Illinois Redistricting Megathread

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Thank you, king! No independent maps in Illinois until we have them nationwide.

At best Congress can mandate them for congressional districts, but not for state legislative districts. Since Pubs in their supermajority states say the same thing, your statement is equivalent of saying no independent maps for the state ever. The irony is that in states like IL an independent map is unlikely to affect the Dem control of the state, but would probably put a number of incumbents at risk in primaries or general elections with ungerrymandered districts.

Democrats have a bill and almost unanimous support for legislation mandating fair maps(there's an argument that under the 14th amendment congress does have the right to mandate them for state legislative districts or at least allow them to be challenged if they are gerrymandered in courts). Republicans can support it or propose their own standalone bill banning gerrymandering if they wanted.

This is moot since Joe Manchin has said he won't support that bill.

No, he said he wouldn’t support for the present version of it and that there were some changes he felt needed to be made.  He’s never commented one way or another on the redistricting reform element AFAIK.

[Pericles]

Are Democrats actually trying to stop gerrymandering for the 2022 cycle? I thought so but I heard that the HR1 changes only take effect for the 2030s redistricting.

[Sestak]

Are Democrats actually trying to stop gerrymandering for the 2022 cycle? I thought so but I heard that the HR1 changes only take effect for the 2030s redistricting.

Might be wrong on this but my understanding is that some of the restrictions on gerrymandering take effect immediately but the mandatory redistricting commissions are only for the 2030 cycle.

[Mr. Illini]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

This is actually not as bad looking as I thought.

Do it

[lfromnj]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

The downstate district is probably Likely R anyway  as you used composite, and then that Rockford to Peoria is probably barely better than a tossup.  And I wouldn't be sure of other districts either. If you really want a rock solid map that maximizes seats, you draw the VRA seats into white rurals such as Iroquois so Underwood won't need to take Rockford. Then draw the 12 Chicago land seats with preferably all seats except maybe Underwood's being Clinton +12 or more. Then draw a Rockford to  Rock Island to Bloomington. After that draw a Champaign to East St.Louis for a 14-3  Overall though I think certain incumbent demands might push Underwood by the end to take Rockford which means a 13-1-3 could also happen.

[Mr. Illini]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

The downstate district is probably Likely R anyway  as you used composite, and then that Rockford to Peoria is probably barely better than a tossup.  And I wouldn't be sure of other districts either. If you really want a rock solid map that maximizes seats, you draw the VRA seats into white rurals such as Iroquois so Underwood won't need to take Rockford. Then draw the 12 Chicago land seats with preferably all seats except maybe Underwood's being Clinton +12 or more. Then draw a Rockford to  Rock Island to Bloomington. After that draw a Champaign to East St.Louis for a 14-3  Overall though I think certain incumbent demands might push Underwood by the end to take Rockford which means a 13-1-3 could also happen.

It’s true, the downstate district would be tough to hold on to. There’s not much room for improvement either - much of the territory around it is solid R unless you want to take Springfield, which complicates things for the district it’s in currently.

The Peoria/Rock Island district actually could be shored up a little further by taking more territory along the river and making the reach down to Peoria even stringy-er. I tried to keep things compact where possible, though.

[Gracile]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

This likely isn't a 15-2 map, as lfromnj pointed out - with the Quad Cities and Metro East districts probably being much more Republican than the composite (which uses 2012 and 2016 Senate data that is more favorable to Democrats downstate). I'll also add that some of these districts are spreading Democrats too thin that they wouldn't be immune from a bad cycle.

[Mr. Illini]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

This likely isn't a 15-2 map, as lfromnj pointed out - with the Quad Cities and Metro East districts probably being much more Republican than the composite (which uses 2012 and 2016 Senate data that is more favorable to Democrats downstate). I'll also add that some of these districts are spreading Democrats too thin that they wouldn't be immune from a bad cycle.

Using 2016 Presidential data only, the Rock Island district is still Democrat by a few %. The downstate district would be Republican.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

This likely isn't a 15-2 map, as lfromnj pointed out - with the Quad Cities and Metro East districts probably being much more Republican than the composite (which uses 2012 and 2016 Senate data that is more favorable to Democrats downstate). I'll also add that some of these districts are spreading Democrats too thin that they wouldn't be immune from a bad cycle.

Thoughts on the map I posted upthread? (on this page)

[Gracile]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

This likely isn't a 15-2 map, as lfromnj pointed out - with the Quad Cities and Metro East districts probably being much more Republican than the composite (which uses 2012 and 2016 Senate data that is more favorable to Democrats downstate). I'll also add that some of these districts are spreading Democrats too thin that they wouldn't be immune from a bad cycle.

Thoughts on the map I posted upthread? (on this page)

It's not terrible if this was strictly hypothetical, but there are several things here that I'm doubtful will happen in real life. If I have more time I'll go into more detail but basically (1) Newman getting drawn out is pretty unlikely and if she was it would be to make way for a second Hispanic opportunity seat. Also in trying to sink Newman you gave away a lot of Garcia's prime turf in Chicago. (2) Foster is not going to be happy with the arrangement of the Naperville area (he lives in your 14th while Underwood lives in your 11th). (3) An open exurban Kane/McHenry seat could elect a GOP representative given its down-ballot GOP tendencies/in a possible wave cycle, so that configuration would not be ideal if you're trying to maximize Democratic seats in Chicagoland (again this would be moot if your intent wasn't trying to create a D gerrymander).

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Dems should go for the jugular. 15-2, all Dem districts are at least +4 except the downstate one, which is +3. Compactness isn't terrible either except for the central IL district. No attention paid to where any of the incumbents reside.

This likely isn't a 15-2 map, as lfromnj pointed out - with the Quad Cities and Metro East districts probably being much more Republican than the composite (which uses 2012 and 2016 Senate data that is more favorable to Democrats downstate). I'll also add that some of these districts are spreading Democrats too thin that they wouldn't be immune from a bad cycle.

Thoughts on the map I posted upthread? (on this page)

It's not terrible if this was strictly hypothetical, but there are several things here that I'm doubtful will happen in real life. If I have more time I'll go into more detail but basically (1) Newman getting drawn out is pretty unlikely and if she was it would be to make way for a second Hispanic opportunity seat. Also in trying to sink Newman you gave away a lot of Garcia's prime turf in Chicago. (2) Foster is not going to be happy with the arrangement of the Naperville area (he lives in your 14th while Underwood lives in your 11th). (3) An open exurban Kane/McHenry seat could elect a GOP representative given its down-ballot GOP tendencies/in a possible wave cycle, so that configuration would not be ideal if you're trying to maximize Democratic seats in Chicagoland (again this would be moot if your intent wasn't trying to create a D gerrymander).

The lines in that part of Illinois were actually to preserve the majority-black seats. I didn't target Newman just because (as much as I do dislike her), I did it so that AA seats could soak up white areas instead of more black areas. And in any case, if such a sacrifice did have to be made, it would be at the expense of the least senior member - aka Marie Newman.
While 2) is definitely very fair, it's also something that sounds hard to reconcile with an effective 3-GOP-seat map, as lines have to change to allow D seats has to soak up those blood red rurals.
3) is also quite fair but the map would probably have to become very, very nasty to preclude that possibility in any of the drawn-to-elect-a-Dem seats. I suppose one could also trade more territory between the NW Cook CD and that CD as well - though it would turn them into strings. It's worth noting that that seat was drawn for Underwood - encouraging her to run there. It even got an arm into heavily D parts of Cook, designed to shore her up. In case she does run in that exurban Kane-McHenry CD, it would seem the seat running from DuPage to rural Western Illinois might be the real problem seat, and that seat would indeed be open.

[Brittain33]

I’m sorry for the psephological blue balls this Tweet will produce since I assume no one here has access to this website.

https://twitter.com/greghinz/status/1394016308157730816?s=21

[new_patomic]

I’m sorry for the psephological blue balls this Tweet will produce since I assume no one here has access to this website.

https://twitter.com/greghinz/status/1394016308157730816?s=21

Not sure if there's a higher resolution available

[Roll Roons]

I’m sorry for the psephological blue balls this Tweet will produce since I assume no one here has access to this website.

https://twitter.com/greghinz/status/1394016308157730816?s=21

Somehow I feel like this map won't hold.

[Nyvin]

I’m sorry for the psephological blue balls this Tweet will produce since I assume no one here has access to this website.

https://twitter.com/greghinz/status/1394016308157730816?s=21

Not sure if there's a higher resolution available

So they actually are going to try to keep Bustos' seat alive and go for the St Louis to Champaign district.

[new_patomic]

On the face of it the new IL-17 would be a narrow Clinton/Biden seat but not one I'd ever feel confident about.

Though I suppose with news that McNamara is interested in running, giving him as much as Rockford as possible makes sense.

[Gass3268]

Twitter thinks this is just Dave Wasserman’s map that he came up with a few weeks ago.

[Gracile]

Twitter thinks this is just Dave Wasserman’s map that he came up with a few weeks ago.

Yes, it literally is an exact copy of that map-

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1388183558599155714

^For comparison.

[new_patomic]

Oh well that's lame then.

Also you could do a lot more to shore up the 17th than what he does.

[Frenchrepublican]

In the first firm indication of how the state’s congressional alignment is likely to soon change, a map of proposed new U.S. House districts has surfaced in Springfield and is being quietly shopped to key remap players.
 
The proposal has not so far been formally endorsed by either state lawmakers who must approve a new map or members of the state’s congressional delegation who would have to run and serve under it.

But the map was prepared by some Democrats, sources close to the matter report, and could be enacted by that party’s supermajority in the Illinois House and Senate and by Gov. J.B. Pritzker in the new few weeks.
 
If nothing else, the proposal strongly suggests the overall direction Democrats are inclined to take.
 
Republicans certainly will not like it.
 
Under its terms, the GOP would face a map intended to force it to eat the state’s overall loss of one congressional seat as per the new Census and to potentially lose a second seat downstate. The map overall is designed to leave the state with 14 Democratic congressmen and 3 Republicans, compared to a 13-5 partisan split now.
 
Some Democrats may have some problems with the map, too, with the district of Downers Grove Democratic Rep. Sean Casten extending miles to the east into Chicago’s Northwest Side. Similarly, Rep. Robin Kelly of Matteson, the newly elected chair of the Illinois Democratic Party, would be given a district that runs into Central Illinois. And the districts of Reps. Bill Foster of Geneva and Raja Krishnamoorthi of Schaumburg would be to the Wisconsin state line.
 
But Republicans are the main target.

Completely dismembered under the  proposal is the district of Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Channahon, who has clashed with Donald Trump loyalists but is still a Republican. Democratic-leaning portions of his district in the Joliet area would be given to Democratic Rep. Lauren Underwood of Naperville to shore up her standing, with Republican sections annexed on to GOP-leaning districts downstate.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg-hinz-politics/new-congressional-map-surfaces-springfield

[Progressive Pessimist]

Good. I used to champion fair map drawing, but with what the GOP has become the Democrats, in states where they actually have control overt the process, can't afford to unilaterally disarm. The Illinois Democrats need to somehow take priority in targeting and eliminating Mary Miller's district first and foremost. She is definitely the worst of their delegation.

[AGA]

What does the map look like?

[MT Treasurer]

14-3 strikes me as pretty risky, but I might be wrong? I think even under the new map, Republicans might win 5 districts on a good night (so not much change from the current partisan make-up of the state's House delegation), but who knows.

Anyway, hopefully OH, FL, and TX Republicans are taking notice.

[Pink Panther]

If this is the map, apart from Il-17, the other thirteen districts should hold for the decade, due to the leftward shift in Chicagoland, and the leftward shift of places such as Bloomington and Decatur should help Il-13. However, Il-17 will probably fall either in 2022 or mid-decade, due to it's rightward shift as a whole. We'll have to see if the state courts will strike this down or not, though litigation usually takes a while for political gerrymandering. Gerrymandering is still bad, no matter what.