2020 Texas Redistricting thread

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I increasingly don't think TX-39 is going to happen this round.  How might things shake out differently with a 38 CD map?

Well, under 39 CDs, DFW, Houston metro, and San Antonio-Austin corridor all gain a seat. Under 38, one of them doesn't. Which of the three is growing the slowest?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I increasingly don't think TX-39 is going to happen this round.  How might things shake out differently with a 38 CD map?

Well, under 39 CDs, DFW, Houston metro, and San Antonio-Austin corridor all gain a seat. Under 38, one of them doesn't. Which of the three is growing the slowest?

Well, if there is enough of a growth setback to result in only 38 CDs, probably Houston, because oil fell to $20 just in time for the census.

My intuition is that would make it near impossible to draw out Fletcher, but that would also free up more R's to shore up the Austin suburbs CDs?

My guess is that GOPers draw TX-07 outwards in a 38-seat map, and add a ton of exurban territory. I'd expect them to produce an Austin vote sink, though they might not create a pure Travis CD if they can get Montgomery County in, say, TX-10. Kevin Brady's seat could be unpacked...

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I increasingly don't think TX-39 is going to happen this round.  How might things shake out differently with a 38 CD map?

Well, under 39 CDs, DFW, Houston metro, and San Antonio-Austin corridor all gain a seat. Under 38, one of them doesn't. Which of the three is growing the slowest?

I suspect under 38 seats all 3 metro areas still gain a seat and a rural seat is technically abolished.

We also could have one of the metros gain a "half-seat" where a rural seat is made exurban I guess.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I increasingly don't think TX-39 is going to happen this round.  How might things shake out differently with a 38 CD map?

Well, under 39 CDs, DFW, Houston metro, and San Antonio-Austin corridor all gain a seat. Under 38, one of them doesn't. Which of the three is growing the slowest?

I suspect under 38 seats all 3 metro areas still gain a seat and a rural seat is technically abolished.

We also could have one of the metros gain a "half-seat" where a rural seat is made exurban I guess.

I suspect something like that would happen. All three urban areas gain a seat but they're more exurban than with 39 seats, and a rural seat is lost in the difference.

Has anyone of us actually made a 38 seat map using 2016 estimates? This might be an illuminating exercise insofar as to what the result might be.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/215c4506-b2b1-43d9-9041-f9c9fab5e391
so I constructed this map.
three D seats in DFW, with northern Dallas County cracked between 4 seats, all of them GOP-leaning
an ingenious way of preventing an additional Democrat from getting elected from Travis County - one seat going west far into West Texas, another going east in Montgomery County, and then a D vote sink
TX-07 is kept competitive by becoming more exurban
Fort Bend is chopped in half to prevent a D from winning there
TX-23 is turned into a McCain district, but its Hispanic % is higher than in the 2010s
12 districts went to McCain with over 65%, and 9 more gave him between 60% and 65%.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I had a response typed out and lost said response due to a short-term connection issue.

What I will say is that my crack of northern Dallas should work flawlessly or close to flawlessly for one or two cycles and then degrade heavily as the decade goes on. However, this is still better than conceding an additional district to Dems. At the beginning of 2018 they had 2 seats in DFW, then they gained another. Now I turned this seat into a pack and then destroyed the D pickup (TX-32), taking the heavily white liberal southern portion into the D vote sink and then splitting its territory among three seats. The NW Dallas County seat is probably the first domino to fall though, in any event, and if the crack failed anywhere, it would do so here. But the others are more resilent. I designed the Park Cities CD to take in a lot of territory in northern Collin, to help insulate it from trends in Dallas County, and the Richardson CD has a ton of exurban territory, which should counterweigh hostile trends in Dallas County; the portion outside of Dallas and Collin is not all that smaller than the Dallas County portion, which helps it a lot. Ds would have to not just landslide in the Dallas County portion by a larger margin than Rs landslide in the exurban portion, they would also need to win the Collin portion. And while the Garland CD retreats quite a bit, its still quite difficult turf for Dems. The 1/3rd of it outside of Dallas County will be strong R turf and Ds would need massive turnout in Dallas County to overcome that. As for the Tarrant CD, it is 64% white in 2016 and has loads of areas that have remained steadfastly R even in the Trump Era. So I have doubts it really needs help.

As for San Antonio and Austin - I deliberately drew a GOP safe seat here (Comal+north Bexar+Hays+Hill Country). And I don't think Ds can break through easily at all in either of the Travis GOP seats. Are Ds supposed to get massive swings in Montgomery County or the rural areas of either the Texas Triangle or West Texas? Less than a third of either district is in Travis County as of 2016 estimates, and the other parts of the seats in question are overwhlemingly R. Yes I'm aware MJ Hegar would win this version of the Williamson CD. That's not really something I see as possible to avert without dealing serious damage elsewhere or making the map look super ugly.

As for the South East parts of Texas - no I do not think the Fort Bend seats are vulnerable. Fort Bend going D by 60-65% overall (a scenario which I do not see as very plausible as a long-term possibility), would be enough to flip both seats, but until you get to that stress point, you have cracked a county that would have elected a D by itself in 2, keeping that from happening for at the very least, two to three election cycles, at the most, until the next round of redistricting. And I don't think TX-07 is a lost cause for GOPers here. It takes on a large amount of GOP turf and gives up minority territory, making it almost majority white in total population. Culberson only lost by 5 points in 2018, and that was with lots of Hispanic areas in SW Houston thrown in. These have all been excised out, and replaced with white, conservative exurban GOP precincts. This should produce a seat that can rather easily vote R in 2022 and 2024, and potentially later on if you have an entrenched, skilled incumbent. And I doubt that the CD in NE Harris is particularly vulnerable either. It has a large chunk of Montgomery (around 20% of the CD), and Liberty County (another 10% or so). And these would make it very hard for the D to win. The only "GOP" seat that should actually be Dem here by 2022 is the one in SW Harris, but that can't be helped too much. Perhaps it would be competitive however, for three to four election cycles.

All in all this gerrymander I think has great potential. Bear in mind that if Ds take the White House in 2020, then a big amount of the potential gains for them are put in much doubt, as the Dems no longer being the out-party makes it considerably harder for them to gain much in Texas. And if the GOP wins in 2020, this map should do a decent job of holding Dems at bay until at least 2026.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Also, I am aware that 2016 population estimates are out of date; but 1) a fair number of the seats mix areas that are weaker in population growth and those are stronger, so it should cancel out in some districts (such as in the Tom Green-Travis CD), and 2) I have no better data to work with. Certainly it's better than using 2010 data...

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What I will say is that my crack of northern Dallas should work flawlessly or close to flawlessly for one or two cycles and then degrade heavily as the decade goes on. However, this is still better than conceding an additional district to Dems. At the beginning of 2018 they had 2 seats in DFW, then they gained another. Now I turned this seat into a pack and then destroyed the D pickup (TX-32), taking the heavily white liberal southern portion into the D vote sink and then splitting its territory among three seats. The NW Dallas County seat is probably the first domino to fall though, in any event, and if the crack failed anywhere, it would do so here. But the others are more resilent. I designed the Park Cities CD to take in a lot of territory in northern Collin, to help insulate it from trends in Dallas County, and the Richardson CD has a ton of exurban territory, which should counterweigh hostile trends in Dallas County; the portion outside of Dallas and Collin is not all that smaller than the Dallas County portion, which helps it a lot. Ds would have to not just landslide in the Dallas County portion by a larger margin than Rs landslide in the exurban portion, they would also need to win the Collin portion. And while the Garland CD retreats quite a bit, its still quite difficult turf for Dems. The 1/3rd of it outside of Dallas County will be strong R turf and Ds would need massive turnout in Dallas County to overcome that. As for the Tarrant CD, it is 64% white in 2016 and has loads of areas that have remained steadfastly R even in the Trump Era. So I have doubts it really needs help.

Given the 4th, 5th and 9th are all right on the edge of Tarrant and all over R+20 why not get them to take a larger bite of Fort Worth allowing the 33rd to take a chunk of blue Dallas allowing the 2 Dallas packs to take more blue territory there. And given the 2nd is only D+12 you could definitely improve the D packs in Dallas county too. And the 9th could also help take a chunk of bluer Dallas too.

As for San Antonio and Austin - I deliberately drew a GOP safe seat here (Comal+north Bexar+Hays+Hill Country). And I don't think Ds can break through easily at all in either of the Travis GOP seats. Are Ds supposed to get massive swings in Montgomery County or the rural areas of either the Texas Triangle or West Texas? Less than a third of either district is in Travis County as of 2016 estimates, and the other parts of the seats in question are overwhlemingly R. Yes I'm aware MJ Hegar would win this version of the Williamson CD. That's not really something I see as possible to avert without dealing serious damage elsewhere or making the map look super ugly.

Instead of adding another Rio Grande Hispanic seat you could keep the existing arrangement (so giving Corpus Christi back to an R seat) and instead keep the current 35th which can take blue east san antonio and then take it up to Austin to get rid of the risk on the Travis splitters.
The risk of MJ Hegar could definitely be gotten rid of by just splitting up Williamson-Bell. The 20th is R+23 so could definitely take a large chunk of Williamson, the 19th then moves north abandoning most of Williamson and instead taking Bell some of the 20th and some of the Eastern counties off the 16th. And the 16th could instead come in and take a large chunk of Williamson too, it's R+18 so it has room to spare.

As for the South East parts of Texas - no I do not think the Fort Bend seats are vulnerable. Fort Bend going D by 60-65% overall (a scenario which I do not see as very plausible as a long-term possibility), would be enough to flip both seats, but until you get to that stress point, you have cracked a county that would have elected a D by itself in 2, keeping that from happening for at the very least, two to three election cycles, at the most, until the next round of redistricting. And I don't think TX-07 is a lost cause for GOPers here. It takes on a large amount of GOP turf and gives up minority territory, making it almost majority white in total population. Culberson only lost by 5 points in 2018, and that was with lots of Hispanic areas in SW Houston thrown in. These have all been excised out, and replaced with white, conservative exurban GOP precincts. This should produce a seat that can rather easily vote R in 2022 and 2024, and potentially later on if you have an entrenched, skilled incumbent. And I doubt that the CD in NE Harris is particularly vulnerable either. It has a large chunk of Montgomery (around 20% of the CD), and Liberty County (another 10% or so). And these would make it very hard for the D to win. The only "GOP" seat that should actually be Dem here by 2022 is the one in SW Harris, but that can't be helped too much. Perhaps it would be competitive however, for three to four election cycles.

Rather than being indecisive the GOP could actually try and secure the 27th a good bit more. Your map improves its PVI vs the current district by 2, but by trading precincts with the 18th, 28th and 29th you could definitely get that seat a few points redder without risking the others.

I don't think its necessary to cross the Tarrant-Dallas county line. What I have with Tarrant is a stable 3R-1D arrangement - one seat that has as much minorities as is feasible, and then the rest of the Tarrant just draws itself. I'd also note that the new D vote sink is pretty much as packed as it feasibly can for the most part (the only caveat being that it was drawn to optimize Latino voting power, hence requiring the inclusion of some GOP-leaning precincts in and around Love Field). You have a fair point regarding the two Denton districts; a precinct exchange is in order, with TX-37 losing areas in its north and it gaining Wise and SW Denton.

I'm also dead-set against keeping the current TX-35. It's a total eyesore, it puts GOP seats in and around Travis at risk, erodes count integrity for no clear partisan benefit, and is too much of a danger, due to it forcing nearby GOP districts to take in some D-trending precincts. The GOP can no longer afford not to have a district very firmly based in eastern Travis. However you have outlined a good alternative arrangement in Williamson so I'm using that. Thanks for the help. And you have a decent point regarding TX-07. It definitely could be improved.

Also thanks for making a map to figure out PVIs.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No, I mean having the current 35th in addition to a new D sink in Austin. Even after 1 D sink there's a lot of blue territory left over in Austin. My suggestion is dropping Corpus Cristi from the D seats so more of Austin can be added instead.

Ah. Apologies for misunderstanding you.
35th+new Austin vote sink might make sense if not for the fact that 1) I don't need any further protection against Ds in Austin, 2) Corpus Christie being placed out of a D seat means that someway or another the red rurals I am using to crack Fort Bend will be taken out of the equation for certain due to geography, and 3) all this makes the map unnecessarily ugly regardless.
Anyway, I redid some of the districts. Thoughts on the changes?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

No, I mean having the current 35th in addition to a new D sink in Austin. Even after 1 D sink there's a lot of blue territory left over in Austin. My suggestion is dropping Corpus Cristi from the D seats so more of Austin can be added instead.

Ah. Apologies for misunderstanding you.
35th+new Austin vote sink might make sense if not for the fact that 1) I don't need any further protection against Ds in Austin, 2) Corpus Christie being placed out of a D seat means that someway or another the red rurals I am using to crack Fort Bend will be taken out of the equation for certain due to geography, and 3) all this makes the map unnecessarily ugly regardless.
Anyway, I redid some of the districts. Thoughts on the changes?

https://davesredistricting.org/join/33de3b30-3901-41ea-8533-aa0395d89209
2010 map updated to match.
You could definitely redraw 7/10/11 to get them nearly as or as safe as 8/9 are. The 3rd could take Grayson and some more then everything east swivels around to get safer too. Merge the 21st and 22nd into one East Texas district and you free up one more district to split up Dallas. And you could still get the 19th to get some ruby red counties from the 16th and the 16th to take some of Williamson to properly shore up against MJ Hegar.

Map is now edited accordingly.
While I opted against shoring up TX-03 any further, I readily accepted redrawing East Texas to facilitate an additional cracking of North Dallas.
I also redrew Central Texas quite a bit. The Williamson CD took in areas to the north, while the Brazos CD takes in some of Williamson, which in turn trades some of Montgomery County to the Waller CD, which in turn made it feasible to radically redraw the lines in Travis County.
Anything else?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I don't know this stuff as well as you guys, but if I were in the republicans' position, I would cede most urban and inner suburban areas to democrats. Something like

Dallas- 4
Houston- 3/4 (depending on whether you count Fort Bend as Houston)
Austin- 2
San Antonio-1/2 (depending on how much they wanna fajita strip areas to the north and to the valley)

ceding 4 seats to Dems in DFW metro is unnecessary and gifts Ds an certain extra district in the early years of the decade. Much better to crack Northern Dallas County and pack everything else.
Had Collin Allred won by 15 or more points then it would probably be measurably different.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I don't know this stuff as well as you guys, but if I were in the republicans' position, I would cede most urban and inner suburban areas to democrats. Something like

Dallas- 4
Houston- 3/4 (depending on whether you count Fort Bend as Houston)
Austin- 2
San Antonio-1/2 (depending on how much they wanna fajita strip areas to the north and to the valley)

They could end up doing this, but only if 2020 goes at leas as bad as 2018 for them.  Should they lose something statewide in 2020 but retain redistricting control, they won't be taking any chances this time.  

The GOP would probably lose control of the Texas HoR on the current map before they lose any statewide races (as I recall, O'Rourke won an easy majority of Texas HoR seats in 2018 even while losing statewide), so that may be a moot point.

It is an interesting issue of what happens if the Democrats control the Texas HoR (or otherwise the Republicans can't pass their maps, say if they have a majority of 1 or 2 and some rebels who are anti-gerrymandering).

In that event all redistricting goes to a backup commission made of statewide elected officials, so unless Ds play ball and manage to get a compromise somewhere involving the state leg and/or congressional maps, then its another GOPmander.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

this is a "good government" 38-district map made from 2016 population estimates, emphasis was on creating compact seats.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/047dc5e1-31f1-46d7-918c-4f442f857c58

there are 13 Obama districts, 1 district where Obama and McCain were exactly tied, and 24 McCain seats. However I assume it would be Dem leaning today.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

this is a "good government" 38-district map made from 2016 population estimates, emphasis was on creating compact seats.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/047dc5e1-31f1-46d7-918c-4f442f857c58

there are 13 Obama districts, 1 district where Obama and McCain were exactly tied, and 24 McCain seats. However I assume it would be Dem leaning today.

No good government would draw the fajittas reasonably.

?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

this is a "good government" 38-district map made from 2016 population estimates, emphasis was on creating compact seats.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/047dc5e1-31f1-46d7-918c-4f442f857c58

there are 13 Obama districts, 1 district where Obama and McCain were exactly tied, and 24 McCain seats. However I assume it would be Dem leaning today.

No good government would draw the fajittas reasonably.

?

Sorry I mean the fajjitas are an unfair tear up of  the COI's I guess they would be mandated by the VRA  to expand hispanic representation  I guess. You can easily just draw 3 simple RGV districts instead of stripping them far north, I doubt the courts will require the fajittas anyway because they fail the Gingles test of a compact COI. If texas already has a natural geographical advantage for Democrats why would a fair map try to make even more tilted in favor of Ds by stripping away hispanic districts. A good government map would naturall draw good COI's in Dallas and Houston accepting that the GOP will be underrepresented in those areas per vote while also accepting that if Hispanics largely live in one region they should be kept in a district in that region.

I'm not signing up for a debate about the merits and drawbacks of the fajitas - I will just say that I see them as necessary and you will not see me remove them from my maps. That is all.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

this is a "good government" 38-district map made from 2016 population estimates, emphasis was on creating compact seats.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/047dc5e1-31f1-46d7-918c-4f442f857c58

there are 13 Obama districts, 1 district where Obama and McCain were exactly tied, and 24 McCain seats. However I assume it would be Dem leaning today.

No good government would draw the fajittas reasonably.

?

Sorry I mean the fajjitas are an unfair tear up of  the COI's I guess they would be mandated by the VRA  to expand hispanic representation  I guess. You can easily just draw 3 simple RGV districts instead of stripping them far north, I doubt the courts will require the fajittas anyway because they fail the Gingles test of a compact COI. If texas already has a natural geographical advantage for Democrats why would a fair map try to make even more tilted in favor of Ds by stripping away hispanic districts. A good government map would naturall draw good COI's in Dallas and Houston accepting that the GOP will be underrepresented in those areas per vote while also accepting that if Hispanics largely live in one region they should be kept in a district in that region.

I'm not signing up for a debate about the merits and drawbacks of the fajitas - I will just say that I see them as necessary and you will not see me remove them from my maps. That is all.

Cool just don't call it a good government map, call it a court map if you wish .

But I see the fajitas as a good government measure. So I will continue calling it as such, thank you very much.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

While everyone has been looking at federal redistricting, given that State Senate districts are actually larger than federal ones, opinion of this map?

https://districtr.org/edit/3296







This map should be a safe 19R-12D map. All R districts are at 58.5% Trump or more. All Dem districts are also at 58% Clinton or more.

Granted, I guess with trends and what not it could end up as a dummymander? I also think several of those districts might be illegal because of the VRA?

I think the Texas Constitution says they have to minimize county splits in the state legislative maps. So a few places you have two or more districts splitting the same two counties (like the three Dallas-Collin districts, the two Harris-Montgomery districts or the four Harris-Fort Bend districts) are illegal.

Although maybe that only applies to the state House... not certain.

It only applies to the State House. Though in practice the State Senate districts being long short strings would not fly too well among the public; so the GOP might take the path of "clean compact gerrymandering" where the seats look good but strongly favor the GOP.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

While everyone has been looking at federal redistricting, given that State Senate districts are actually larger than federal ones, opinion of this map?

https://districtr.org/edit/3296







This map should be a safe 19R-12D map. All R districts are at 58.5% Trump or more. All Dem districts are also at 58% Clinton or more.

Granted, I guess with trends and what not it could end up as a dummymander? I also think several of those districts might be illegal because of the VRA?

I think the Texas Constitution says they have to minimize county splits in the state legislative maps. So a few places you have two or more districts splitting the same two counties (like the three Dallas-Collin districts, the two Harris-Montgomery districts or the four Harris-Fort Bend districts) are illegal.

Although maybe that only applies to the state House... not certain.

It only applies to the State House. Though in practice the State Senate districts being long short strings would not fly too well among the public; so the GOP might take the path of "clean compact gerrymandering" where the seats look good but strongly favor the GOP.

If there is any place they go MD style all out, it will be in the state senate.  The state house district constitutional rules are probably strict enough that the chamber will inevitably flip before 2031 if it hasn't flipped already.  The state senate will be the focus.  It's their best hope to ensure a say in the state's government for another decade.  

Yeah, by design its much easier to gerrymander the State Senate than the State House. I fully expect a devious gerrymander there designed to hurt the Democrats' chances. It probably won't be ugly overall - but it will be fine-tuned to achieve its intended effect regardless.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I am pretty sure after this decade's weakening of the VRA the fajitas won't be required anymore especially as they don't fit the gingles test(compactness)

Depending on the total # of districts, you might have a single district that is contained mostly within Hidalgo (as there is a limit to how many seats you can send north).
Try to draw a 40 CD map without having one CD like that. It is tough.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f960b344-3da3-45d8-8b26-1ad76f0b95a7
I drew this map of state board of education districts based off of 2018 population estimates. Without intending to I created a perfect example as to how geographic bias in favor of Ds is now a thing in Texas. Clinton, despite losing the state by 9, wins 8/15 seats, all of them by double digits. The Clinton districts voted for her by margins of 11, 14, 27, 20, 36, 12, 24, and 18 points, while Trump districts went to him by a margins of 31, 55, 20, 45, 38, 49, and 13 points.

[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.

[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.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Have been playing around with Texas maps again. Did you know it's possible to draw four fajita strips now? Hard to see why it wouldn't be required.



link

This looks like a nice set of fajitas.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Is Texas likelier to have 39 seats or 38?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

TX map I made.
Was designed to be non-partisan while generally addhewing to least change when realistic and desirable. This is not a fair map as it was not designed to be proportional to the state. As such, due mostly to my general desire to have just one district crossing out of a county when possible, the map has a slight Dem lean relative to the state.
The new districts are TX-37 (Hispanic majority in total pop, Dallas County), TX-38 (areas between San Antonio and Austin), and TX-39 (fast-growing DFW exurbs). Harris County also gains about at least half a seat as TX-36 is now contained within it, and TX-17 is about 40% within it.
https://davesredistricting.org/join/c8f8ea43-5428-45c0-aadb-b36ada186ab9