2020 Redistricting in Arizona

[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.

[S019]

Do the Maricopa/Pinal reservations have to be included in AZ-1 or is it just the northeastern ones with San Carlos/Fort Apache?

I don't believe there are any requirements at all with the reservations in the 1st district--it's only 22% native, and the various groups in the area are distinct ethnic groups. The pre-2010 map looked like this:

I'm pretty sure that that occurred due to some conflicts between the native groups, and it was a very unusual arrangement.

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)?

It should still be pretty easy to draw two Dem sinks in Maricopa County with the remaining seats being pretty strongly Republican. Something like two 70%+ Sinema seats and the rest 55% McSally or better.

If it's so easy, please draw one that does that.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/45380952-72e8-4c6c-9d96-606ce6f84395
Not possible.  The best I could do is 2 Phx vote sinks, 1 Trump-Sinema competitive seat (still leans R because Sinema overperformed being from the area) and the rest of the Phx suburban seats are at least McSally+10.  We really need 3 dem leaning seats in Maricopa so the suburbs are safe R.  Can be competitive D tho.

That 9th district is only Trump +6, it's almost certain to flip sometime during the 2020s if current suburban trends continue.

TBH the best option for the AZGOP is to lock in a 6-4, which can be done easily - if you create a Tucson sink and 3 Phoenix sinks (one of which is a VRA), you can make the other suburban seats all at least McSally+13 and Trump+20, and make the 1st and 2nd (which shouldn't be trending left as aggressively, if at all) at least Trump +10. Here's a map that does that: https://davesredistricting.org/join/e382b695-9c53-40b4-9a50-ffb294c23045. The suburban seats should hold through the decade, and while the 2nd could plausbily fall, it's Trump +10 and would be an uphill climb.

Theoretical Map

These gerrymandered maps aren't going to be drawn. AZ has a commission for a reason, it's not going to draw 6 solid seats for either party, also the AZ commission, in particular, seems to prioritize competitiveness, which makes the gerrymanders in this thread, even less likely.

[S019]

https://www.azmirror.com/2020/10/08/five-finalists-to-lead-independent-redistricting-committee-chosen/

The five finalists are:

Nicole Cullen, an American history, American government and criminal justice teacher at Perry High School in Gilbert.
Thomas Loquvam, general counsel and vice president of corporate services at the utility company EPCOR. He previously served as general counsel at Pinnacle West, the parent company of Arizona Public Service.
Erika Schupak Neuberg, a psychologist with a practice in Scottsdale who serves as a national board member for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.
Gregory Teesdale, an Oro Valley resident and former executive at venture capital companies
Robert Wilson, who owns a business consulting practice and gun store in Flagstaff.

Description of all 5 in the article, feel free to read through.

Based on the bios, Cullen and Neuberg are probably the only ones who aren't guaranteed to be partisan Republicans

[S019]

I'd be shocked if any of Gila, Navajo, and Apache counties end up in the East Tuscon instead of the Northern AZ district. Cutting Mohave and putting Lake Havasu City in with AZ-03 is the much more obvious way of dealing with the population imbalance.

There is a reason.

Where is the border Hispanic VRA seat?

[S019]

AZ IRC met on the 27th and narrowed down who they're deciding on to three firms


https://www.azmirror.com/2021/04/27/redistricting-commission-will-give-mapping-consultants-time-to-respond-to-comments-criticism/

The three firms are HaystaqDNA, Taylor English Decision, LLC, and Timmons Group

Per AZMirror, all three firms have faced accusations of partisan bias, Timmons Group and Taylor English Decisions are accused of GOP bias, while HaystaqDNA is accused of Dem bias. In 2012, chair Colleen Mathis chose a firm accused of Dem bias and the result was a map that did largely favor Democrats, our independent this time seems to be truly independent, but of course no one actually is, which firm is picked will tell us a lot about which map we get.

[S019]

AZ IRC met on the 27th and narrowed down who they're deciding on to three firms


https://www.azmirror.com/2021/04/27/redistricting-commission-will-give-mapping-consultants-time-to-respond-to-comments-criticism/

The three firms are HaystaqDNA, Taylor English Decision, LLC, and Timmons Group

Per AZMirror, all three firms have faced accusations of partisan bias, Timmons Group and Taylor English Decisions are accused of GOP bias, while HaystaqDNA is accused of Dem bias. In 2012, chair Colleen Mathis chose a firm accused of Dem bias and the result was a map that did largely favor Democrats, our independent this time seems to be truly independent, but of course no one actually is, which firm is picked will tell us a lot about which map we get.

‘Democratic bias’ here meaning ‘doesn’t attempt a GOP gerrymander’

I just report the news, but yes a Democratic leaning map would focus on competitiveness and also preserving the current AZ-01 (tossup seat), while a Republican leaning map would make AZ-01 stretch east-west across the northern half of the state (turning it into a Likely R seat). Also a Republican leaning map might prioritize competitiveness less in Maricopa, but there's only so much you can do in that part of that state, AZ-01 is the main fight here.

[S019]

AZ has chosen a consultant with Republican ties: https://kjzz.org/content/1680510/arizona-redistricting-panel-picks-mapping-consultant

This is from another article: Opposition to the Timmons Group largely revolves around its partnership with National Demographics Corporation, which served as the mapping consultant for Arizona’s first redistricting commission in 2001, and the company’s president, Doug Johnson. Democratic organizations and individuals objected to the company’s Republican ties and its history drawing maps that they allege disenfranchised Latino voters.


https://www.azmirror.com/2021/04/27/redistricting-commission-will-give-mapping-consultants-time-to-respond-to-comments-criticism/

So, yeah O'Halleran is probably going to be drawn out.

[S019]

Did you seriously eliminate the Tucson seat? What COI is represented by Yavapai and Cochise?

[S019]

I really don't get why they can't do Santa Cruz+Cochise+Tucson



It looks nice and compact and has the bonus of being competitive, Biden+5 (you can also still draw the border VRA seat with this configuration)

[S019]

Maps possibly coming next week
https://twitter.com/jeremyduda/status/1451312716862275607

at the moment, they stand here: https://irc-az.maps.arcgis.com/sharing/rest/content/items/6234a1043da144e9bdcfbd5940b10adf/data



Unfortunately, their shape files are not DRA friendly, so we don't really know the exact partisan numbers on this map.

[S019]

https://twitter.com/garrett_archer/status/1453861139066986498?s=21

[S019]

DRA map for you all to enjoy: https://davesredistricting.org/join/e57facbd-e9c0-4bee-b000-636c42f2669b