere in the map).  When in doubt, the PA SC's map is gonna favor the Democrats and this seems like a perfect example of somewhere that could happen.

2) Does anyone know why the "don't split Bucks County" rule has persisted for so long?  I'm not saying I expect it to change; I'm just curious.

Wouldn't it be more efficient to give Lamb all the Dem turf directly east of Pittsburgh, remove Butler, and turn his district into a Beaver+all of Allegheny as needed, and then give Doyle parts of Washington County instead?

That’d also work and just underscores my point about how easy it is to shore up Lamb.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f3410140-478f-48b0-ba35-e8acd88c5f2b
thoughts on this map?

Putting Cambria into Reschenthaler's district avoids one more county split at the cost of compactness. Personally in this case I'd prefer compactness, but that's debatable.

Lamb would probably prefer Mount Lebanon to stay in his district, but as we agreed in another thread, incumbents' wishes should not take priority over everything else.

[Sol]

With the recent chatter about Madeleine Dean running for Senate, it might be a good opportunity to look at maps which use her territory to make Houlahan more safe.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

With the recent chatter about Madeleine Dean running for Senate, it might be a good opportunity to look at maps which use her territory to make Houalahan more safe.

Might we see MontCo split up among 3-4 districts?

[Sol]

Here's a pass at a incumbent protection PA map which uses Dean leaving for a Senate campaign to its advantage. You still have to screw Cartwright or Wild though, but that's basically necessary given geography, and it replaces them with a Reading based swing seat.







link

[Boss_Rahm]

Here's a pass at a incumbent protection PA map which uses Dean leaving for a Senate campaign to its advantage. You still have to screw Cartwright or Wild though, but that's basically necessary given geography, and it replaces them with a Reading based swing seat.

Are you thinking Houlahan would run in the Lower Montgomery seat? It overlaps very little with her current district.

[Sol]

Here's a pass at a incumbent protection PA map which uses Dean leaving for a Senate campaign to its advantage. You still have to screw Cartwright or Wild though, but that's basically necessary given geography, and it replaces them with a Reading based swing seat.

Are you thinking Houlahan would run in the Lower Montgomery seat? It overlaps very little with her current district.

Sorry for not responding, I didn't see this.

That was my initial thought since her seat is in that district, but if that's an issue (which can understand) you can transfer more of Chester into the 4th and rotate accordingly (5th --> 3rd, 3rd--> 2nd, 2nd --> 4th). Had initially drawn the 4th that way to be more compact since I figured everyone would want a bipartisan fig leaf for their incumbent gerrymandering.

[ctherainbow]

Here's my shot at a balanced 5D/7Swing/5R map:



11 counties are split, with multi-splits in Allegheny, Berks, Lancaster, and Philadelphia bringing the total to 17 splits.  2 minority-majority districts in Philadelphia, with one outright Black-majority district.  All districts are relatively compact, as many are competitive as I could reasonably make competitive, and none have a population deviation(this will change when we get the 2020 numbers, but until then) of greater than 0.13%.

This is a map that I would imagine the courts considering, as it is favorable to Dems without being OVERTLY partisan.  It pushes Cartwright and Wild into slightly redder territory, with Houlahan taking in a significant chunk of red territory in Lancaster, endangering her the most of the three.  Lamb's district rotates south, giving up Beaver for the south end Allegheny suburbs, while Doyle absorbs the conservative north end suburbs, still leaving him with a 60%+ Dem seat.  Kelly's seat gets a bit bluer with the addition of Beaver, and in the center of the state, the new 10th District should benefit Dems as well, as Lancaster very slowly continues to blue.

[Boss_Rahm]

Here's my shot at a balanced 5D/7Swing/5R map:

This is certainly a good map from a COI perspective (assuming Wilkes-Barre is in the 8th, I can't quite tell from the image). I do think most of those "Swing" districts will vote R most of the time.

[ctherainbow]

Here's my shot at a balanced 5D/7Swing/5R map:

This is certainly a good map from a COI perspective (assuming Wilkes-Barre is in the 8th, I can't quite tell from the image). I do think most of those "Swing" districts will vote R most of the time.

Thank you!  I was disappointed that I couldn't really find a way to keep the West Shore suburbs with Harrisburg, but honestly I'm not sure they would mind being separated.     xD

And yes, Wilkes-Barre stays in the 8th; Cartwright sheds the red outlying suburbs, but retains the city and inner burbs.  Combining that with the addition of the Stroudsburg area, he's able to absorb Susquehanna and Wyoming counties without the district getting prohibitively redder.

In terms of incumbents, this map would force Houlahan and Scanlon into a primary, as well as pitting Cartwright against Meuser and Lamb against Gooey.  Perry and Smucker swap districts, and the 6th and the 14th end up with no incumbent, though Houlahan and Kelly could easily each move a little west and run in each of them respectively, although Kelly could just stay in the new 15th and have no automatic primary opponent.

And as far as the swing districts go in terms of partisan lean, the 10th and 14th lean Republican, the 6th, 7th, 8th, and 16th are true swing districts, and the 1st leans Democrat.  Of those, the 8th, 14th, and 16th seem to be trending right, the 7th staying about neutral, and the 1st, 6th, and 10th trending left.

[Boss_Rahm]

Thank you!  I was disappointed that I couldn't really find a way to keep the West Shore suburbs with Harrisburg, but honestly I'm not sure they would mind being separated.     xD

You and I both went for a "Keystone Corridor" district rather than pairing Dauphin with Cumberland. So no complaints there!

[Boss_Rahm]

I went ahead and drew a Congressional map based on the 2019 ACS data. I took an unorthodox approach in SEPA - butchering Montgomery in order to keep the other collar counties whole.



https://davesredistricting.org/join/37aa567f-8f21-4da3-a468-b814179c05e6

[Roll Roons]

Here's my go at a PA map, with 2016 partisanship:
https://davesredistricting.org/join/7e597fcd-7654-4f8f-8bb2-46f3df84038b

PA-01: Clinton +1. All of Bucks, a bit of MontCo and some of the more Republican areas in NE Philly. Realistically, this is Likely R while Fitz is around. But it would be extremely competitive without him.

PA-02: Clinton +61. North Philly. Very diverse and very blue, as expected. Boyle's only threat would be in a primary.

PA-03: Clinton +80 or something. In this very district, born and raised, on the playground is where I spent most of my days. You all the know the rest. Black-majority district in Center City and West Philly that also includes some heavily black areas in DelCo. This is probably one of the five most Democratic districts in the country. Evans has this for life.

PA-04: Clinton +27. Most of MontCo and some white liberal parts of Philly. The days of Richard Schweiker are long gone. Dean is safe.

PA-05: Clinton +18. Most of DelCo and eastern ChesCo. Even the vaunted DelCo GOP machine probably won't bring this one back. Scanlon is safe. Houlahan also lives here, but she's rumored to be considering a Senate bid. Otherwise, she can try her luck in...

PA-06: Trump +4. Eastern ChesCo, most of Berks, and northern MontCo. It's actually possible that Biden won it. Regardless, this seat is winnable for both parties and will likely be highly competitive in most years.

PA-07: Trump +3.5. Lehigh, Northampton and Carbon. Again, may have flipped to Biden. But Susan Wild had a surprisingly close race in 2020, and would be vulnerable in this swingy district.

PA-08: Trump +8. Lackawanna, Luzerne, Monroe and Pike. My guess is Trump still won this district in 2020, but Biden made huge inroads here that helped him win the state. Cartwright is strong, but will have a very, very tough fight on his hands.

PA-09: Trump +43. A section of rural northeast PA that has been Republican since the Civil War and probably won't change that anytime soon. Basically combines Meuser and Keller, but the former is rumored to be running for Gov, in which case the latter will sail.

PA-10: Trump +13. Dauphin, most of York County (including the city) and Eastern Cumberland. There are some worrying trends for Republicans in this area, but Perry the insurrectionist should be fine for the next couple cycles.

PA-11: Trump +25. Lancaster, Lebanon and part of York County. Smucker will probably be around for a while.

PA-12: Trump +34. Rural northern/central PA district stretching from the New York border to Cambria County, which was once heavily Democratic but has turned hard right. Johnstown and State College are really the only Democratic enclaves in this district. Thompson is safe.

PA-13: Trump +43. South Central PA district that has been Republican since the Civil War. Speaking of the Civil War, Gettysburg is here. Joyce has it forever.

PA-14: Trump +31. Ancestrally Democratic seat in the state's southwest corner, surrounding Pittsburgh. This area was Democratic until the early 2000s, but has taken a hard-right turn since then, particularly in the Trump era. Reschenthaler may run statewide soon, but in any case, the GOP will have no problem holding it.

PA-15: Trump +6. Suburban and exurban Pittsburgh. Luckily for Lamb, the Pittsburgh suburbs have trended sharply blue in the Trump era, so it's possible that this seat flipped to Biden. Unfortunately for him, it has to expand north to gain Lawrence County, so it becomes slightly more Republican, though definitely not out of reach for a strong Democrat.

PA-16: Trump +24. Northwest PA. Kelly isn't the best incumbent, but Erie is really the only part of this district where Democrats are competitive, and it's not even close to enough to outweigh the rest of it. He's safe.

PA-17: Clinton +26. Urban Pittsburgh. A Rust Belt-flavored city that's undergoing somewhat of a tech boom now. Doyle is obviously safe in a general, but it's possible that he faces issues in a primary despite his long tenure.

So you have 6 Clinton districts and 11 Trump districts. The current PA-09 is blown up. Geography is not very good for Democrats in this state, but in most years, Democrats would have a fair shot at four of those Trump districts, while Republicans would be favored in Clinton-won PA-01 as long as that seat's exceptionally strong incumbent is still around.

[sting in the rafters]

-Key swing districts would be Lamb's, Cartwright's, Wild's, and Perry's.
-Gave some of NE Philly to PA-01 as it's similar to Bensalem
-Factor in the Fitzpatrick effect that PA-01 will remain Likely R as long as he's their rep
-Gave Delco's district some of the Main Line in Montco
-I used the 2012-2018 composite so adjust the map accordingly w/demographic trends.
-A key factor was trying to respect the Appalachia-Acela divide as much as possible.
-Carving up Berks was a tough decision however keeping Chesco together was a biased move as my home
-In any case, Ds need to realize some of their most vulnerable districts nationwide are in NEPA. Keeping the party unified and being able to counteract high GOP turnout in the more rural parts of Luzerne and Carbon with strong margins in Wyoming/Lehigh Valley is very important.

[Gass3268]

Former University of Pittsburgh chancellor named the tiebreaker vote for the PA state legislative maps.

https://twitter.com/SamDunklau/status/1389303502137081858?s=20

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Former University of Pittsburgh chancellor named the tiebreaker vote for the PA state legislative maps.

https://twitter.com/SamDunklau/status/1389303502137081858?s=20

So does this mean we get a map in the same spirit as the previous one?

[Gass3268]

Former University of Pittsburgh chancellor named the tiebreaker vote for the PA state legislative maps.

https://twitter.com/SamDunklau/status/1389303502137081858?s=20

So does this mean we get a map in the same spirit as the previous one?

This process only applies for creating the state legislature maps.

[Skill and Chance]

Former University of Pittsburgh chancellor named the tiebreaker vote for the PA state legislative maps.

https://twitter.com/SamDunklau/status/1389303502137081858?s=20

So does this mean we get a map in the same spirit as the previous one?

This process only applies for creating the state legislature maps.

And historically, it's always an AZ 2011 situation where the tiebreaker is a de facto partisan and just votes for whatever maps the party with a state supreme court majority at the time proposes.  I would expect just about the most Dem maps possible within the rules the state sets for legislative districts.