2020 Redistricting in Arizona

[AustralianSwingVoter]

I can't help but think there should be a single district taking in the urban core of the area, including Downtown Phoenix, the Biltmore Area, Downtown Scottsdale, and Downtown Tempe.

Sounds like a Dem vote sink that Republicans would create.

It's too big and Scottsdale still leans r.

No and no. This is a population-balanced 6-4 D map (7-3 if O'Halleran can hold on--AZ Republicans are seriously packed in  the far northwest valley, far east valley, and along the Colorado River.) By lumping in R-leaning Scottsdale with the white liberal core of Phoenix and college town Tempe, you get a D+19 district, but you allow for four more Maricopa-based Dem districts in Peoria/Glendale, South Phoenix/Buckeye, and Mesa/Chandler.)

It would look like this:

Just looking at it I have doubts to that maps legality. That grey district certainly doesn't look like it's anywhere near a HVAP majority, it looks more like a HVAP in the low 40s.

Two things to consider.
1. 2010 HVAP data is not that relevant for a 2020 map, you ought to look at 2010 total population proportions instead.
2. The share of Pinal in that seat is actually quite a bit more non-white relative to the county as a whole. Looks can be deceiving.

1. Going off the 2015 ACS the Hispanic pop in the grey will increase by about 5% to 2020. In which case the HVAP in that seat is maybe 45%.
2. On a redrawing of the map in DRA following Blairite's map, the grey area in Pinal is only about 5% more Hispanic than the county as a whole.

[Former President tack50]

Just like I did for NJ, here is my attempt at a "fair map" for Arizona

https://davesredistricting.org/join/11c5be7b-6cae-4cb0-9e35-cd41ba44b688



And the numbers. Including both PVI and Clinton-Trump numbers as the former seems to be deceiving for Arizona?

AZ-01: R+10, Trump 55-38
AZ-02: EVEN, Clinton 49-44
AZ-03: D+8, Clinton 57-37 (51% Hispanic)
AZ-04: R+12, Trump 57-36
AZ-05: R+9, Trump 50-41
AZ-06: R+6, Trump 47-44
AZ-07: D+18, Clinton 66-27 (56% Hispanic)
AZ-08: R+12, Trump 56-38
AZ-09: D+3, Clinton 53-40
AZ-10: R+14, Trump 57-37

So in theory, going by PVI this even looks like an R gerrymander, with only 2 safe Dem district, a lean Dem district, a swing district and a whopping 6 safe R districts

However this also seems like the kind of map that would end up being a dummymander. I imagine AZ-06 almost certainly went D in 2018 and probably would not look back. AZ-09 is probably gone for good. And it is not inconceivable that dems narrowly flipped AZ-05 in this map, leading to a 6D-4R delegation though I imagine 5-5 is more likely.

Overall I imagine this map would be a 5R-4D-1 Swing map in practice; or maybe 5R-3D-2S if you think the Republicans will make a suburban comeback.

[Oryxslayer]

Just like I did for NJ, here is my attempt at a "fair map" for Arizona

FTR, this map is illegal because of what it does to the NE native reservations.

[Former President tack50]

Just like I did for NJ, here is my attempt at a "fair map" for Arizona

FTR, this map is illegal because of what it does to the NE native reservations.

Wait so you need to have them together? They are not enough for a native VRA district right?

[Oryxslayer]

Just like I did for NJ, here is my attempt at a "fair map" for Arizona

FTR, this map is illegal because of what it does to the NE native reservations.

Wait so you need to have them together? They are not enough for a native VRA district right?

No, you do not need to put all the native reservations in one district because they do not have enough for one clear district at the congressional level. However, the following reservations are considered superior to counties and need to be preserved before anything else. You cut the Navajo, Hopi, San Carlos, and White Mountain reservations, along with those in the south. The entire reason for the bizarre northern arrangement in 2000 for example was because the Hopi and Navajo tribes desired separation, but the tribal land needed to be kept whole. In 2010 this was no longer an issue, so the NE block was reunited.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Just like I did for NJ, here is my attempt at a "fair map" for Arizona

https://davesredistricting.org/join/11c5be7b-6cae-4cb0-9e35-cd41ba44b688

The map seems to totally ignore municipal lines (mainly in Maricopa of course) not to mention some rather odd districts which don't follow COIs, particularly the rural seats (splitting the NE Natives, Northern Pinal shoved in a rural seat while the 10th randomly takes rural Yavapai). So I'd question how this map is "fair".

[Former President tack50]

Just like I did for NJ, here is my attempt at a "fair map" for Arizona

https://davesredistricting.org/join/11c5be7b-6cae-4cb0-9e35-cd41ba44b688

The map seems to totally ignore municipal lines (mainly in Maricopa of course) not to mention some rather odd districts which don't follow COIs, particularly the rural seats (splitting the NE Natives, Northern Pinal shoved in a rural seat while the 10th randomly takes rural Yavapai). So I'd question how this map is "fair".

Well I did not use partisan data and the districts look "neat" for the most part

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

I can't help but think there should be a single district taking in the urban core of the area, including Downtown Phoenix, the Biltmore Area, Downtown Scottsdale, and Downtown Tempe.

Sounds like a Dem vote sink that Republicans would create.

It's too big and Scottsdale still leans r.

No and no. This is a population-balanced 6-4 D map (7-3 if O'Halleran can hold on--AZ Republicans are seriously packed in  the far northwest valley, far east valley, and along the Colorado River.) By lumping in R-leaning Scottsdale with the white liberal core of Phoenix and college town Tempe, you get a D+19 district, but you allow for four more Maricopa-based Dem districts in Peoria/Glendale, South Phoenix/Buckeye, and Mesa/Chandler.)

It would look like this:

Just looking at it I have doubts to that maps legality. That grey district certainly doesn't look like it's anywhere near a HVAP majority, it looks more like a HVAP in the low 40s.

Two things to consider.
1. 2010 HVAP data is not that relevant for a 2020 map, you ought to look at 2010 total population proportions instead.
2. The share of Pinal in that seat is actually quite a bit more non-white relative to the county as a whole. Looks can be deceiving.

1. Going off the 2015 ACS the Hispanic pop in the grey will increase by about 5% to 2020. In which case the HVAP in that seat is maybe 45%.
2. On a redrawing of the map in DRA following Blairite's map, the grey area in Pinal is only about 5% more Hispanic than the county as a whole.

It would be about 47% HVAP, but 51% by total hispanic population. Regardless, the WVAP would only be about 34% in 2020 so it might be good enough. And the yellow district should be majority minority FWIW.

[Sol]

Here's a quick and dirty Republican "fair" map of Arizona. (DRA link)





Tried to do something similar to the 2010 map but for the Republicans. A pretty strong 7-3 map, though the 6th, 10th and 2nd could be pickups in an excellent Democratic year.

I guess there might be some VRA issues with the 3rd? If so that just means switching some white liberals with the 2nd probably, which would make the 2nd a proper tossup. I doubt Grijalva minds the white progressives though.

[Idaho Conservative]

Pretty solid 6-4 map, but the Tuscan suburban seat and Glendale seat could be competitive, meaning it could be 5-5 in a dem wave or 7-3 in a republican wave.  Overall, this map is favorable to dems in Maricopa, giving them 3 seats, but outside of that the map is favorable to republicans. 
https://davesredistricting.org/join/533b0941-3a47-469b-8cba-bdf618aa2e0b
This map is probably in the inverse of the current in terms of partisan favorability.  But could be much more for dems, they could easily walk away with only 3 seats. 

[S019]

Pretty solid 6-4 map, but the Tuscan suburban seat and Glendale seat could be competitive, meaning it could be 5-5 in a dem wave or 7-3 in a republican wave.  Overall, this map is favorable to dems in Maricopa, giving them 3 seats, but outside of that the map is favorable to republicans. 
https://davesredistricting.org/join/533b0941-3a47-469b-8cba-bdf618aa2e0b
This map is probably in the inverse of the current in terms of partisan favorability.  But could be much more for dems, they could easily walk away with only 3 seats. 

From a quick glance this doesn't look like it follows the requirement of keeping Native reservations together, and even if it does, this is needlessly ugly, and probably splits too many counties. Also a quick reminder that AZ's commission prioritizes competitive seats. After a look in the link, the east central Native reservation was split up for no good reason, I'd recommend keeping it whole. Also this is a clear gerrymander, there is no need to dismantle the Tucson seat like that, and the Native reservation split clearly seems like it was for partisan reason, which is an absolute "no." Also Phoenix should really have one competitive seat. There are a lot of questionable decisions in this map, and they really mess up the entire map. For instance, a random one, but still relevant, is that I'm wondering what exactly happened to the Northwest AZ seat, also the border VRA seat can extend a bit north, which may orient the blue and purple seats better and might help to reshape the entire map, for the better.

[Idaho Conservative]

My map has competitive seats, and a bunch of other maps here split Tuscan. 

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Some Tucson split is inevitable. However I tend to split it along white-Latino lines, with the most white areas going with Cochise and possibly Santa Cruz, and the most Latino areas going with Yuma, Santa Cruz if the white seat isn't taking it in, and if necessary, parts of Maricopa.

[cvparty]

My map has competitive seats, and a bunch of other maps here split Tuscan. 

tuscan chicken

[SevenEleven]

Idaho Conservative will continue trolling you if you don't ignore him

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It seems the most profound change in AZ that comes from going from 9 seats to 10 is that the 3rd's share of Maricopa shrinks dramatically.

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

So we can definitely kiss AZ-01 and AZ-02 goodbye with the inevitable Republican gerrymander. Dems will be confined to 2 seats in Phoenix and 1 in Tucson

[DaWN]

So we can definitely kiss AZ-01 and AZ-02 goodbye with the inevitable Republican gerrymander. Dems will be confined to 2 seats in Phoenix and 1 in Tucson

Madigan is going to have his work cut out for him in making up for the states where Dems will be gerrymandered to oblivion, that's for sure

[TrendsareUsuallyReal]

So we can definitely kiss AZ-01 and AZ-02 goodbye with the inevitable Republican gerrymander. Dems will be confined to 2 seats in Phoenix and 1 in Tucson

Madigan is going to have his work cut out for him in making up for the states where Dems will be gerrymandered to oblivion, that's for sure

Yup. Democrats stupidly ceded their map-drawing ability in Virginia back to Republicans, turned their biggest states into commissions, and Republicans are going to nuke Florida, Texas, and Georgia into oblivion. Democrats are losing the House in 2022 for sure, it’s just a question of how bad will it be.

[DaWN]

So we can definitely kiss AZ-01 and AZ-02 goodbye with the inevitable Republican gerrymander. Dems will be confined to 2 seats in Phoenix and 1 in Tucson

Madigan is going to have his work cut out for him in making up for the states where Dems will be gerrymandered to oblivion, that's for sure

Yup. Democrats stupidly ceded their map-drawing ability in Virginia back to Republicans, turned their biggest states into commissions, and Republicans are going to nuke Florida, Texas, and Georgia into oblivion. Democrats are losing the House in 2022 for sure, it’s just a question of how bad will it be.

Eh, I'm not sure I'd go THAT far. The Democrats self-righteous idiocy is going to make it much harder than it should be, but by default the maps will be better than they were in the 2010s. There won't be any PA or MI gerrymanders, NC will automatically be better and WI will probably be a fair map... probably anyway. Point is, if Biden stays popular I don't think a hold is totally impossible and if he becomes unpopular it was going to be lost regardless of redistricting.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/ef8f655e-675f-4264-aa78-80c03271bd49

Here is a map designed to correct for the D lean of the 2013-2023 map.
AZ-01: This seat largely replicates the previous map's AZ-01. It however withdraws from Yavapai and becomes majority-minority on paper in overall population (the current CD is 52% White or so). It also expands into Maricopa as to increase the Native %. 46W 28N 23H in 2018 total population, 52W 25N 19H in 2018 CVAP. It moves slightly to the right due to selection of precincts with a relatively high Hispanic % but also a strong GOP lean. R+2.
AZ-02: This seat doesn't change all that much. Interstate 10 is its border for a long stretch, but broadly it takes in white precincts without much regard to partisanship. It also moves to the right slightly. R+2.
AZ-03: Withdraws entirely from Metro Pheonix. Doesn't change too much, overall. It gains some precincts in Pinal, as well as Yuma. 60H 30W in 2018 total population, 50H 41W in 2018 CVAP. D+9.
AZ-04: Now has all of Yavapai, and loses all of its share of Pinal and Gila. Gains a wide swathe of land to the west of the 8th, 7th, and 1st - including areas with a major Hispanic presence formerly in the 3rd. Overall partisanship is almost exactly the same as the old AZ-04 - even the PVI is unchanged. R+21.
AZ-05: 2013-2023 map had this CD confined to Maricopa. This seat now exits Maricopa and begins to resemble the eastern half of the 2003-2013 AZ-05. Overall partisanship barely changes that much. R+17.
AZ-06: Moves south to take in some heavily white Dem trending area so that the Latino % in the now two Latino seats based in Maricopa are more firmed up. Loses some territory to nearby districts. Net effect of all these changes is to move it two points to the left. R+7.
AZ-07: Still a Latino district, though not necessarily entirely solidly Latino right now. Would elect a Latino however. Loses a lot of territory to the "new" 10th district, though this is probably the new CD moreso than the others as it is not really rooted in any of the 2013-2023 districts. 55H 30W in 2018 total population, 42W 42H in 2018 citizen VAP. D+8.
AZ-08: Loses territory to both the 7th and the 4th. Essentially stays the same partisan-wise and similar demographically. R+13.
AZ-09: Moves south and east and loses territory to its neighbors, while eating the western chunk of AZ-05. In the process it shifts half a dozen points to the right, but Greg Stanton could still run and win here. R+2.
AZ-10: This is a "new district" but in practice is, roughly, the western half of old AZ-09 and the eastern half of old AZ-07, with more of the latter. 53H 30W 11B in 2018 total population, 43W 38H 12B in 2018 citizen VAP. D+18.

Come 2022 the 7th's CVAP is likely boosted to sizable pluralities and the 10th in a clear lead, and when you consider the current AZ-07 as it is has a +23 percentage point advantage for Latinos among the broader population on 2010 figures, there is not much of a problem actually in my 7th and 10th.

[lfromnj]

So we can definitely kiss AZ-01 and AZ-02 goodbye with the inevitable Republican gerrymander. Dems will be confined to 2 seats in Phoenix and 1 in Tucson

Madigan is going to have his work cut out for him in making up for the states where Dems will be gerrymandered to oblivion, that's for sure

Yup. Democrats stupidly ceded their map-drawing ability in Virginia back to Republicans, turned their biggest states into commissions, and Republicans are going to nuke Florida, Texas, and Georgia into oblivion. Democrats are losing the House in 2022 for sure, it’s just a question of how bad will it be.

Hey AZ and CA provably even out by itself.

[Nyvin]

Just my take on two hispanic CVAP seats.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/27ce5e1f-05d6-4356-a161-a26d89b75311





AZ-2 is kinda boxed in by the Native and Hispanic districts, so not much to do there really.

AZ-1 is 25% Native American CVAP

AZ-3 is 48.7% Hispanic CVAP

AZ-7 is 55.3% Hispanic CVAP

Map overall is 4R-4D-2s.   By 2022 AZ-9 most likely won't be competitive anymore.

AZ-1: 44.9% Clinton - 46.0% Trump
AZ-2: 46.8% Clinton - 45.8% Trump
AZ-3: 60% Clinton - 33.6% Trump
AZ-4: 27.8% Clinton - 66.2% Trump
AZ-5: 33.2% Clinton - 58.4% Trump
AZ-6: 38.6% Clinton - 54.9% Trump
AZ-7: 71.6% Clinton - 21.5% Trump
AZ-8: 40.4% Clinton - 53% Trump
AZ-9: 48.2% Clinton - 43.1% Trump
AZ-10: 54.7% Clinton - 37% Trump

[Idaho Conservative]

So we can definitely kiss AZ-01 and AZ-02 goodbye with the inevitable Republican gerrymander. Dems will be confined to 2 seats in Phoenix and 1 in Tucson

At least 2 Dem seats i Phoenix are needed to avoid a dummmander.  3 is ideal.  A 6R-4D map is pretty fair anyways.

[Nyvin]

So we can definitely kiss AZ-01 and AZ-02 goodbye with the inevitable Republican gerrymander. Dems will be confined to 2 seats in Phoenix and 1 in Tucson

At least 2 Dem seats i Phoenix are needed to avoid a dummmander.  3 is ideal.  A 6R-4D map is pretty fair anyways.

What about when Democrats are winning a majority of the statewide vote (which seems inevitable at this point)?