2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[lfromnj]

Ah I think Hispanics would still have their choice in most districts, its just Cuellar would get a national challenge, even perhaps from a Hispanic in the RGV but Austin libs would obviously vote en masse against him so thats why he's doomed, each district has about 31% of the population and perhaps a bit more of the electorate from Austin. The GOP should probably try to get rid of the VRA problem and the Austin.

[Coastal Elitist]

I made a 38 district map it splits 26R - 12D. I tried to make the populations as equal as possible, but it's hard because some precincts are huge.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f63a68f5-1b2a-406f-8cca-f354b2439336

[Idaho Conservative]

Again the worst GOP will need to go to if it wants maximum safety
3 RGV
1 El paso
1 San antonio
1 San Antonio to Austin
1 Austin
4 DFW
4 Houston
thats 15 D seats max and tbh 13 or 14 would do it.

Not a chance. I still don't see how you get DFW down from 5 to 4 districts.

What do you see as safe?

1 El Paso
3 RGV
2 San Antonio
2 Austin
4 Houston
5 DFW

I can see getting San Antonio+Austin down to 3, but I think later in the decade, it just wouldn't hold as Travis, Hayes, and Williamson make up a growing share of whatever rural districts you strip them out to. Maybe DFW can get down to 4 but I haven't worked out a way yet. So far, it looks like you need the black Dallas VRA, a west Dallas seat, an east Tarrant seat, a Plano/Richardson seat, and a southwest Collin/southeast Denton/northwest Dallas seat.

Again what are the numbers for what you see as safe?

Trump+10 if it's rural, Trump +20 if it's metropolitan as a rule of thumb. With Texas though, it isn't just about what the margins are but where you anticipate growth. Say you have a R+15 district including west Fort Bend County and a bunch of rurals. By 2030, there could easily be another quarter million people voting 70-30 past Cinco Ranch and suddenly this district goes from casting 150k votes for Dems and and 210k votes for the GOP to casting for the 240k Dems and 250k votes for the GOP before any changes to voting are applied in already built-up parts of the district. That's the challenge with TX: not just creating buffers for normal trends but creating buffers for the brand new, Dem-leaning cities that will spring up around North and West Houston, in Collin and Denton Counties, and along the I-35 corridor from San Antonio to Temple. As such, you have to be very careful how you draw the suburb-rural districts.

Ironic how TX GOP laizze-fair policies are killing them.  All of this growth in housing and bussiness is turning Texas blue.  If red states wanna stay red, they should limit construction and tax big bussiness more, like CA does. 

[Idaho Conservative]

25-14 map.  Least red Trump district is the Corpus Christi district, Trump+20.  Most Trump districts are around Trump+30, even the DFW ones.  3 Dem packs in DFW, 4 in Houston, 4 south TX to Austin fajitas each about 70% Hispanic (no district is based in Travis, the county is divided 7 ways), 1 pack in San Antonio, 1 San Antonio to El Paso district, 1 El Paso district. 
I did the fajitas into Austin because the courts demand white votes be wasted, might as well waste white lib votes.  The fajitas range from 20-25% white, so they should function as vra seats.
The map is so ugly not because it is the most extreme republican gerrymander which could be drawn (Dems gain a seat after all) but because I wanted the map to last the decade.  A Trump+30 suburban rural mix should hold up just fine.  At this time, this map is more of an incumbent protection map than hard R gerrymander, unless Dems gin a bunch of suburban seats in 2020, those gains would be wiped out.  Yes, you could squeeze in another republican seat or 2, but my top priority was to maximize titanium r seats, not safe r seats.

[S019]

Looks impressive, better than my attempt at drawing an R gerry for sure, just a few issues, Austin basically needs its own seat, splitting it is asking for disaster. The current fajitas are around 80% Hispanic, so maybe make the fajitas more Hispanic. Also did you eliminate a minority seat connecting San Antonio to Austin? Also, I doubt Hurd's seat is Hispanic enough under that map.

[Idaho Conservative]

Looks impressive, better than my attempt at drawing an R gerry for sure, just a few issues, Austin basically needs its own seat, splitting it is asking for disaster. The current fajitas are around 80% Hispanic, so maybe make the fajitas more Hispanic. Also did you eliminate a minority seat connecting San Antonio to Austin? Also, I doubt Hurd's seat is Hispanic enough under that map.

Hurd's seat actually is over 70% hispanic and becomes a D pack.  The Austin to San Antonio seat is the 4th fajita.  An Austin to San Antonio seat wouldn't work on this map, and the current one is dominated by white libs in Austin.  I don't see why the fajitas need to be more hispanic.  70% is enough considering the whites are liberal, Austin whites will vote for he hispanic choice candidate.  Hispanics have the numbers to elect their candidate of choice in the primary.  Austin doesn't need its own seat, this map has much more of travis county in blue districts than it is now.

[S019]

Looks impressive, better than my attempt at drawing an R gerry for sure, just a few issues, Austin basically needs its own seat, splitting it is asking for disaster. The current fajitas are around 80% Hispanic, so maybe make the fajitas more Hispanic. Also did you eliminate a minority seat connecting San Antonio to Austin? Also, I doubt Hurd's seat is Hispanic enough under that map.

70% is enough considering the whites are liberal, Austin whites will vote for he hispanic choice candidate.  Hispanics have the numbers to elect their candidate of choice in the primary.  Austin doesn't need its own seat, this map has much more of travis county in blue districts than it is now.

This isn't a valid argument in court, liberal whites will just vote for the white Austin-area Dem in the primary. Also, packing Austin is about packing those liberal whites who you irrationally placed in a Hispanic VRA seat.

[Idaho Conservative]

Looks impressive, better than my attempt at drawing an R gerry for sure, just a few issues, Austin basically needs its own seat, splitting it is asking for disaster. The current fajitas are around 80% Hispanic, so maybe make the fajitas more Hispanic. Also did you eliminate a minority seat connecting San Antonio to Austin? Also, I doubt Hurd's seat is Hispanic enough under that map.

70% is enough considering the whites are liberal, Austin whites will vote for he hispanic choice candidate.  Hispanics have the numbers to elect their candidate of choice in the primary.  Austin doesn't need its own seat, this map has much more of travis county in blue districts than it is now.

This isn't a valid argument in court, liberal whites will just vote for the white Austin-area Dem in the primary. Also, packing Austin is about packing those liberal whites who you irrationally placed in a Hispanic VRA seat.

I don't like it any more than you, but it's better than wasting white rural votes.  it's not irrational from a republican pov.  They might vote for a white lib in the primary, but they'll be outvoted by hispanic voters down south.   70% hispanic is enough for a vra seat anything less is borderine.  And could you make your signature smaller?  Takes up so much room lol.

[Idaho Conservative]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/1c8bc548-612f-4f68-9789-961c6f5f335c
Here is a good starting point for Texas redistricting. To be clear, I do not support this map it is too risky but this is the maximum Republicans could draw and still have hold up in court. The current Voting Rights Act seats are maintained but no additional democrat-leaning seats are drawn. Fletcher and Aldred's seats are cut up and made safe R.  I also found a way to make TX-23 lean a lot more Republican without making it any less Hispanic.  I removed a lot of the San Antonio suburbs, and included more rural whites and West Texas conservative Hispanics. Now the district went for Trump by 6 points, likely for Cruz as well. I believe it would hold up in court, since the current one did and this district is no less Hispanic. 69% total and 62% citizen VAP.  Another crucial change I made is sending the fajita strips into Austin instead of rural white areas.  They are all 82-83% Hispanic, so shouldn't count as packs, that are Hispanic enough so Austin white libs won't control the primaries.  I also increased the Hispanic percentage and Lloyd Doggett's seat so it should actually perform as a vra seat.  Overall I tried to get most Republican seats to around Trump+25.  My Waco based seat Trump+13, but that should be pretty safe given that the district does not include any suburbs.  It actually trended slightly red from 2008.  The remainder of the Republican seats range from Trump+20 to 30.  Also, suburban-rural combos should hold up better over the decade.  This map is 27R-1LR-11D. 

If I were the Texas Republicans, I'd make it 24R-1LR-14D, with the additional vote sinks in Austin, Dallas, and Houston.  If you do that, you can get the suburban Trump districts to Trump+30, and have more minority seats, which helps the map survive court challenges.

[dpmapper]

No reason to have 4 sinks in Houston.  You can keep the three sinks, make TX-7 lean R (at least for the first part of the decade), and still have every other seat in the region be quite safe. 

[Idaho Conservative]

No reason to have 4 sinks in Houston.  You can keep the three sinks, make TX-7 lean R (at least for the first part of the decade), and still have every other seat in the region be quite safe. 

So packing 32 and adding a vote sink in Austin should be enough?  Crenshaw can be shored up with 8, but what about 22?  That seems to be troublesome.  Houston has grown a lot.

[dpmapper]

TX-7 is Trump+7, all others Trump+20 or more. 

[Idaho Conservative]

TX-7 is Trump+7, all others Trump+20 or more. 

2018 population numbers?

[dpmapper]

TX-7 is Trump+7, all others Trump+20 or more. 

2018 population numbers?

Yes. 

[Idaho Conservative]

TX-7 is Trump+7, all others Trump+20 or more. 

2018 population numbers?

Yes. 

https://davesredistricting.org/join/5752bdd5-80a5-449f-9a74-33cc613665c5
I was able to make TX-7 Trump+18, but needed to get creative with rural east tx to shore up other suburban seats.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/59a47c6f-b6a5-40c5-906f-7ea9fb388ead
TX R gerrymander I made. 2018 numbers.
Ds are limited to 15 seats. 4 in DFW metro, 3 in Houston, 5 on the border, and 3 in San Antonio-Austin corridor.

[Idaho Conservative]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/59a47c6f-b6a5-40c5-906f-7ea9fb388ead
TX R gerrymander I made. 2018 numbers.
Ds are limited to 15 seats. 4 in DFW metro, 3 in Houston, 5 on the border, and 3 in San Antonio-Austin corridor.

You drew 4 fajitas, only 3 are needed.  In fact, 4 fajitas stretches hispanics too thin.  Cornyn won 3 of them in 2014, indicating they might not perform in midterm elections.  Also, why not use Austin white libs instead of rural whites?  As long as the districts are around 80% hispanic, it should be enough so a hispanic wins.  Also, a bynch of your red districts won't be safe by the late or even mid 2020s.  38, 22, 31, and 24 make me nervous.  Also, DFW could be packed better.  Look at this.  https://davesredistricting.org/join/1172162a-3bcc-48fb-a712-3b1ffea99d3f
4 DFW packs, but more efficient.  A republican is unlikely to win your 32, might as well pack it.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/59a47c6f-b6a5-40c5-906f-7ea9fb388ead
TX R gerrymander I made. 2018 numbers.
Ds are limited to 15 seats. 4 in DFW metro, 3 in Houston, 5 on the border, and 3 in San Antonio-Austin corridor.

You drew 4 fajitas, only 3 are needed.  In fact, 4 fajitas stretches hispanics too thin.  Cornyn won 3 of them in 2014, indicating they might not perform in midterm elections.  Also, why not use Austin white libs instead of rural whites?  As long as the districts are around 80% hispanic, it should be enough so a hispanic wins.  Also, a bynch of your red districts won't be safe by the late or even mid 2020s.  38, 22, 31, and 24 make me nervous.  Also, DFW could be packed better.  Look at this.  https://davesredistricting.org/join/1172162a-3bcc-48fb-a712-3b1ffea99d3f
4 DFW packs, but more efficient.  A republican is unlikely to win your 32, might as well pack it.

I preserved roughly similar % of Latinos in most of the fajitas relative to 2010s versions, districts that performed throughout the 2010s and will continue do so in the 2020s. And I cannot use Austin whites instead of rural whites because of court precedent.
You have a fair point on some of the districts. I'd go through each of them one by one.
22 goes from R+10 to R+14, enough to vote R for a majority of the 2020s. It is also relatively insulated from suburban trends a bit now due to to its newly added rural territory. It won't be safe R come 2030. I agree. What matters is that Rs likely win this a majority of the 2020s.
24 goes from R+9 to R+15, a decent improvement. This could certainly facilitate a flip in 2022 in the event Ds flip it in 2020, and it would remain competitive for quite some time afterwards due to its movement deeper into NE Tarrant, which is more firm for the GOP than northern Dallas County.
31, defacto successor to TX-10, is in a similar boat to 22. It also is made more sustainable for the GOP due to its retreat from Travis County.
38, while not really solid for the decade completely, is still R enough to go GOP in 2022 and 2024, and quite possibly later if Biden wins this year (such an eventuality looks likely to harm the Dem's growth prospects in the state).
The effectiveness of a gerrymander is not measured by how it performs in its last election, but rather how it performed over a whole decade. I think my map will likely do well by that metric.

I am aware of the effectiveness of your gerrymander and admire its efficiency, but it is just flat-out impossible to put in effect. Kay Granger supporters in the legislature would never allow your 26th to become law, for instance, and Ratliffe would never support this either, these baconstrips running all the way to Arkansas and Loouisiana.

Given this and other facets of the matter, I think that it, while a good proof of concept, can be discarded as a realistic map. I instead posited a map that would have a real possibility of being put into law. For instance, while I preserve the all-Collin nature of TX-03 and not force Ratliffe and Taylor to be thrown in together, I put the most Dem parts of Collin in another GOP district, and even went so far as to cede most of Dallas County to Dems. My lines there reflect race more than partisanship, with me repurposing TX-32 as a "white sink" and creating new VRA seats both to pack D votes and to make any litigation easier. In Tarrant, I packed Dems in TX-06 as well.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

A lot of these 3 Dem Houston districts aren't VRA compliant. With 2018 numbers, it's really easy to argue Houston requires 3 VRA districts: an AA one stretching from Missouri City to Downtown to Northeast Houston, a Latino one from the Second Ward to Pasadena to La Porte, and a second Latino one from Spring Valley Village to IAH Airport to Dyersdale. With these three districts established, it's really hard to avoid drawing a fourth Dem district in the Uptown/Bellaire area without all the West Houston and Fort Bend districts collapsing.

[lfromnj]

Im pretty sure all 3 current Houstoun districts are VRA  compliant why would the GOP draw a non VRA district in Texas in 2010?

[Idaho Conservative]

A lot of these 3 Dem Houston districts aren't VRA compliant. With 2018 numbers, it's really easy to argue Houston requires 3 VRA districts: an AA one stretching from Missouri City to Downtown to Northeast Houston, a Latino one from the Second Ward to Pasadena to La Porte, and a second Latino one from Spring Valley Village to IAH Airport to Dyersdale. With these three districts established, it's really hard to avoid drawing a fourth Dem district in the Uptown/Bellaire area without all the West Houston and Fort Bend districts collapsing.

Houston currently has 3 vra seats, but I agree a west houston pack should be created unless they REALLY want to cut up rural TX.  Here's a good example of how to create 4 vote sinks in Houston.  2 black, 1 hispanic, 1 multiracial dem seat that is very likely to elect Lizzie Fletcher, since it has a majority white electorate but is Clinton+28 (2008 Obama+12, Cornyn+1).  

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

A lot of these 3 Dem Houston districts aren't VRA compliant. With 2018 numbers, it's really easy to argue Houston requires 3 VRA districts: an AA one stretching from Missouri City to Downtown to Northeast Houston, a Latino one from the Second Ward to Pasadena to La Porte, and a second Latino one from Spring Valley Village to IAH Airport to Dyersdale. With these three districts established, it's really hard to avoid drawing a fourth Dem district in the Uptown/Bellaire area without all the West Houston and Fort Bend districts collapsing.

Houston currently has 3 vra seats, but I agree a west houston pack should be created unless they REALLY want to cut up rural TX.  Here's a good example of how to create 4 vote sinks in Houston.  2 black, 1 hispanic, 1 multiracial dem seat that is very likely to elect Lizzie Fletcher, since it has a majority white electorate but is Clinton+28 (2008 Obama+12, Cornyn+1).  

My mistake. What I meant to say is that I don't think in 2020, drawing a map of Houston that only has 3 Dem seats and is VRA compliant is possible. Some of the previous maps that tried to do that are either non-VRA compliant or actually have more than three Dem districts. Come 2022, I think the TX GOP will have to concede these four Dem packs:

[Idaho Conservative]

A lot of these 3 Dem Houston districts aren't VRA compliant. With 2018 numbers, it's really easy to argue Houston requires 3 VRA districts: an AA one stretching from Missouri City to Downtown to Northeast Houston, a Latino one from the Second Ward to Pasadena to La Porte, and a second Latino one from Spring Valley Village to IAH Airport to Dyersdale. With these three districts established, it's really hard to avoid drawing a fourth Dem district in the Uptown/Bellaire area without all the West Houston and Fort Bend districts collapsing.

Houston currently has 3 vra seats, but I agree a west houston pack should be created unless they REALLY want to cut up rural TX.  Here's a good example of how to create 4 vote sinks in Houston.  2 black, 1 hispanic, 1 multiracial dem seat that is very likely to elect Lizzie Fletcher, since it has a majority white electorate but is Clinton+28 (2008 Obama+12, Cornyn+1).  

My mistake. What I meant to say is that I don't think in 2020, drawing a map of Houston that only has 3 Dem seats and is VRA compliant is possible. Some of the previous maps that tried to do that are either non-VRA compliant or actually have more than three Dem districts. Come 2022, I think the TX GOP will have to concede these four Dem packs:

I agree they should draw 4, but those could be more efficient.  Take some red precincts out of that district 16 and move it further into SW Harris and Fort Bend.  The other districts could be more efficiently drawn too.  No reason to waste heavily Trump precincts.  On my map, the 4 packs have virtually no Trump precincts.

[Idaho Conservative]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/59a47c6f-b6a5-40c5-906f-7ea9fb388ead
TX R gerrymander I made. 2018 numbers.
Ds are limited to 15 seats. 4 in DFW metro, 3 in Houston, 5 on the border, and 3 in San Antonio-Austin corridor.

You drew 4 fajitas, only 3 are needed.  In fact, 4 fajitas stretches hispanics too thin.  Cornyn won 3 of them in 2014, indicating they might not perform in midterm elections.  Also, why not use Austin white libs instead of rural whites?  As long as the districts are around 80% hispanic, it should be enough so a hispanic wins.  Also, a bynch of your red districts won't be safe by the late or even mid 2020s.  38, 22, 31, and 24 make me nervous.  Also, DFW could be packed better.  Look at this.  https://davesredistricting.org/join/1172162a-3bcc-48fb-a712-3b1ffea99d3f
4 DFW packs, but more efficient.  A republican is unlikely to win your 32, might as well pack it.

I preserved roughly similar % of Latinos in most of the fajitas relative to 2010s versions, districts that performed throughout the 2010s and will continue do so in the 2020s. And I cannot use Austin whites instead of rural whites because of court precedent.
You have a fair point on some of the districts. I'd go through each of them one by one.
22 goes from R+10 to R+14, enough to vote R for a majority of the 2020s. It is also relatively insulated from suburban trends a bit now due to to its newly added rural territory. It won't be safe R come 2030. I agree. What matters is that Rs likely win this a majority of the 2020s.
24 goes from R+9 to R+15, a decent improvement. This could certainly facilitate a flip in 2022 in the event Ds flip it in 2020, and it would remain competitive for quite some time afterwards due to its movement deeper into NE Tarrant, which is more firm for the GOP than northern Dallas County.
31, defacto successor to TX-10, is in a similar boat to 22. It also is made more sustainable for the GOP due to its retreat from Travis County.
38, while not really solid for the decade completely, is still R enough to go GOP in 2022 and 2024, and quite possibly later if Biden wins this year (such an eventuality looks likely to harm the Dem's growth prospects in the state).
The effectiveness of a gerrymander is not measured by how it performs in its last election, but rather how it performed over a whole decade. I think my map will likely do well by that metric.

I am aware of the effectiveness of your gerrymander and admire its efficiency, but it is just flat-out impossible to put in effect. Kay Granger supporters in the legislature would never allow your 26th to become law, for instance, and Ratliffe would never support this either, these baconstrips running all the way to Arkansas and Loouisiana.

Given this and other facets of the matter, I think that it, while a good proof of concept, can be discarded as a realistic map. I instead posited a map that would have a real possibility of being put into law. For instance, while I preserve the all-Collin nature of TX-03 and not force Ratliffe and Taylor to be thrown in together, I put the most Dem parts of Collin in another GOP district, and even went so far as to cede most of Dallas County to Dems. My lines there reflect race more than partisanship, with me repurposing TX-32 as a "white sink" and creating new VRA seats both to pack D votes and to make any litigation easier. In Tarrant, I packed Dems in TX-06 as well.

Your fajitas are more conservative than the current ones.  While they'd probably hold up, I doubt the court would mandate the 4th.  Also, the court did not strike down the concept of an Austin fajita, just that specific one.  The primary issue was that its CVAP was under 50% hispanic, so it didn't count.  Mine are all in the 70s (CVAP) so should count as majority minority.  The second issue was that the fajita strip was connecting 2 far apart hispanic communities, but the Austin portion of my fajita districts is not majority hispanic cvap.  The Austin area serves purely to reduce the hispanic % so the districts are legal, the only difference is the northern destination of the fajitas.  My fajita strips are fundamentally different from the one struck down previously, and it would be difficult to strike down my map without striking down the idea of the fajita strips altogether (which should happen tbh).
A handful of those gop seats likely voted Cruz in the single digits.  You have a point about incumbent concerns, and certain incumbents would be unsatisfied and want safer districts.  I'm sure a better district could be drawn for Kay Granger than the one I drew without threatening other incumbents.
Ratcliffe is no longer in congress, and no reason Van Taylor would need to run in the district of his successor.  I didn't eliminate TX-3 or 4, just traded precincts to shore up 3 while keeping 4 solidly red.  While maybe Collin County doesn't have to be divided as much as I did, an all Collin seat isn't guaranteed to be safe.  Might as well take in some rural territory.  

As for the VRA, no need to waste all those red precincts in your TX-32.  Pull out the red areas and reincorporate the remaining in neighboring seats.  At the very least, trade precincts between 32 and 24, shoring up the latter.  In fact, 4 minority seats can be made in DFW if you strip out the red precincts.  The few white lib precincts can to go to TX-30, where they won't threaten the incumbent.  

[Former President tack50]

Since DRA now has 2018 population data and after learning a few more things, here is my R gerrymander for the TX state Senate.



DFW inset



Houston / Austin / San Antonio inset



https://davesredistricting.org/join/75038893-d2e6-42b5-af50-40e1dda36b94

All Republican districts voted for Trump by at least 20 points in this map. The map has 20 Republican districts and 11 Democratic districts. In fact, it is slightly better than that number, as district 4 is "only" Clinton+8 and D+4, so theoretically it could fall in a wave, particularly if Hispanic turnout is down.

Making District 4 into a true swing district that is still like 70% Hispanic (and even one that is clearly majority Hispanic by CVAP!) is trivial in fact, though that might break the VRA. District 3 is in a similar situation of being 70% Hispanic by CVAP but being "only" Clinton+12.

Still, in theory 21-10 and Republicans giving themselves a 2/3 supermajority is possible but that would leave them vulnerable to a lawsuit. Though I suppose the Republicans will likely not risk it and will not try to dismantle any of the 3 Hispanic southern districts.