2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

How did the new 6th, minus Dallas and Tarrant, vote? 72% Trump?

71-28

And to think there were thoughts in my head that were going "Oh, 72 percent seems a bit high"...

[Torie]

Mike McCaul may be a Pubmandering genius, but I don't see a second performing Hispanic CD in the Houston area, that our very own Tim Turner was able to draw at 50% HCVAP, thus triggering Gingles. Instead, Chairman Mike left Sheila Jackson Lee alone, when her district should have been converted to a performing Hispanic CD, like I did. LULAC should sue immediately!  

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

So, there are only 2 single districts left in this map which are purely rural R districts. TX-01 in east TX, and TX-19 in West TX.

Every single other White Republican district is involved in some way or another in cracking some sort of Dem urban/suburban area.

Here are the Dem/Dem trending areas that each of the white R districts is directly involved in cracking/overwhelming:

TX-02 - Houston north/east fringes
TX-03 - Collin County
TX-04 - Collin County
TX-05 - Dallas County
TX-06 - Dallas/Tarrant counties (mostly Irving, a bit of Arlington)
TX-08 - West Houston Bear Creek Park area
TX-10 - Small part of Austin and also Dem trending College Station
TX-11 - Killeen/Fort Hood
TX-12 - Fort Worth
TX-13 - Denton
TX-14 - Galveston & Beaumont
TX-17 - North Austin/Round Rock
TX-21 - San Antonio and a small amount of Austin
TX-22 - Fort Bend County and Pearland
TX-24 - North Dallas
TX-25 - Arlington
TX-26 - Lewisville
TX-31 - Williamson County
TX-36 - South-East Houston
TX-38 - West Houston

They really went pretty much all in on the cracking. The only way they could have done more would to have been to make some incumbents less safe, and the incumbents wouldn't want that.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Mike McCaul may be a Pubmandering genius, but I don't see a second performing Hispanic CD in the Houston area, that our very own Tim Turner was able to draw at 50% HCVAP, thus triggering Gingles. Instead, Chairman Mike left Sheila Jackson Lee alone, when her district should have been converted to a performing Hispanic CD, like I did. LULAC should sue immediately!  

You can keep her district as a performing African American opportunity district and also add a 2nd separate Hispanic district. So yes, they should sue, but that would realistically mean TX-38 would become the new Hispanic district, not TX-18, while TX-29 would take more Hispanics that are mostly cracked and outvoted by white Rs in TX-36 and TX-2, both of which include a lot of Hispanic majority areas on the fringes of the eastern part of Houston.

I think I may edit the map in DRA to show how that can be done.

[Torie]

Mike McCaul may be a Pubmandering genius, but I don't see a second performing Hispanic CD in the Houston area, that our very own Tim Turner was able to draw at 50% HCVAP, thus triggering Gingles. Instead, Chairman Mike left Sheila Jackson Lee alone, when her district should have been converted to a performing Hispanic CD, like I did. LULAC should sue immediately!  

You can keep her district as a performing African American opportunity district and also add a 2nd separate Hispanic district. So yes, they should sue, but that would realistically mean TX-38 would become the new Hispanic district, not TX-18, while TX-29 would take more Hispanics that are mostly cracked and outvoted by white Rs in TX-36 and TX-2, both of which include a lot of Hispanic majority areas on the fringes of the eastern part of Houston.

I think I may edit the map in DRA to show how that can be done.

Unless TX-07 becomes the second performing Hispanic CD, that means the Dems are getting an extra seat, no?

[lfromnj]

So, there are only 2 single districts left in this map which are purely rural R districts. TX-01 in east TX, and TX-19 in West TX.

Every single other White Republican district is involved in some way or another in cracking some sort of Dem urban/suburban area.

Here are the Dem/Dem trending areas that each of the white R districts is directly involved in cracking/overwhelming:

TX-02 - Houston north/east fringes
TX-03 - Collin County
TX-04 - Collin County
TX-05 - Dallas County
TX-06 - Dallas/Tarrant counties (mostly Irving, a bit of Arlington)
TX-08 - West Houston Bear Creek Park area
TX-10 - Small part of Austin and also Dem trending College Station
TX-11 - Killeen/Fort Hood
TX-12 - Fort Worth
TX-13 - Denton
TX-14 - Galveston & Beaumont
TX-17 - North Austin/Round Rock
TX-21 - San Antonio and a small amount of Austin
TX-22 - Fort Bend County and Pearland
TX-24 - North Dallas
TX-25 - Arlington
TX-26 - Lewisville
TX-31 - Williamson County
TX-36 - South-East Houston
TX-38 - West Houston

They really went pretty much all in on the cracking. The only way they could have done more would to have been to make some incumbents less safe, and the incumbents wouldn't want that.

Weirdly enough Gohmert even was willing to get in on the cracking but I guess they didn't do it.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Unless TX-07 becomes the second performing Hispanic CD, that means the Dems are getting an extra seat, no?

If the lawsuit were successful, yeah, the Hispanic seat would basically combine the northern part of TX-29 with heavily Hispanic areas that are currently split mostly between TX-18 and TX-38 on the north/western side of Houston, and wouldn't cross over at all into the areas taken in by TX-07 (although it could theoretically if you wanted it to, it doesn't have to).

But I wouldn't expect the lawsuit to be successful though, even if it were successful in lower courts probably SCOTUS would reverse it out of partisanship. Also it is possible that if it were the Rs would go back and try to draw out Fletcher to compensate for it. Although that could be risky for the Rs, because White college educated Dems in Montrose/Bellaire/etc are a lot more dangerous to Republican incumbents, because they turn out to vote at a MUCH higher rate.

Basically there is something hidden about the proposed TX-29, which is that it is actually a lot less Hispanic than it can be, because in this proposal it is drawn to include a lot of majority white areas in Downtown/West Houston (the Houston Heights and areas to the immediate west of downtown) that don't have many Hispanics.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Basically, there doesn't seem to be enough Latinos that there's a ironclad argument for a second seat.
There will be one in 2030, but in 2020 it's more unclear. TX GOPers have the space to defend the map they have made.

[Brittain33]

Beth Van Duyne was mayor of Irving which doesn’t appear to be in TX-24 any longer.

[Perlen vor den Schweinen]

Beth Van Duyne was mayor of Irving which doesn’t appear to be in TX-24 any longer.

A change like that seems in-character for a person who, uh, gets around.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

OK, I made some slight edits to the proposed map proposed by the Republicans to add a 2nd Hispanic seat in the Houston area.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/1264ee5e-e452-4e1a-93db-1df2d96ee694







TX-29: 69.4% Hispanic, compared to 71.7% Hispanic in the official proposed map. Obviously you are not having to significantly dilute TX-29's Hispanic supermajority to be able to draw a new Hispanic district, and TX-29 will be just as likely to perform for the candidate of choice of Hispanic voters (and actually it will be MORE likely to perform as a Hispanic district, since it includes fewer of the White liberals in west Houston).

TX-38 - 64.4% Hispanic (and 12.7% White, 17.5% Black, 5.7% Asian, 3.4% Native). Instead of being a Republican district gerrymandered to elect Wesley Hunt, it reflects the fact that most of the population growth has been Hispanic and other minorities as a new Hispanic VRA seat.

TX-18 - The edited district is 37.7% Black 32.7% Hispanic, 23.6% White, and 5.8% Asian. The official proposal is 35.5% Black, 50.4% Hispanic, 9.9% White, 4.6% Asian. So my edits actually made the African American population go UP. So it is also not the case that the African American VRA performance of the district is in any way weakened by making a new Hispanic district.


I also made very minor changges to TX-07 and TX-22, but this was a very small number of precincts and doesn't make any real difference to anything. My edited TX-09 is 38.8% Black, 36.7% hispanic, 13.6% White, and 11.5% Asian. Whereas in the official proposal, it is 40.9% Black, 34.9% hispanic, 13.6% White, and 11.2% Asian. So no real change to that either. All I did was very slightly lower the Black population in TX-09 to add a bit more Black Population to TX-18. But seeing as the TX-18 I edited is actually MORE heavily African American than the official proposed one, I probably didn't even need to do that at all, lol, or at least not as much. TX-18 also still has a lot of white liberal areas near Downtown Houston that could more sensibly go in TX-07, but I wasn't really trying to mess with TX-07 other than minor incidental changes which I made just to equalize population of TX-09 since I took that small South Houston African American area from TX-09 to put into TX-18. You could do essentially this same map while only editing TX-02, TX-08, TX-36, TX-38, and TX-29.


The main change is really just that TX-36 and TX-02 are more safely Republican and less Hispanic, because they are diluting a lot less Hispanic votes in Pasadena, Baytown, etc which are instead put in TX-29, which frees up Hispanic population in the northern part of TX-29 to fill up TX-38 and make TX-38 into a new Hispanic VRA seat on the north/west sides of Houston.

I guess if the TX Republicans who drew the official proposal were to say anything against creating a new Hispanic seat while also keeping TX-18 as a performing Black VRA seat, maybe they might try to say that TX-18 is a Hispanic seat as they drew it, since it is 50.4% Hispanic (47.2% Hispanic VAP). Of course, we all know the reality is the proposed TX-18 is really a black VRA seat and will easily elect the candidate of choice of Black voters, not a Hispanic one. But maybe that is what Republicans would say in response to the lawsuit. And probably John Roberts and the other partisan Rs on SCOTUS will buy it and ignore the reality.

[S019]

Simple amendment to make TX-15 a bit more favorable for the GOP

who proposed this amendment?

[Nyvin]

Simple amendment to make TX-15 a bit more favorable for the GOP

who proposed this amendment?

No one in the TX leg,  it looks like it's just a PDF someone made.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Basically, there doesn't seem to be enough Latinos that there's a ironclad argument for a second seat.
There will be one in 2030, but in 2020 it's more unclear. TX GOPers have the space to defend the map they have made.

There are plenty of Latinos in the Houston area for 2 Hispanic seats (there were actually plenty in 2010 as well!). See the map I just posted. I could have gotten the Hispanic population %s even higher if I were spending more time on it, changing more districts and drawing a map from scratch rather than just editing a few districts in the R proposal. Probably the way to get the highest Hispanic population percentage on the new west-side Hispanic VRA district would be to include some of the heavily Hispanic areas in southwest Houston which are currently in TX-09 & TX-07, which I left entirely untouched. And I was still able to easily draw 2 2/3+ Hispanic districts in a very short amount of time with no real effort required.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Simple amendment to make TX-15 a bit more favorable for the GOP

who proposed this amendment?

No one in the TX leg,  it looks like it's just a PDF someone made.

The only justifiable modification that can be made to TX-15/TX-34 in terms of the VRA is to unpack TX-34.

The proposed TX-34 is 90.3% Hispanic.
The proposed TX-15 is 81.4% Hispanic.
The proposed TX-28 is 75.3% Hispanic
The proposed TX-23 is 62.7% Hispanic.

Which of those things isn't like the others? It is that TX-34 is over-packed with Hispanics in order to reduce the Hispanic population in the other districts so that in the other districts it is easier/more likely for white Rs to outvote the Hispanics.

There is also the issue of the very large Hispanic population in Corpus Christi being disenfranchised and stuck into a white dominated district. I don't understand how that can be legal. But it was also allowed for some reason in 2010 (when before it was in a VRA seat). This was a retrogression in Hispanic voting rights that was allowed to sneak by.

The proposed TX-27 is 53.6% Hispanic. There are a heck of a lot of wasted Hispanic votes in TX-27, where they get outvoted by rural white Rs. Meanwhile Texas Rs gerrymander to stuff extra white voters into districts like TX-23 and TX-15 to try to help the White Rs in those districts to out-vote the Hispanics so that the seats no longer perform as VRA seats electing the Hispanic candidate of choice. That is why e.g. TX-23 includes a large area of far north Bexar County that is strongly majority white (some precincts up to 70% white or more), rather than including more Hispanic areas that could have been included instead.

Which really just goes to show what we have known all along. Republicans don't care about the VRA and they don't want anyone to vote or for their vote to count for anything other than white Republicans.

[Pollster]

Lost in the kerfuffle here is that TX-23 remains quite winnable for Democrats, though will require an better national environment to do so (not likely to be 2022).

[dpmapper]

Lost in the kerfuffle here is that TX-23 remains quite winnable for Democrats, though will require an better national environment to do so (not likely to be 2022).

I'm sure the last few months have convinced folks in Del Rio to swing back to the Democrats.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Basically, there doesn't seem to be enough Latinos that there's a ironclad argument for a second seat.
There will be one in 2030, but in 2020 it's more unclear. TX GOPers have the space to defend the map they have made.

There are plenty of Latinos in the Houston area for 2 Hispanic seats (there were actually plenty in 2010 as well!). See the map I just posted. I could have gotten the Hispanic population %s even higher if I were spending more time on it, changing more districts and drawing a map from scratch rather than just editing a few districts in the R proposal. Probably the way to get the highest Hispanic population percentage on the new west-side Hispanic VRA district would be to include some of the heavily Hispanic areas in southwest Houston which are currently in TX-09 & TX-07, which I left entirely untouched. And I was still able to easily draw 2 2/3+ Hispanic districts in a very short amount of time with no real effort required.

Oh, I don't doubt it's possible.
But whether or not such a seat can be drawn is different than if such a district will be drawn. It is possible to draw an extra black seat in Mississippi even in 2010, but I don't see such a district on the map today, and the drawing of such a district in 2020 is a very dubious proposition unless the votes for it exist in the legislature (Translation: it's not happening).
Overwhelming numbers of a group is enough to oblige the drawing of such a district, even over the wishes of the state government; the critical mass to force an R trifecta into drawing a second Latino seat will be there in 2030, but it's far from a certain bet in 2020.

[Torie]

Basically, there doesn't seem to be enough Latinos that there's a ironclad argument for a second seat.
There will be one in 2030, but in 2020 it's more unclear. TX GOPers have the space to defend the map they have made.

There are plenty of Latinos in the Houston area for 2 Hispanic seats (there were actually plenty in 2010 as well!). See the map I just posted. I could have gotten the Hispanic population %s even higher if I were spending more time on it, changing more districts and drawing a map from scratch rather than just editing a few districts in the R proposal. Probably the way to get the highest Hispanic population percentage on the new west-side Hispanic VRA district would be to include some of the heavily Hispanic areas in southwest Houston which are currently in TX-09 & TX-07, which I left entirely untouched. And I was still able to easily draw 2 2/3+ Hispanic districts in a very short amount of time with no real effort required.

Oh, I don't doubt it's possible.
But whether or not such a seat can be drawn is different than if such a district will be drawn. It is possible to draw an extra black seat in Mississippi even in 2010, but I don't see such a district on the map today, and the drawing of such a district in 2020 is a very dubious proposition unless the votes for it exist in the legislature (Translation: it's not happening).
Overwhelming numbers of a group is enough to oblige the drawing of such a district, even over the wishes of the state government; the critical mass to force an R trifecta into drawing a second Latino seat will be there in 2030, but it's far from a certain bet in 2020.

I know no instance where a Gingles seat could be drawn (a "compact" 50% CVAP minority seat), that was not due to a gerrymander screwing the subject minority out of a seat. Do you?
If one blows off that metric, one is betting that either the Blacks v. Hispanics case will not be litigated, or SCOTUS will water down Gingles. The thing is, is that per Gingles, in Houston the blacks are legally entitled to but one seat, and Hispanics two. The Pub map is the opposite. That seems crazy to me. I don't know what I am missing.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Basically, there doesn't seem to be enough Latinos that there's a ironclad argument for a second seat.
There will be one in 2030, but in 2020 it's more unclear. TX GOPers have the space to defend the map they have made.

There are plenty of Latinos in the Houston area for 2 Hispanic seats (there were actually plenty in 2010 as well!). See the map I just posted. I could have gotten the Hispanic population %s even higher if I were spending more time on it, changing more districts and drawing a map from scratch rather than just editing a few districts in the R proposal. Probably the way to get the highest Hispanic population percentage on the new west-side Hispanic VRA district would be to include some of the heavily Hispanic areas in southwest Houston which are currently in TX-09 & TX-07, which I left entirely untouched. And I was still able to easily draw 2 2/3+ Hispanic districts in a very short amount of time with no real effort required.

Oh, I don't doubt it's possible.
But whether or not such a seat can be drawn is different than if such a district will be drawn. It is possible to draw an extra black seat in Mississippi even in 2010, but I don't see such a district on the map today, and the drawing of such a district in 2020 is a very dubious proposition unless the votes for it exist in the legislature (Translation: it's not happening).
Overwhelming numbers of a group is enough to oblige the drawing of such a district, even over the wishes of the state government; the critical mass to force an R trifecta into drawing a second Latino seat will be there in 2030, but it's far from a certain bet in 2020.

I know no instance where a Gingles seat could be drawn (a "compact" 50% CVAP minority seat), that was not due to a gerrymander screwing the subject minority out of a seat. Do you?
If one blows off that metric, one is betting that either the Blacks v. Hispanics case will not be litigated, or SCOTUS will water down Gingles. The thing is, is that per Gingles, in Houston the blacks are legally entitled to but one seat, and Hispanics two. The Pub map is the opposite. That seems crazy to me. I don't know what I am missing.

There were cases of black Democrats in state legislatures teaming up with Republicans to add VRA seats, but I don't know to what extent that is applicable here, because some of that history precedes the decision that put in place the Gingles test.

[Torie]

Basically, there doesn't seem to be enough Latinos that there's a ironclad argument for a second seat.
There will be one in 2030, but in 2020 it's more unclear. TX GOPers have the space to defend the map they have made.

There are plenty of Latinos in the Houston area for 2 Hispanic seats (there were actually plenty in 2010 as well!). See the map I just posted. I could have gotten the Hispanic population %s even higher if I were spending more time on it, changing more districts and drawing a map from scratch rather than just editing a few districts in the R proposal. Probably the way to get the highest Hispanic population percentage on the new west-side Hispanic VRA district would be to include some of the heavily Hispanic areas in southwest Houston which are currently in TX-09 & TX-07, which I left entirely untouched. And I was still able to easily draw 2 2/3+ Hispanic districts in a very short amount of time with no real effort required.

Oh, I don't doubt it's possible.
But whether or not such a seat can be drawn is different than if such a district will be drawn. It is possible to draw an extra black seat in Mississippi even in 2010, but I don't see such a district on the map today, and the drawing of such a district in 2020 is a very dubious proposition unless the votes for it exist in the legislature (Translation: it's not happening).
Overwhelming numbers of a group is enough to oblige the drawing of such a district, even over the wishes of the state government; the critical mass to force an R trifecta into drawing a second Latino seat will be there in 2030, but it's far from a certain bet in 2020.

I know no instance where a Gingles seat could be drawn (a "compact" 50% CVAP minority seat), that was not due to a gerrymander screwing the subject minority out of a seat. Do you?
If one blows off that metric, one is betting that either the Blacks v. Hispanics case will not be litigated, or SCOTUS will water down Gingles. The thing is, is that per Gingles, in Houston the blacks are legally entitled to but one seat, and Hispanics two. The Pub map is the opposite. That seems crazy to me. I don't know what I am missing.

There were cases of black Democrats in state legislatures teaming up with Republicans to add VRA seats, but I don't know to what extent that is applicable here, because some of that history precedes the decision that put in place the Gingles test.

Adding VRA seats is different than not adding VRA seats, but allocating them to the "wrong" minority.

[Non Swing Voter]

So basically TX redistricting looks like a wash, no net pickups for either party = the most likely outcome in 2022?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Basically, there doesn't seem to be enough Latinos that there's a ironclad argument for a second seat.
There will be one in 2030, but in 2020 it's more unclear. TX GOPers have the space to defend the map they have made.

There are plenty of Latinos in the Houston area for 2 Hispanic seats (there were actually plenty in 2010 as well!). See the map I just posted. I could have gotten the Hispanic population %s even higher if I were spending more time on it, changing more districts and drawing a map from scratch rather than just editing a few districts in the R proposal. Probably the way to get the highest Hispanic population percentage on the new west-side Hispanic VRA district would be to include some of the heavily Hispanic areas in southwest Houston which are currently in TX-09 & TX-07, which I left entirely untouched. And I was still able to easily draw 2 2/3+ Hispanic districts in a very short amount of time with no real effort required.

Oh, I don't doubt it's possible.
But whether or not such a seat can be drawn is different than if such a district will be drawn. It is possible to draw an extra black seat in Mississippi even in 2010, but I don't see such a district on the map today, and the drawing of such a district in 2020 is a very dubious proposition unless the votes for it exist in the legislature (Translation: it's not happening).
Overwhelming numbers of a group is enough to oblige the drawing of such a district, even over the wishes of the state government; the critical mass to force an R trifecta into drawing a second Latino seat will be there in 2030, but it's far from a certain bet in 2020.

I know no instance where a Gingles seat could be drawn (a "compact" 50% CVAP minority seat), that was not due to a gerrymander screwing the subject minority out of a seat. Do you?
If one blows off that metric, one is betting that either the Blacks v. Hispanics case will not be litigated, or SCOTUS will water down Gingles. The thing is, is that per Gingles, in Houston the blacks are legally entitled to but one seat, and Hispanics two. The Pub map is the opposite. That seems crazy to me. I don't know what I am missing.

There were cases of black Democrats in state legislatures teaming up with Republicans to add VRA seats, but I don't know to what extent that is applicable here, because some of that history precedes the decision that put in place the Gingles test.

Adding VRA seats is different than not adding VRA seats, but allocating them to the "wrong" minority.

Aaaah I see.
So the issue with the TX map is that it might have "converted" a black seat into a Hispanic one?

[GALeftist]

So basically TX redistricting looks like a wash, no net pickups for either party = the most likely outcome in 2022?

If this map stands, my money is on TX-15 flipping in 2022, being swingy in 2024, and then marching right, but the RGV trends are so weird that honestly who knows. All the D seats besides that are fairly safe though

[Torie]

It "should" have converted a black seat into an Hispanic one. It is a painful process given history. But the Charlie Rangel black seat is now gone in NYC, converted to an Hispanic one. That is going to happen more and more, outside the South. When Hispanics move in, blacks tend to move out, to make what I think is an accurate if not politically correct statement.

This has been a "thing" for a long time. 30 years ago I remember an article perhaps in the WSJ but maybe not, about some politically blacks in Miami being distressed that Cubans were moving in en mass. Their perceived path to "progress" on which a launch  had been made was being slammed shut, was their perception.

Michael Barone I think had it right as he predicted 30 years ago. As time goes by, the more Hispanics seem to be like Italians. It is almost uncanny.