2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Alabama

[Torie]

Question: say AL has two black seats drawn in 2020. In 2030, if the state drops to six seats, does it lose one of those black seats?

For purposes of the applying the Gingles test, it would if the census figures are identical to the 2020 census figures.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/457311a7-6b54-4fd1-a906-4102125c7082

[Oryxslayer]

Question: say AL has two black seats drawn in 2020. In 2030, if the state drops to six seats, does it lose one of those black seats?

Yes. If we were basing it purely on pop change, AL-07 would have been the seat that got cut if the state lost a seat, but of course that wouldn't happen. Separating Birmingham and the Belt - which are going into two different directions in terms of population change - makes it likely the belt seat would be axed if the state went down to six seats.

As it is for example the neighboring GA-02 needed to take in almost 100K people given its relative stagnation and potential decline compared to the states good growth.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

The uncertain thing would be if AL got more black or stayed black enough in relative terms between 2020 and 2030, where it mattered, right?
Like say a compact AL seat is drawn centering on Birmingham.
In the vein of this: https://davesredistricting.org/join/774885fd-3f86-444a-91f0-06e9c9ef8b83
Would this count as a black-accessable seat for VRA purposes and thus be protected?

[Oryxslayer]

Like say a compact AL seat is drawn centering on Birmingham.
In the vein of this: https://davesredistricting.org/join/774885fd-3f86-444a-91f0-06e9c9ef8b83
Would this count as a black-accessable seat for VRA purposes and thus be protected?

I mean that seat fails the court order given that it does not approach 50% BVAP, though as shown there is a measurable number of crossover voters in Birmingham so that threshold need not be hit on the dot and can be lower. But the percentage would need to be higher, which means going SW towards the edges of the belt.

As far as performing goes, Jefferson would need to get bluer before one could probably argue with reliable evidence that the number of crossover whites ensures that the Black-dominated primary candidate will reliably win. It's the same situation in Duval FL right now - you can get compact dem seats, but as of now the evidence isn't concrete enough for that to be the preferable of the presented alternatives.

[MillennialModerate]

Let’s say by some miracle this decision stood. Would such a rational be applied to other southern high African American states with GOP gerrymanders? How many seats could that net Dems?

[MaxQue]

Let’s say by some miracle this decision stood. Would such a rational be applied to other southern high African American states with GOP gerrymanders? How many seats could that net Dems?

At most, 2. LA and NC (and the NC map is already in front of courts).

[Oryxslayer]

Let’s say by some miracle this decision stood. Would such a rational be applied to other southern high African American states with GOP gerrymanders? How many seats could that net Dems?

At most, 2. LA and NC (and the NC map is already in front of courts).

Also GA, but given the cases currently brought look at Atlanta and the potential there for a fourth AA and therefore fifth dem seat, and not the extremely polarized rural regions, it is a separate set of circumstances. The priors for the south remain as they were: MS 3-1 is solid, NC is going to get changed by the Dem supremes, GA Atlanta districts are in litigation, and LA has a good potential to go 4-2.

[Greedo punched first]

Will SCOTUS actually allow a 7R-0D map?

[Oryxslayer]

The state's appeal asking for higher court authority has been now been filed.

[BoiseBoy]

Will SCOTUS actually allow a 7R-0D map?

No.

[Roll Roons]

Let’s say by some miracle this decision stood. Would such a rational be applied to other southern high African American states with GOP gerrymanders? How many seats could that net Dems?

At most, 2. LA and NC (and the NC map is already in front of courts).

In NC, the Safe Dem seat in Greensboro/Winston-Salem might also get restored even though it's majority white.

[Boobs]

Anyways I will self-quote my old self on what imo should happen given that now 2 black districts are required. I sadly don't have the map link but still. Also it might not be good enough anyways

Why is everyone doing a bastardized thing in Mobile? There is no way such a horrible split is required right? Even if you want 2 black districts you can do much better than that



In this map, district 2 is an easy black majority district. Technically only 49.7% black by CVAP, but more than enough to elect a black Democrat (56-44 composite, D+4)

District 5 is a white majority district that however would be very likely to elect a black democrat under a "black voters + token white liberals" weird coalition. It is 52-45 white by CVAP (49-46 white by total population) and D+3, 55-45 D composite

Assuming it is a legal map (I will admit district 5 is iffy), this is what it should ideally look like

Your primary complaint with an arm to Mobile was that it would be ugly, and yet you promote this map as somehow being better? 

If anything, a Mobile arm makes more sense from a COI perspective in addition to performing better on Black % of the electorate. In general the rural areas along the Mobile River are fairly similar if slightly less Black than the main “belt”. Economically, the agricultural output of the region was shipped along the Tombigbee and Mobile rivers down to the port at Mobile; today there’s still a similar economic connection between these two regions. Birmingham, meanwhile, is surrounded by deep red (and white) rural areas, some industrial exurbs that have a high Black population, as well as wealthy white suburbs that developed in the mid-20th century. The economy there is much more self-contained.

In short, agricultural and exporter interests do align in the Black Belt and Mobile, whereas the Belt and Birmingham do not share such economic interests. Bringing in Talladega at least does give a second potential Democrat district, but it is unnecessary in a sense, since the areas it must take in between Bham and Talladega are heavily white and heavily Republican, diluting the potential ability of the Black community to elect the candidate of their choice.

The issue with the Mobile arm is entirely invented without a true reason. Aesthetics, as you’ve demonstrated with your map, clearly don’t actually matter. And the “corner” issue is also a bit ridiculous, as for example, Hampton Roads in Virginia exhibits the same “issue” but no one serious advocates for the dissolution of VA-04. 

[ProgressiveModerate]

Weird to think about how Dems May get a better delegation out of ALABAMA than Wisconsin

[patzer]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/a0140a71-b920-4565-8f37-8f6da277cb2d
Here's an attempt at a compact map minimizing county splits- I only split six counties. 5th district is Biden+11 and CVAP black 47%, white 46%; 7th district is Biden+15 and CVAP white 49%, black 43%. This should be enough to be minority performing, I expect.

Like in my previous map, every incumbent running for reelection retains a seat without having to move, although the 3rd is changed almost entirely despite keeping Mike Rogers's home in it.

This is the sort of map where the Republicans could perhaps hope for chances in the 5th later in the decade if black belt population decline continues, given how rural much of it is.

[Former President tack50]

Your primary complaint with an arm to Mobile was that it would be ugly, and yet you promote this map as somehow being better? 

If anything, a Mobile arm makes more sense from a COI perspective in addition to performing better on Black % of the electorate. In general the rural areas along the Mobile River are fairly similar if slightly less Black than the main “belt”. Economically, the agricultural output of the region was shipped along the Tombigbee and Mobile rivers down to the port at Mobile; today there’s still a similar economic connection between these two regions. Birmingham, meanwhile, is surrounded by deep red (and white) rural areas, some industrial exurbs that have a high Black population, as well as wealthy white suburbs that developed in the mid-20th century. The economy there is much more self-contained.

In short, agricultural and exporter interests do align in the Black Belt and Mobile, whereas the Belt and Birmingham do not share such economic interests. Bringing in Talladega at least does give a second potential Democrat district, but it is unnecessary in a sense, since the areas it must take in between Bham and Talladega are heavily white and heavily Republican, diluting the potential ability of the Black community to elect the candidate of their choice.

The issue with the Mobile arm is entirely invented without a true reason. Aesthetics, as you’ve demonstrated with your map, clearly don’t actually matter. And the “corner” issue is also a bit ridiculous, as for example, Hampton Roads in Virginia exhibits the same “issue” but no one serious advocates for the dissolution of VA-04. 

Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess

For some reason, I still do think that the map I drew is genuinely better than the proposals from before that split Mobile. (not like that one is pretty, it definitely is not, but it seems less bad to me) There's something about the "leftovers" 2nd district that just means to my head it is wrong; even if it is probably a factually better combination of COIs. You can probably fix all of the issues at the cost of having a potentially non-performing map I suppose (like the map patzer just posted would show?)

I don't find the Virginia comparison accurate since it does not have the water contiguity issue; plus I think the issue is resolved in the new map anyways?

[Born to Slay. Forced to Work.]

Let’s say by some miracle this decision stood. Would such a rational be applied to other southern high African American states with GOP gerrymanders? How many seats could that net Dems?

At most, 2. LA and NC (and the NC map is already in front of courts).

I’m still gonna insist it’ll have some affect on SC. At the very least a new minority influence seat could very easily be argued for, if not two majority minority seats outright

[Skill and Chance]

Let’s say by some miracle this decision stood. Would such a rational be applied to other southern high African American states with GOP gerrymanders? How many seats could that net Dems?

At most, 2. LA and NC (and the NC map is already in front of courts).

I’m still gonna insist it’ll have some affect on SC. At the very least a new minority influence seat could very easily be argued for, if not two majority minority seats outright

LA is the obvious other state for this, and that one may happen anyway due to JBE's negotiating power.  NC may happen anyway due to Dem control of the state supreme court. 

However, if this ruling ends up creating a broad national standard to the point where it is impacting SC, we also have to consider that it would likely be used to force an additional majority-black seat in MD and possibly IL as well, and to force a majority-Hispanic seat in Las Vegas (which likely creates 2 R leaning seats statewide).  It could also be used in NYC in a way that would constrain NY Dem map drawing meaningfully.

[Sol]

Let’s say by some miracle this decision stood. Would such a rational be applied to other southern high African American states with GOP gerrymanders? How many seats could that net Dems?

At most, 2. LA and NC (and the NC map is already in front of courts).

I’m still gonna insist it’ll have some affect on SC. At the very least a new minority influence seat could very easily be argued for, if not two majority minority seats outright

Idk about that--spent some of last night playing around with 2 minority influence districts in SC and it's frankly pretty challenging to do. Would be interesting in seeing your map, but my suspicion is that only 1 district meets the Gingles test.

[Former President tack50]

Anyways, after quite a bit of trying, I finally managed to get a map with a Mobile split and 2 black districts that doesn't give me the weird, borderline OCD issues

Ugly as hell, but I guess so is going to be any map. The population distribution and geography really make it hard. Every time you seem close to a solution a district ends up way under/over populated or the populations just don't match



https://davesredistricting.org/join/f95c6b0b-1fd9-42fc-ab28-396c8b8355c1

District 7 is 45.8% black, 45.7% White CVAP and Biden+27
District 1 is 49% black, 43.8% white CVAP and Biden+15

I still can't fully explain what makes this better than the previous proposals (I want to say it's the water contiguity issue but still not fully sure) but anyways. This is going to be subjective I suppose

[Torie]

If SCOTUS upholds the decision that most likely intimidates Louisiana Republicans into allowing a second black district too, which would be amazing.

Unlike AL, you can't draw two "compact" 50% BVAP CD's in LA, so no. Gingles does not trigger the drawing of a second black performing CD in LA.

[politicallefty]

One of the problems is that Alabama is oddly shaped. I've long advocated for giving everything west of Gadsden County in Florida's Panhandle to Alabama.

If SCOTUS upholds the decision that most likely intimidates Louisiana Republicans into allowing a second black district too, which would be amazing.

Unlike AL, you can't draw two "compact" 50% BVAP CD's in LA, so no. Gingles does not trigger the drawing of a second black performing CD in LA.

How does the "compact" criteria work in states that aren't compact or otherwise oddly shaped?

[Greedo punched first]

If SCOTUS upholds the decision that most likely intimidates Louisiana Republicans into allowing a second black district too, which would be amazing.

Unlike AL, you can't draw two "compact" 50% BVAP CD's in LA, so no. Gingles does not trigger the drawing of a second black performing CD in LA.

Wrong. You can.

[Torie]

One of the problems is that Alabama is oddly shaped. I've long advocated for giving everything west of Gadsden County in Florida's Panhandle to Alabama.

If SCOTUS upholds the decision that most likely intimidates Louisiana Republicans into allowing a second black district too, which would be amazing.

Unlike AL, you can't draw two "compact" 50% BVAP CD's in LA, so no. Gingles does not trigger the drawing of a second black performing CD in LA.

How does the "compact" criteria work in states that aren't compact or otherwise oddly shaped?

I am not sure I understand you question since it appears to be focused on the shape of states rather than districts, but the definition of "compact" is not that precise under the law.

[politicallefty]

One of the problems is that Alabama is oddly shaped. I've long advocated for giving everything west of Gadsden County in Florida's Panhandle to Alabama.

If SCOTUS upholds the decision that most likely intimidates Louisiana Republicans into allowing a second black district too, which would be amazing.

Unlike AL, you can't draw two "compact" 50% BVAP CD's in LA, so no. Gingles does not trigger the drawing of a second black performing CD in LA.

How does the "compact" criteria work in states that aren't compact or otherwise oddly shaped?

I am not sure I understand you question since it appears to be focused on the shape of states rather than districts, but the definition of "compact" is not that precise under the law.

I meant like in the context of a state like Louisiana. It's an L-shaped state and any second VRA district would tend to follow that shape (or at least that's what I've seen from various proposed maps). It's not necessarily the most compact due to the shape of the state. That said, it's nothing like the '90s map that went all of the place with various tendrils and was eventually struck down. In that same vein, I wouldn't consider the current FL-05 to be offensive or egregious as a VRA district. If you want egregious, look at the FL-03 that was struck down in the '90s.

[If my soul was made of stone]

Anyways, after quite a bit of trying, I finally managed to get a map with a Mobile split and 2 black districts that doesn't give me the weird, borderline OCD issues

Ugly as hell, but I guess so is going to be any map. The population distribution and geography really make it hard. Every time you seem close to a solution a district ends up way under/over populated or the populations just don't match



https://davesredistricting.org/join/f95c6b0b-1fd9-42fc-ab28-396c8b8355c1

District 7 is 45.8% black, 45.7% White CVAP and Biden+27
District 1 is 49% black, 43.8% white CVAP and Biden+15

I still can't fully explain what makes this better than the previous proposals (I want to say it's the water contiguity issue but still not fully sure) but anyways. This is going to be subjective I suppose

The rest of the Black Belt is sitting on its hands wondering why you put white Mobile suburbs/exurbs in the seat instead of them...