2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Florida

[ProgressiveModerate]

Republicans currently hold just short of 80 seats in the Florida House.  During Jeb Bush's governorship (in his second term), they had at times upwards of an 85-seat majority, at least until 2006.  After redistricting is over and done with, how likely is it that we are going to see those majorities again this decade?

Seems like Rs win basically every marginal state HD and SD down ballot in Florida and generally have massive over performances on the Pres level, especially since Dems locally tend to be pretty packed. It would not surprise me.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Here is the actual law that I thought I would put up that constrains a Pubmander.

The issue is that these types of laws are pretty vague. What is “compact” at what point does a given map “favor” one political party over another. The GOP controlled state SC prolly has a pretty loose interpretation of this law and therefore it’s more idealistic. Now if there was a specific thing that said the district borders must be at most % of the area or only X counties can be split, then we’d been having a different discussion. But things that say general “muh compact” “muh fair” won’t prevent anything

[ProgressiveModerate]

Here is the actual law that I thought I would put up that constrains a Pubmander.

The issue is that these types of laws are pretty vague. What is “compact” at what point does a given map “favor” one political party over another. The GOP controlled state SC prolly has a pretty loose interpretation of this law and therefore it’s more idealistic. Now if there was a specific thing that said the district borders must be at most % of the area or only X counties can be split, then we’d been having a different discussion. But things that say general “muh compact” “muh fair” won’t prevent anything

As I have said many times before, I have more faith in the courts than that, even partisan courts. I think that for an obviously partisan reason, a map makes additional county chops, or significant city chops, or makes a map significantly more erose, is very vulnerable to being struck down under the Florida law. For example, if FL-14 is going to cross the bay , it had better take in the entirety of St. Petersburg, and eliminate a county chop elsewhere or greatly mitigate it, or make some CD materially more compact. A line change that benefits the Pubs, while also adding some other negative factor as described above, has no talking points to go to the court with. The Pub case in such event has no clothes, and the court is quite unlikely to ignore that fact the way the emperor's subjects did when the he was in his birthday suit. I am not changing my mind of this one. Color me obtuse or stubborn if you must. I won't mind too much.


That said, I Pubbed up Tim's TX-13 by a grand total of 30 basis points. My talking point? Keep the cities united! I lost a muni chop, and even though the erosity is a tad greater, that is a damn good talking point - in fact it should be a winner! Aren't I wonderful?  

A masochist can go through Tim's map with a fine tooth comb, and try to find other ways to Pub it up, that have similar talking points available. But it won't be FL-13. I tried and it was a fail. No talking points to do something more major were there to be had, unless of course I just lack the perspicacity to discern it, but I don't think so in this case. If I had found an avenue, I would have shared it. Of course!

Fair enough. With FL-13, what I do is make one entirely Pinellas based CD, and the leftovers “just happen” to be FL-14. I really do hope you’re right that the courts will enforce the law, to help mitigate the gerrymander a bit.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Here is the actual law that I thought I would put up that constrains a Pubmander.

The issue is that these types of laws are pretty vague. What is “compact” at what point does a given map “favor” one political party over another. The GOP controlled state SC prolly has a pretty loose interpretation of this law and therefore it’s more idealistic. Now if there was a specific thing that said the district borders must be at most % of the area or only X counties can be split, then we’d been having a different discussion. But things that say general “muh compact” “muh fair” won’t prevent anything

As I have said many times before, I have more faith in the courts than that, even partisan courts. I think that for an obviously partisan reason, a map makes additional county chops, or significant city chops, or makes a map significantly more erose, is very vulnerable to being struck down under the Florida law. For example, if FL-14 is going to cross the bay , it had better take in the entirety of St. Petersburg, and eliminate a county chop elsewhere or greatly mitigate it, or make some CD materially more compact. A line change that benefits the Pubs, while also adding some other negative factor as described above, has no talking points to go to the court with. The Pub case in such event has no clothes, and the court is quite unlikely to ignore that fact the way the emperor's subjects did when the he was in his birthday suit. I am not changing my mind of this one. Color me obtuse or stubborn if you must. I won't mind too much.


That said, I Pubbed up Tim's TX-13 by a grand total of 30 basis points. My talking point? Keep the cities united! I lost a muni chop, and even though the erosity is a tad greater, that is a damn good talking point - in fact it should be a winner! Aren't I wonderful?  

A masochist can go through Tim's map with a fine tooth comb, and try to find other ways to Pub it up, that have similar talking points available. But it won't be FL-13. I tried and it was a fail. No talking points to do something more major were there to be had, unless of course I just lack the perspicacity to discern it, but I don't think so in this case. If I had found an avenue, I would have shared it. Of course!

Fair enough. With FL-13, what I do is make one entirely Pinellas based CD, and the leftovers “just happen” to be FL-14. I really do hope you’re right that the courts will enforce the law, to help mitigate the gerrymander a bit.

The problem with that is that you generate an extra, and major, muni chop, without any offsetting benefit. St. Pete just has too many residents,  a most unfortunate inconvenience for the Pubs. Even if its population fit the Pub agenda as you described it, just what is the benefit of crossing the bay other than partisan reasons? Is there some other benefit elsewhere as a plus to justify it?

Only idea I can come up with is to keep Pinellas to 1 county chop, and have one reasonably high minority majority seat with a mild black influence, but that’s about it

[ProgressiveModerate]

Interesting how 5 was kept in tact but 14 still crosses the bay

[ProgressiveModerate]

Weather or not FL Rs gerrymander, they have 2 problems in the Miami-Dade metro area.

The northern part of the state can be gerrymandered relatively normally "cracking/packing", and I suspect they will slowly ammend the map to make it more GOP favorable. No way Tampa gets 3 Biden seats for instance.

However, their Miami problem is outside the 2 black seats, you get 3 D (21, 22, and 23) seats that are kinda the ideal partisanship of around D +15 to D + 20; not enough to be considered packed but enough to reliably win. It very much gives me RGC

The 2nd decision they have to make is how crazy they want to go in the Cuban parts of Miami, since huge swings between 2016 and 2020 make defining a gerrymander in the region hard; a gerrymander on 2020 Pres numbers could be considered a dummymander but playing it safe could mean "overpacking" Rs if 2020 is indicative of future trends.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Bruh even if they're playing it safe why would they draw 3 Biden seats in Tampa, when 2 is easy to do and perfectly legal, and one could argue better represents the interests of minority voters.

Even if Rs do end up playing this one safe I'd expect them to make a few minor changes at the very least, especially when it comes to the I-84 corridor.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Despite what was done to Crist's district, it's hard to see Dems not voting for these maps if they come up. It's the best they can realistically expect and has the capability of being 15-13 D in a 2018 type year.

This one seems like a calculated gamble by the FL GOP that Dems will move in the direction of becoming an AOC/identity obsessed party and lose Hispanic and Jewish voters. Note the Tampa area 3 Biden seats could all become R with additional GOP gains with minorities and WWC voters. The new 22nd in eastern Broward/Boca/Delray is a heavily Jewish area and could swing R if Dems continue in the AOC/Corbyn direction. This is a big if and must involve the Rs moving on from Trump (but not so much his policies). Murphy probably has GOP allies in the legislature uninterested in helping Sabatini join Boebert and MTG in Congress. Still, the 21-7 upside for the GOP comes with enormous risk and Dems get the economy strong in 2024, mild reversion with Dade Hispanics, it could easily become a 14-14 map.

I do give the Florida GOP credit if it passes, it is definitely something different than other Republican maps and I don't doubt the political acumen of the strongest state party in the country.

Your thinking too hard. We have the mapper 'on record' basically saying he doesn't want any lawsuits or litigation, which means following the constitutions anti-gerrymandering laws as they were written rather than as one desires AND provide adequate access for minorities. With those considerations, ones can only Gerry so much yet this map attempts such things.

If they opt for the coastal 21/22 rather than the N/S it would simply be because the coast actually has entrenched GOP areas and they are gerrying two safe D seats into a Safe D and a potentially competitive one. The GOP has long held some coastal state house seats in this area. This isn't some new invention - the 2010 map did it. Which is why it may not occur: coastal-inland was thrown out in favor of north-south. Same with Tampa - more a product or nesting and a desire to try to make the seats similar to the successfully gerryed state Senate lines than any pecularities. You can see very similar behavior on the state Senate map, which is more status-quo/incumbent protection with gerrymandering reserved for those areas like Gainesville that are safe from a lawsuit and clearly would remove a competitive seat from the board in favor of the GOP.

IDK what to make of this... R's in OH and NC swinging for the fences, but very reserved maps in Florida, Texas, and probably Georgia.

Which ofc is weird, but reflects the political situation in their states. The GOP fears the states with established or growing Dem parties, especially when said parties are dependent upon minority voters and therefore have most of their seats situationally untouchable by litigation. Retention not expansion is the goal. Meanwhile in the other states on your list the Dems have been out of power for a long time, and recently were (relatively) never close to really seizing it. The mappers are therefore confident, even though institutional strength means the Dems are in a stronger position in both states thanks to their courts than in TX or FL. Same thing will likely happen in KS.

Ehhh... I think the GOP has a lot more to worry about in NC now than in FL or even TX given how much the Hispanic vote shifted right in 2020 and how aggressive the Biden admin has been on environmental issues.

OH and GA R's both seem to be reading the landscape well.  NV and NM D's look overconfident.    It sounds farfetched, but I also think the KS GOP should be more worried.  There's a long way to go, but KS actually had a bigger swing toward Biden than GA.  

The new FL Supreme Court is majority conservative. That’s why I am surprised the Rs aren’t trying for a bigger gain. That said, perhaps the GOP is concerned that these justices are strict textualists and might be sympathetic to the Dems argument as the law states districts can’t favor one party.

Trump Rs don’t care about theories of statutory interpretation but a lot of constitutional conservatives take reading the statute and directly applying its words very seriously.

Even if the GOP is assuming there's a majority strict-textualists, it does seem like you'd be able to easily go at least a little further. One could make a very strong argument that just making FL-14 more like it currently is is better in terms of COI because it keeps minorities together in a district where the can elect a canidate of choice, thereby making it the only blue district in Hillsboro County.

Even FL-7 you could at least make a bit weaker without doing anything too egregious, but maybe the GOP sees the writing on the wall in Orlando.

What's so weird about this map is you can tell there was at least a little bit of gerrymandering going on in Miami-Dade to shore up FL-27 and get a 22nd that could be winnable for the GOP in the right year, but the rest of the map really does look like it was drawn by a commission.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Dang I didn’t realize how tiny a downtown Orlando seat would be.

Anyways ye seems like at the very least 13 will still be competitive and FL-5 ain’t going anywhere. The thing about FL is Dems aren’t really packed into cities the same way they are traditionally on other states, especially in Orlando and Tampa, which is why in Tampa’s case creating swing seats may actually help the GOP if done right. A reminder that Hilsboro county shifted slightly right in 2020. Seems to be the consensus though that Miami Metro will get 5 D seats + FL-5, it’s really what the GOP does in central FL.

[ProgressiveModerate]

-SNIP-

Image Link

So, I actually took a moment to try your proposal out and see what it'd look like if Gimenez's district (FL-28 above) stretched up into Collier, and this really has multiple effects, the largest being making Gimenez's district redder as Homestead is outweighed by Collier and Hendry. FL-28 stays overwhelmingly Hispanic (63.2% population, 62.8% Voting-Age population), especially as Cubans (who make up the vast majority of Hispanics in this district, Sweetwater and Doral are in FL-27) are a relatively older group compared to other Hispanic groups.

This also has the secondary effect of shifting FL-26 bluer, though, as FL-28, as it takes territory from Diaz-Balart's district FL-27, forces FL-27 to take up more ruby red Republican municipalities, finally culminating in shifting FL-26 to be a prime competitive seat that voted Biden by 1.4%.

It also weakens the VRA district as FL-27 has to intake a few of the Black neighborhoods as well. However, the North Miami-Miami Gardens area is bleeding black residents anyway to Broward. Not much they can do there, and Blacks will still no doubt dominate the primary here, making up 39.2% of the Voting-Age population and 41.0% of the total population.

This really comes to show the type of gamble the Florida GOP is making when they attempt to take three Republican seats in Miami-Dade, and just how marginal many of these seats are. It'd take more digging into Collier in order to try to make these seats redder, and there's a limit to that, as many other political concerns remain.

I agree with everything here.

The Miami Dade metro area is a unique city to gerrymander because traditionally cities are gerrymandered by attaching to red rural areas around them, but in this case geography doesn’t  really allow for that so the gerrymander is mostly contained in the metro area itself.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I'm honestly really confused about what the GOP's goal is in Tampa. All 3 of those seats in all the maps went for Biden, probably by lean-likely margins meaning while they could clean-sweep Tampa in 2022, it offers a good chance Dems a good chance for 3 Tampa seats, and more often than not I'd expect Dems to hold at least 2 of the 3 seats. is it for competitiveness? Do they believe that they'll start outright winning Hilsboro County?

The only differences in the 2 maps appear to be whether 21 and 22 should be configured North-South or East-West or how 8, 10, and 7 should be configured in Downtown Orlando. The East-West config of 21 and 22 seems slightly better Rs as it'd make 22 probably only about Biden + 10. Seems like the difference in Orlando seat partisanship between the districts is negligible though 1 seems to try and push out 7 slightly more.

These maps seem pretty reasonable though. There are some small decisions made to benefit the GOP, most notably in Miami, but all things considered this is much better than many maps we've seen

[ProgressiveModerate]

I'm honestly really confused about what the GOP's goal is in Tampa. All 3 of those seats in all the maps went for Biden, probably by lean-likely margins meaning while they could clean-sweep Tampa in 2022, it offers a good chance Dems a good chance for 3 Tampa seats, and more often than not I'd expect Dems to hold at least 2 of the 3 seats. is it for competitiveness? Do they believe that they'll start outright winning Hilsboro County?

Trying to avoid a lawsuit I guess? Hillsborough County's overall margin has been very static over the past four election cycles, even though the internal coalitions have changed a bit.

But it doesn't make sense. Even the old FL Supreme court would allow a Inner Ring seat and then a more suburban seat.

Maybe it's for the point of competitiveness? A D-leaning seat in Orlando or Jacksonville would likely have more favorable Dem trends for the decade whereas most of Tampa metro has been pretty neutral.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Interesting that all 3 Miami Cuban seats are Clinton - Trump

[ProgressiveModerate]

I'm honestly really confused about what the GOP's goal is in Tampa. All 3 of those seats in all the maps went for Biden, probably by lean-likely margins meaning while they could clean-sweep Tampa in 2022, it offers a good chance Dems a good chance for 3 Tampa seats, and more often than not I'd expect Dems to hold at least 2 of the 3 seats. is it for competitiveness? Do they believe that they'll start outright winning Hilsboro County?

Trying to avoid a lawsuit I guess? Hillsborough County's overall margin has been very static over the past four election cycles, even though the internal coalitions have changed a bit.

But it doesn't make sense. Even the old FL Supreme court would allow a Inner Ring seat and then a more suburban seat.

Maybe it's for the point of competitiveness? A D-leaning seat in Orlando or Jacksonville would likely have more favorable Dem trends for the decade whereas most of Tampa metro has been pretty neutral.

But there's no requirements for exact partisan fairness . Overall FL's requirements are closest to CA's although county lines matter more. The FL supreme court made the GOP redraw SD01 and SD02 in the panhandle. The GOP preferred one inland and one beach seat. No partisan difference as both are super Safe R.

Ye that’s what gets sticky, it says a map can’t unduly favour one party but at the same time doesn’t offer any objective metrics. Their more take approach is probably a combination of not wanting to risk the map getting overturned as well as satisfying R incumbents, many of who may be unwilling to take in parts of blue cities and want to keep ultra-safe districts

[ProgressiveModerate]

Anyone else feel like the GOP will pull a last minute gotcha and like completely reconfigure Tampa? This still doesn’t make sense why they’d draw 3 Dem leaning seats unless they’re really cocky they can win all 3. There’s no real VRA or COI reason for this config, infact I’d argue it’s not great from either standpoint as it cracks minorities in Tampa, isnt based on any precedent, and isn’t really an incumbent thing since as the poster above pointed out you can make a Pinellas seat R-Leaning without touching any other R seats

This is the FL GOP, they ain’t stupid and I have a hard time seeing them just throw away 1-2 possible seats like that

One possibility is that it’s just a placeholder config for now; they drew giant rectangles because they weren’t sure what to do with Tampa yet and they plan on going through later and drawing a more favorable config

[ProgressiveModerate]

Anyone else feel like the GOP will pull a last minute gotcha and like completely reconfigure Tampa? This still doesn’t make sense why they’d draw 3 Dem leaning seats unless they’re really cocky they can win all 3. There’s no real VRA or COI reason for this config, infact I’d argue it’s not great from either standpoint as it cracks minorities in Tampa, isnt based on any precedent, and isn’t really an incumbent thing since as the poster above pointed out you can make a Pinellas seat R-Leaning without touching any other R seats

This is the FL GOP, they ain’t stupid and I have a hard time seeing them just throw away 1-2 possible seats like that

One possibility is that it’s just a placeholder config for now; they drew giant rectangles because they weren’t sure what to do with Tampa yet and they plan on going through later and drawing a more favorable config

There seems to be a fundamental difference of opinion between the Florida Senate and the Florida House on what to do with redistricting. It will be interesting to see who wins out.

Actually one of the drafts we've seen from the House doesn't really look that bad. It shores up Gimenez and Salazar about as much as the Senate does and it doesn't axe Murphy's seat or even really make it redder. It does change the configuration in Tampa to be more R favorable and limit Ds to two seats but even then it doesn't axe Crist's seat or anything. Of course, there's also Sabatini's map which axes Murphy's seat, but everyone hates him so I'm hopeful they won't go with his map. (Plus, his map makes the new seat in Tampa a little tenuous as well.)

Unrelated question: how Hispanic are you allowed to make the Hialeah seat without running afoul of the VRA? Trying to draw a fair map of Florida.

One H000C8001 plan seems pretty reasonable though reduces Tampa to just a likely and lean D seat. However, I'd say the H000C8003 map is a gerrymander, though not the most aggressive one. The thing is it's really hard to shore up the South Miami seats more than they already are anyways because in order to do that you need to start pushing into Cape Coral area, which is just terrible from COI, doesn't help from a VRA standpoint, and just looks horrendous. The map reduces Orlando to only 2 Dem seats when it should clearly be 3.

From what it seems like, it seems like the FL GOP is making maps that at least for now try to protect their incumbents with relatively least change seats in the process keeping seats like FL-05 intact.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Bro if this holds I’m actually pretty happy with how FL Rs redistricted. They were relatively transparent, followed VRA, acknowledged current lines, didn’t make many “power grabs”, and does a decent job at COIs

[ProgressiveModerate]

DeSantis has a lot of influence over the FL Legislature (I know people in the Florida SL and I know DeSantis).

That being said, the final map (while far more aggressive than the State Senate maps) won’t exactly be the DeSantis proposed map. I do expect the final map to possibly draw out FL-05 and have a similar partisan lean (18-19 Trump seats minimum), but it will shore up some R incumbents such as Salazar a bit more.

Except shoring up Salazar and Giminez more is hard without making Diaz-Balart mad; the Senate proposals already make his district into a Clinton one. The GOP seems to be betting on the idea that 2016 Miami-Dade was a fluke and 2020 will be the norm going forwards.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Yeah, as others have said, this DeSantis map doesn't seem to be an actual legitimate proposal, just something to set the tone for what he wants which seems to be more aggressive. It's overall sloppy and too many incumbents would be unhappy.

Even though this map is 19-9 on 2020, it doesn't, there are a lot of Trump + 5ish seats that could foreseeably fall (FL-03, FL-06, FL-17, FL-21, FL-27, FL-28) so it doesn't even do a particularly great job at gerrymandering, more just tries to shoot the Dems floor down to 8 and prolly reduce them to 8 seats in 2022.

[ProgressiveModerate]

DeSantis has a lot of influence over the FL Legislature (I know people in the Florida SL and I know DeSantis).

That being said, the final map (while far more aggressive than the State Senate maps) won’t exactly be the DeSantis proposed map. I do expect the final map to possibly draw out FL-05 and have a similar partisan lean (18-19 Trump seats minimum), but it will shore up some R incumbents such as Salazar a bit more.

Except shoring up Salazar and Giminez more is hard without making Diaz-Balart mad; the Senate proposals already make his district into a Clinton one. The GOP seems to be betting on the idea that 2016 Miami-Dade was a fluke and 2020 will be the norm going forwards.

Looking at the voter registration trends in Miami-Dade as well as the insane drivel the FL Dems are saying about Florida Hispanics, that’s probably a very good bet the GOP is making.

Yes and no. For the furthest out parts of the County (say everything South of Kendall and Hialeah, this definitely seems true (FL25 and 26). However, iirc, Biden actually did better than Obama in FL-27 at least Obama in 2008. This is like Little Havana and the areas immediately outside the "CBD" of Miami with all the High-Rise condos. I think 2024 (and frankly the 2022 midterms) will be a test as to see what happens in Miami Dade because it almost always seems to swing towards the incumbent party regardless of what happens nationally. Even if the Cuban areas of Miami-Dade are shifting right (which I think by and large they are), I still think Biden's performance was uniquely bad, at least for now.

So ig what I'm trying to say is that it's not just 1 big universal shift; the wealthier, higher educated, more connected areas immediately outside CBD will prolly be neutral if not shift left while FL-26 and FL-25 continue their rightwards trajectory.

Keeping FL-27 marginal seems like the GOPs best bet. If it stagnates or shifts left, oh well, at least they had a chance at the start of the decade, and FL-26 and FL-25 can be more secure. If the GOP loses all 3 because of repeat 2016 performance, then there's prolly not much they could've done.

[ProgressiveModerate]

They aren't going to kill FL-05, a VRA district.

Actually, it's not a VRA district as it's only ~40% black, and it'd be very hard to make majority Black, even though it does functionally elect a black Dem

[ProgressiveModerate]

Yo voy a votar

Por fair maps?

[ProgressiveModerate]

To me, it seems like the State Senate is more about bending to the will of individual incumbents, whereas DeSantis is doing more what national Rs want. The DeSantis map would narrow many R seats beyond what incumbents want whereas the Senate map sacrifices D seats in exchange for incumbents retaining their current seat if not making it better. Many incumbents also prolly worry about the potential if the map is overturned because it's seen as too extreme, they'll get completely screwed., When you think about it, this makes sense as the Florida Senate is going to be more invested in the state's politics whereas DeSantis is really a national figure on Rs side.

The FL State Senate map is interesting because while it is generally pretty fair from a COI and visual standpoint, the median seat is pushed decently to the right of the state at about Trump + 10 on 2020 numbers. There just seems to generally be a theme in their maps of everything being normal except a lack of narrow R seats.

[ProgressiveModerate]

I do wonder if this is almost a test of sorts to see how favorable or unfavorable the court may be towards a gerrymander

[ProgressiveModerate]

I wonder if DeSantis is serious with his implicit veto threats. If so, could give Democrats more leverage; they'd probably want a veto override over a court map.

DeSantis has vetoed 1 or 2 unanimously passed bills before and nothing happened to them FYI.

https://twitter.com/fineout/status/1480875684444749824

not related to redistricting.

Difference is that no matter what a congressional map is needed, and I think even DeSantis would prefer a slight GOP Gerry over a Court drawn map which could cause real problems for GOP incumbents, most notably Salazar who's district could become more Dem leaning (though not a guarantee, just a possiblity).

Also seems like that FL-15 is a very very narrow Biden seat possibly. Idk why the GOP legislature has an obsession with creating 3 swingy seats in Tampa, rather than a Likely Dem seat and Tossup (as is the current map)