2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Michigan

[lfromnj]

An interesting development in also how stupid they went for partisan fairness. They crossed the Monroe Wayne border multiple times to create more Dem composite districts but actually increases a Trump district. Meanwhile they also split Washtenaw like 7 times. It perfectly nests into 4 very clean and obvious COI seats(Ann Arbor North and 1 South, 1 Ypsi, 1 rest of county)

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The House map would have been better if they used NC-style nesting. They don't need to split counties left and right like this to get proportionality.

[Bojack Horseman]

An interesting development in also how stupid they went for partisan fairness. They crossed the Monroe Wayne border multiple times to create more Dem composite districts but actually increases a Trump district. Meanwhile they also split Washtenaw like 7 times. It perfectly nests into 4 very clean and obvious COI seats(Ann Arbor North and 1 South, 1 Ypsi, 1 rest of county)

The ironic thing is that it was pretty much intended to be a D gerrymander because anything short of that would pretty much be an R gerrymander.

[lfromnj]

https://www.wkar.org/wkar-news/2022-01-28/league-of-women-voters-activist-groups-plan-suit-over-partisan-bias-of-michigans-new-districts

Over the state house map because muh 2% R efficiency gap. Don't forget they already split Washtenaw 7 ways, Lansing Democrats and GR Dems get 5 seats each as well. Meanwhile downriver and Macomb dems could get absolutely screwed for 2022.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

https://www.wkar.org/wkar-news/2022-01-28/league-of-women-voters-activist-groups-plan-suit-over-partisan-bias-of-michigans-new-districts

Over the state house map because muh 2% R efficiency gap. Don't forget they already split Washtenaw 7 ways, Lansing Democrats and GR Dems get 5 seats each as well. Meanwhile downriver and Macomb dems could get absolutely screwed for 2022.

And here I was thinking that the LWV had developed a conscience and was opposing comissionmandering lol.

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/DavidEggert00/status/1489388862174601219?s=20&t=Zcm5GPJQ...

The legislative suit, alleging that the commissions RPV analysts had it wrong and African American seats need to by >50% by VAP, is over. One D judge dissented, one R concurred with the three other majority Ds. There remains a GOP OMOV suit on the congressional map.

[Torie]

I decided that Michigan badly needed a map beautification program, and came up with this stunning specimen, thereby deserving a tree moniker of equal magnificence. Can you guess the name of the species?

It also has diversity. Every county in the state but one, has a real potential of having at least a portion thereof represented by a Pub.



https://davesredistricting.org/join/e533be5d-680c-42be-924f-f2c4d0f37b90

I don’t know about trees, but given that it’s a Republican gerrymander, Poisonwood seems like a rather apt name

Redwood of course. It's beautiful and of the right color. 

[Skill and Chance]

https://twitter.com/DavidEggert00/status/1489388862174601219?s=20&t=Zcm5GPJQ...

The legislative suit, alleging that the commissions RPV analysts had it wrong and African American seats need to by >50% by VAP, is over. One D judge dissented, one R concurred with the three other majority Ds. There remains a GOP OMOV suit on the congressional map.

This was not a party-line decision, even though the court is currently  4D/3R.  One Republican voted to  uphold the map and one Democrat voted to strike it down.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Isn't one of the Republicans on the Michigan Supreme Court basically a RINO though?

[lfromnj]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2022/03/29/black-residents-challenge-metro-detroit-redistricting-maps-federal-court/7202491001/?gnt-cfr=1

Federal lawsuit over Michigan legislative maps.

[Torie]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2022/03/29/black-residents-challenge-metro-detroit-redistricting-maps-federal-court/7202491001/?gnt-cfr=1

Federal lawsuit over Michigan legislative maps.

That won't go anywhere, unless ir cut down compact gingles protected black performing districts, which I strongly doubt.

[ProgressiveModerate]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2022/03/29/black-residents-challenge-metro-detroit-redistricting-maps-federal-court/7202491001/?gnt-cfr=1

Federal lawsuit over Michigan legislative maps.

That won't go anywhere, unless ir cut down compact gingles protected black performing districts, which I strongly doubt.

Tbf the commission went kinda hard on unpacking Detroit and bacon stripped many black areas pretty far out. 2022 will be a test to see how many of the districts perform.

Really though the legislative maps are gross, especially since there are easier ways to achieve relative equality. I'd say the CD map is prolly one of the best in the nation though.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2022/03/29/black-residents-challenge-metro-detroit-redistricting-maps-federal-court/7202491001/?gnt-cfr=1

Federal lawsuit over Michigan legislative maps.

That won't go anywhere, unless ir cut down compact gingles protected black performing districts, which I strongly doubt.

Tbf the commission went kinda hard on unpacking Detroit and bacon stripped many black areas pretty far out. 2022 will be a test to see how many of the districts perform.

Really though the legislative maps are gross, especially since there are easier ways to achieve relative equality. I'd say the CD map is prolly one of the best in the nation though.

My biggest gripe with the maps is that they seem to completely ignore county lines.

[Schiff for Senate]

(Bumping a very old thread - I know, I'm sorry!)

Competitive map I came up with for MI:  https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::10f6b431-05bf-43fa-ad0d-3ec99eddd423. 3 Safe R seats, 3 Safe D seats, and 7 (yes, 7) very competitive seats (the election I used was the 2020 presidential race). Just quickly skimming through their 2020 and 2016 presidential voting (plus the 2020 Senate race to compare where Biden over and unperformed Peters):

District: 2020-PRES, 2020-SEN (2016-PRES)
1: Biden+2.2; James+3.3 (Trump+5.3)
2: Trump+3.5; James+8.6 (Trump+9.0)
3: Trump+22.3; James+24.2 (Trump+24.1)
4: Biden+0.4; James+0.5 (Trump+2.0)
5: Trump+21.5; James+20.8 (Trump+24.6)
6: Biden+1.0; Peters+3.2 (Clinton+0.8)
7: Trump+26.3; James+24.5 (Trump+27.8)
8: Biden+1.1; James+1.0 (Trump+4.7)
9: Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5 (Trump+4.4)
10: Biden+2.4; Peters+1.1 (Clinton+0.5)
11: Biden+30.0; Peters+26.9 (Clinton+25.4)
12: Biden+15.9; Peters+16.9 (Clinton+11.9)
13: Biden+77.9; Peters+75.6 (Clinton+80.1)

Biden (D) won 8 districts in 2020; Trump (R) won 5.
James (R) won 7 districts in 2020; Peters (D) won 6.
Trump won 8 districts in 2020; Clinton (D) won 5.
And, surprising me, even Gretchen Whitmer (D) only won 8 districts in 2018. I'd have guessed she won 9 or perhaps even 10 (with 10 probably being a stretch).

You can see that generally, in Western MI, Biden did noticeably better than Gary Peters and Hillary Clinton, whereas in Eastern MI, there wasn't much of a difference. While Peters ran behind Biden throughout Western/Southwestern MI, in the eastern portion of the state, he tended to do better than Biden (in certain districts, at least - including the state's lone Peters/Trump district). And, of course, while Biden did much better than Clinton throughout suburban Southwest MI, in rural and urban MI, either Clinton did better than Biden, or Biden did only a little better than Clinton.

One novelty here IMO is MI08 and MI09. These are two seemingly very similar, purple districts in the Macomb/Oakland County area. However, interestingly, the 8th is a Biden-James district (Biden+1.1; James+1.0) while the 9th is the opposite - a Trump-Peters district (Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5)! I wonder why this is the case. (Of course, both the 8th and the 9th voted for Trump in 2016.)

[ProgressiveModerate]

(Bumping a very old thread - I know, I'm sorry!)

Competitive map I came up with for MI:  https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::10f6b431-05bf-43fa-ad0d-3ec99eddd423. 3 Safe R seats, 3 Safe D seats, and 7 (yes, 7) very competitive seats (the election I used was the 2020 presidential race). Just quickly skimming through their 2020 and 2016 presidential voting (plus the 2020 Senate race to compare where Biden over and unperformed Peters):

District: 2020-PRES, 2020-SEN (2016-PRES)
1: Biden+2.2; James+3.3 (Trump+5.3)
2: Trump+3.5; James+8.6 (Trump+9.0)
3: Trump+22.3; James+24.2 (Trump+24.1)
4: Biden+0.4; James+0.5 (Trump+2.0)
5: Trump+21.5; James+20.8 (Trump+24.6)
6: Biden+1.0; Peters+3.2 (Clinton+0.8)
7: Trump+26.3; James+24.5 (Trump+27.8)
8: Biden+1.1; James+1.0 (Trump+4.7)
9: Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5 (Trump+4.4)
10: Biden+2.4; Peters+1.1 (Clinton+0.5)
11: Biden+30.0; Peters+26.9 (Clinton+25.4)
12: Biden+15.9; Peters+16.9 (Clinton+11.9)
13: Biden+77.9; Peters+75.6 (Clinton+80.1)

Biden (D) won 8 districts in 2020; Trump (R) won 5.
James (R) won 7 districts in 2020; Peters (D) won 6.
Trump won 8 districts in 2020; Clinton (D) won 5.
And, surprising me, even Gretchen Whitmer (D) only won 8 districts in 2018. I'd have guessed she won 9 or perhaps even 10 (with 10 probably being a stretch).

You can see that generally, in Western MI, Biden did noticeably better than Gary Peters and Hillary Clinton, whereas in Eastern MI, there wasn't much of a difference. While Peters ran behind Biden throughout Western/Southwestern MI, in the eastern portion of the state, he tended to do better than Biden (in certain districts, at least - including the state's lone Peters/Trump district). And, of course, while Biden did much better than Clinton throughout suburban Southwest MI, in rural and urban MI, either Clinton did better than Biden, or Biden did only a little better than Clinton.

One novelty here IMO is MI08 and MI09. These are two seemingly very similar, purple districts in the Macomb/Oakland County area. However, interestingly, the 8th is a Biden-James district (Biden+1.1; James+1.0) while the 9th is the opposite - a Trump-Peters district (Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5)! I wonder why this is the case. (Of course, both the 8th and the 9th voted for Trump in 2016.)

The Detroit suburbs are really fascinating, and there's a pretty remarkable divide between Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties. You can very clearly see the racial divide between Wayne and Oakland/Macomb counties where the black population experiences a very sudden dropoff from like 96% black precincts to majority white precincts. This divide has been fading the past few decades though.

Between Oakland and Macomb, you def have geopolitical and economic divide. Macomb County is a bit more stereotypical "white working-class suburbs" that have been shifting right under Trump but still have residual downballot D support, whereas Oakland is your stereotypical growing "well to do" white collar suburb that has been swinging left but has some residual down ballot R support. It's not so obvious on DRA, but on 2020 Pres numbers you can see a decently sharp political contrast, and on Google Maps you'll notice the communities in Oakland County have significantly more "greenery" than neighboring Macomb making the County line decently notable.

[Schiff for Senate]

(Bumping a very old thread - I know, I'm sorry!)

Competitive map I came up with for MI:  https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::10f6b431-05bf-43fa-ad0d-3ec99eddd423. 3 Safe R seats, 3 Safe D seats, and 7 (yes, 7) very competitive seats (the election I used was the 2020 presidential race). Just quickly skimming through their 2020 and 2016 presidential voting (plus the 2020 Senate race to compare where Biden over and unperformed Peters):

District: 2020-PRES, 2020-SEN (2016-PRES)
1: Biden+2.2; James+3.3 (Trump+5.3)
2: Trump+3.5; James+8.6 (Trump+9.0)
3: Trump+22.3; James+24.2 (Trump+24.1)
4: Biden+0.4; James+0.5 (Trump+2.0)
5: Trump+21.5; James+20.8 (Trump+24.6)
6: Biden+1.0; Peters+3.2 (Clinton+0.8)
7: Trump+26.3; James+24.5 (Trump+27.8)
8: Biden+1.1; James+1.0 (Trump+4.7)
9: Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5 (Trump+4.4)
10: Biden+2.4; Peters+1.1 (Clinton+0.5)
11: Biden+30.0; Peters+26.9 (Clinton+25.4)
12: Biden+15.9; Peters+16.9 (Clinton+11.9)
13: Biden+77.9; Peters+75.6 (Clinton+80.1)

Biden (D) won 8 districts in 2020; Trump (R) won 5.
James (R) won 7 districts in 2020; Peters (D) won 6.
Trump won 8 districts in 2020; Clinton (D) won 5.
And, surprising me, even Gretchen Whitmer (D) only won 8 districts in 2018. I'd have guessed she won 9 or perhaps even 10 (with 10 probably being a stretch).

You can see that generally, in Western MI, Biden did noticeably better than Gary Peters and Hillary Clinton, whereas in Eastern MI, there wasn't much of a difference. While Peters ran behind Biden throughout Western/Southwestern MI, in the eastern portion of the state, he tended to do better than Biden (in certain districts, at least - including the state's lone Peters/Trump district). And, of course, while Biden did much better than Clinton throughout suburban Southwest MI, in rural and urban MI, either Clinton did better than Biden, or Biden did only a little better than Clinton.

One novelty here IMO is MI08 and MI09. These are two seemingly very similar, purple districts in the Macomb/Oakland County area. However, interestingly, the 8th is a Biden-James district (Biden+1.1; James+1.0) while the 9th is the opposite - a Trump-Peters district (Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5)! I wonder why this is the case. (Of course, both the 8th and the 9th voted for Trump in 2016.)

The Detroit suburbs are really fascinating, and there's a pretty remarkable divide between Wayne, Oakland, and Macomb Counties. You can very clearly see the racial divide between Wayne and Oakland/Macomb counties where the black population experiences a very sudden dropoff from like 96% black precincts to majority white precincts. This divide has been fading the past few decades though.

Between Oakland and Macomb, you def have geopolitical and economic divide. Macomb County is a bit more stereotypical "white working-class suburbs" that have been shifting right under Trump but still have residual downballot D support, whereas Oakland is your stereotypical growing "well to do" white collar suburb that has been swinging left but has some residual down ballot R support. It's not so obvious on DRA, but on 2020 Pres numbers you can see a decently sharp political contrast, and on Google Maps you'll notice the communities in Oakland County have significantly more "greenery" than neighboring Macomb making the County line decently notable.

Some interesting points you made. What I noticed on DRA is how stark the difference is between Southern Macomb and Oakland and Northern Wayne - those below the line are noticeably even more Democratic than those above the line. Like, maybe those above the line are even close to 80% Democratic, but the moment you go into Wayne, it goes into 90%+ D mode. Even with county lines turned off, you can pretty much see the dividing line between Wayne County and Macomb/Oakland Counties.

Also, I kind of suspected what you said about Macomb vs Oakland (worth noting that my 8th district, the Biden-James won, is mostly in Oakland; while the 9th, the Trump-Peters won, is much more Macomb-centric). I'm guessing Washtenaw County is much more similar to Oakland than Macomb?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

(Bumping a very old thread - I know, I'm sorry!)

Btw, while I have not yet the time to look at the map you've drawn, don't feel bad about bumping these kinds of threads. They exist for a reason.

[palandio]

(Bumping a very old thread - I know, I'm sorry!)

Competitive map I came up with for MI:  https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::10f6b431-05bf-43fa-ad0d-3ec99eddd423. 3 Safe R seats, 3 Safe D seats, and 7 (yes, 7) very competitive seats (the election I used was the 2020 presidential race). Just quickly skimming through their 2020 and 2016 presidential voting (plus the 2020 Senate race to compare where Biden over and unperformed Peters):

District: 2020-PRES, 2020-SEN (2016-PRES)
1: Biden+2.2; James+3.3 (Trump+5.3)
2: Trump+3.5; James+8.6 (Trump+9.0)
3: Trump+22.3; James+24.2 (Trump+24.1)
4: Biden+0.4; James+0.5 (Trump+2.0)
5: Trump+21.5; James+20.8 (Trump+24.6)
6: Biden+1.0; Peters+3.2 (Clinton+0.8)
7: Trump+26.3; James+24.5 (Trump+27.8)
8: Biden+1.1; James+1.0 (Trump+4.7)
9: Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5 (Trump+4.4)
10: Biden+2.4; Peters+1.1 (Clinton+0.5)
11: Biden+30.0; Peters+26.9 (Clinton+25.4)
12: Biden+15.9; Peters+16.9 (Clinton+11.9)
13: Biden+77.9; Peters+75.6 (Clinton+80.1)

Biden (D) won 8 districts in 2020; Trump (R) won 5.
James (R) won 7 districts in 2020; Peters (D) won 6.
Trump won 8 districts in 2020; Clinton (D) won 5.
And, surprising me, even Gretchen Whitmer (D) only won 8 districts in 2018. I'd have guessed she won 9 or perhaps even 10 (with 10 probably being a stretch).

You can see that generally, in Western MI, Biden did noticeably better than Gary Peters and Hillary Clinton, whereas in Eastern MI, there wasn't much of a difference. While Peters ran behind Biden throughout Western/Southwestern MI, in the eastern portion of the state, he tended to do better than Biden (in certain districts, at least - including the state's lone Peters/Trump district). And, of course, while Biden did much better than Clinton throughout suburban Southwest MI, in rural and urban MI, either Clinton did better than Biden, or Biden did only a little better than Clinton.

One novelty here IMO is MI08 and MI09. These are two seemingly very similar, purple districts in the Macomb/Oakland County area. However, interestingly, the 8th is a Biden-James district (Biden+1.1; James+1.0) while the 9th is the opposite - a Trump-Peters district (Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5)! I wonder why this is the case. (Of course, both the 8th and the 9th voted for Trump in 2016.)

The thing about Michigan is that several highly competitive districts are basically default (e.g. Lansing, Grand Rapids), others are not inevitable, but easy to draw (Flint-Saginaw and two districts in Macomb and Oakland). Some are a bit of a stretch (from Kalamazoo to its West, from Outer Wayne County to its South) and some seem artificial (pairing Ann Arbor with rurals). But the main challenge is to get them all on one map.

The following map is based on the new congressional map (which has its issues, of course) and doesn't rely on major district contortionism. The biggest change is in the area of the 5th and 6th. Apart from that it's mostly some tweaking around to get the districts fully competitive. And it's just a quick sketch.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/869ca613-10ce-4f8d-bda9-c1963b1331ac

[Schiff for Senate]

(Bumping a very old thread - I know, I'm sorry!)

Competitive map I came up with for MI:  https://davesredistricting.org/maps#viewmap::10f6b431-05bf-43fa-ad0d-3ec99eddd423. 3 Safe R seats, 3 Safe D seats, and 7 (yes, 7) very competitive seats (the election I used was the 2020 presidential race). Just quickly skimming through their 2020 and 2016 presidential voting (plus the 2020 Senate race to compare where Biden over and unperformed Peters):

District: 2020-PRES, 2020-SEN (2016-PRES)
1: Biden+2.2; James+3.3 (Trump+5.3)
2: Trump+3.5; James+8.6 (Trump+9.0)
3: Trump+22.3; James+24.2 (Trump+24.1)
4: Biden+0.4; James+0.5 (Trump+2.0)
5: Trump+21.5; James+20.8 (Trump+24.6)
6: Biden+1.0; Peters+3.2 (Clinton+0.8)
7: Trump+26.3; James+24.5 (Trump+27.8)
8: Biden+1.1; James+1.0 (Trump+4.7)
9: Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5 (Trump+4.4)
10: Biden+2.4; Peters+1.1 (Clinton+0.5)
11: Biden+30.0; Peters+26.9 (Clinton+25.4)
12: Biden+15.9; Peters+16.9 (Clinton+11.9)
13: Biden+77.9; Peters+75.6 (Clinton+80.1)

Biden (D) won 8 districts in 2020; Trump (R) won 5.
James (R) won 7 districts in 2020; Peters (D) won 6.
Trump won 8 districts in 2020; Clinton (D) won 5.
And, surprising me, even Gretchen Whitmer (D) only won 8 districts in 2018. I'd have guessed she won 9 or perhaps even 10 (with 10 probably being a stretch).

You can see that generally, in Western MI, Biden did noticeably better than Gary Peters and Hillary Clinton, whereas in Eastern MI, there wasn't much of a difference. While Peters ran behind Biden throughout Western/Southwestern MI, in the eastern portion of the state, he tended to do better than Biden (in certain districts, at least - including the state's lone Peters/Trump district). And, of course, while Biden did much better than Clinton throughout suburban Southwest MI, in rural and urban MI, either Clinton did better than Biden, or Biden did only a little better than Clinton.

One novelty here IMO is MI08 and MI09. These are two seemingly very similar, purple districts in the Macomb/Oakland County area. However, interestingly, the 8th is a Biden-James district (Biden+1.1; James+1.0) while the 9th is the opposite - a Trump-Peters district (Trump+0.1; Peters+1.5)! I wonder why this is the case. (Of course, both the 8th and the 9th voted for Trump in 2016.)

The thing about Michigan is that several highly competitive districts are basically default (e.g. Lansing, Grand Rapids), others are not inevitable, but easy to draw (Flint-Saginaw and two districts in Macomb and Oakland). Some are a bit of a stretch (from Kalamazoo to its West, from Outer Wayne County to its South) and some seem artificial (pairing Ann Arbor with rurals). But the main challenge is to get them all on one map.

The following map is based on the new congressional map (which has its issues, of course) and doesn't rely on major district contortionism. The biggest change is in the area of the 5th and 6th. Apart from that it's mostly some tweaking around to get the districts fully competitive. And it's just a quick sketch.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/869ca613-10ce-4f8d-bda9-c1963b1331ac

Yeah, I agree with your point - you get a lot of naturally very competitive seats in MI just because of its geography, in a way you don't necessarily get in, say, WI, or MN, or even PA (despite the fact that PA has 6 more CDs more than MI).

[Atlas Force]

https://twitter.com/RedistrictNet/status/1719058902803775608

[ProgressiveModerate]

Interesting to see if this succeeds.

I really do not like the way the Commission tried to "unpack" black voters - however a very good handful of said seats failed in 2022. The commission argues it's what their VRA lawyers told them to do, but there def seemed to be some level of underlying partisan incentives.

The thing is in MI, you don't even have to excessively "unpack" black voters to make a partisan equitable map so that argument is weak as well. A lot of the map just "unpacks" black voters into already D-leaning suburbs.

Really hope these issues are fixed.

[Skill and Chance]

Interesting to see if this succeeds.

I really do not like the way the Commission tried to "unpack" black voters - however a very good handful of said seats failed in 2022. The commission argues it's what their VRA lawyers told them to do, but there def seemed to be some level of underlying partisan incentives.

The thing is in MI, you don't even have to excessively "unpack" black voters to make a partisan equitable map so that argument is weak as well. A lot of the map just "unpacks" black voters into already D-leaning suburbs.

Really hope these issues are fixed.

Yes, I think to be consistent with the principles laid out in the AL, LA, and now GA section 2 cases, the MI state senate map has to go.

[Oryxslayer]

Interesting to see if this succeeds.

I really do not like the way the Commission tried to "unpack" black voters - however a very good handful of said seats failed in 2022. The commission argues it's what their VRA lawyers told them to do, but there def seemed to be some level of underlying partisan incentives.

The thing is in MI, you don't even have to excessively "unpack" black voters to make a partisan equitable map so that argument is weak as well. A lot of the map just "unpacks" black voters into already D-leaning suburbs.

Really hope these issues are fixed.

Yes, I think to be consistent with the principles laid out in the AL, LA, and now GA section 2 cases, the MI state senate map has to go.

Yeah especially the when it comes to the Senate districts. The thing to remember with this case is it effects the inner Detroit region, and therefore has nothing to do with partisanship. All the adjacent areas are varying hues of Blue. It instead has everything to do with the Dem Primary, and I would not be surprised if the commission's VRA analyst just didn't do that side of the equation. Because from a D v R perspective, all the districts they drew should function. But things in some of the seats don't work from a D v D primary RPV perspective.

[Tekken_Guy]

Yeah, for the most part the non-black areas of the cracked districts are still Democratic leaning so all the newly drawn districts should still lean Democratic, even if some of them won’t be safe anymore.

[Nyvin]

Would the main partisan impact of this be taking the black majority areas out of SD-11 and SD-12?  I can't really see anything else on the map that would change in any meaningful way. 

They can make either SD-1 or SD-2 closer to black majority at the expense of the other, but that doesn't really change either away from Safe D (not even close really).