2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Wisconsin

[BigSkyBob]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Yes. North Carolina.

Was speaking more about the current court (Post-Barrett in other words).

I noted a counter-example from the 90's, I think. The decision went against the
GOP's ability to pack as many Democrats as possible, because these political
oacking of voters was deemed "racial gerrymanders."  The decision cuts two
ways, Democrats can't crack Black-majority districts to create White liberal districts,
and, Republicans can't create districts that are "too" Black, whatever that means.

The notion that the Court has invariable favored the GOP is simply false.

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Yes. North Carolina.

Was speaking more about the current court (Post-Barrett in other words).

I noted a counter-example from the 90's, I think. The decision went against the
GOP's ability to pack as many Democrats as possible, because these political
oacking of voters was deemed "racial gerrymanders."  The decision cuts two
ways, Democrats can't crack Black-majority districts to create White liberal districts,
and, Republicans can't create districts that are "too" Black, whatever that means.

The notion that the Court has invariable favored the GOP is simply false.

Again, I'm talking about Court decisions made in the 2021-2022 timeframe,  obviously throughout history the court has not favored Republicans exclusively, that would be nuts.

[BigSkyBob]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Actually,  this is what you said. There was restriction to this term.

Even with that restriction, the Court did not side with the GOP on the Wisconsin Congressional map. What you said is simply false.

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Actually,  this is what you said. There was restriction to this term.

Even with that restriction, the Court did not side with the GOP on the Wisconsin Congressional map. What you said is simply false.

They refused to take the case, they didn't make a decision in that.   I guess I wasn't exact in my original wording but I typed it pretty quickly.

[BigSkyBob]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Actually,  this is what you said. There was restriction to this term.

Even with that restriction, the Court did not side with the GOP on the Wisconsin Congressional map. What you said is simply false.

They refused to take the case, they didn't make a decision in that.   I guess I wasn't exact in my original wording but I typed it pretty quickly.

Their decision to not take the case disfavored the GOP, did it not?

[Nyvin]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Actually,  this is what you said. There was restriction to this term.

Even with that restriction, the Court did not side with the GOP on the Wisconsin Congressional map. What you said is simply false.

They refused to take the case, they didn't make a decision in that.   I guess I wasn't exact in my original wording but I typed it pretty quickly.

Their decision to not take the case disfavored the GOP, did it not?

"Decision" being the legal term for the papers the court writes after it hears arguments.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Has there been a single redistricting SCOTUS decision that "hasn't" benefited the Republicans?   It seems like it's been a completely one sided partisan court all the way here.

Actually,  this is what you said. There was restriction to this term.

Even with that restriction, the Court did not side with the GOP on the Wisconsin Congressional map. What you said is simply false.

They refused to take the case, they didn't make a decision in that.   I guess I wasn't exact in my original wording but I typed it pretty quickly.

Their decision to not take the case disfavored the GOP, did it not?

"Decision" being the legal term for the papers the court writes after it hears arguments.

Words mean whatever Mr. "conservatism is Boolean" here needs them to mean in order to be nasty to people he's arguing with.

[Schiff for Senate]

More compact and proportional map of WI I carved out: https://districtr.org/plan/128273. The elections referenced are the 2018 Senate race, 2018 Governor race, and 2020 presidential race. All percentages and margins are in terms of the two-way vote share unless otherwise specified (so the Democratic vote share would be (Democratic votes)/(Democratic votes + Republican votes)).


The 1st district is similar to the current 3rd (Ron Kind's seat), but more compact. Doesn't have an arm stretching out to Stevens Point, but it takes in Wisconsin Rapids and comes just short of including Stevens Point. In place of Stevens Point, it includes Madison's blue-leaning western suburbs. It is a very marginal and WWC seat that's usually blue-leaning but where Trump was able to pull off a win. Evers won by 5.18%, Baldwin by 15.5%, and Trump by 1.54%.

The 2nd district includes Madison, as well as swaths of land to its east and especially its north. Overwhelmingly Democratic and the equivalent of Democrat Mark Pocan's Madison-based 2nd district. Gave Biden 66.67% (so basically almost exactly twice as many votes as Trump if not exactly twice as many), Evers 67.62%, and Baldwin 70.18%.

The 3rd district is similar to the current 1st (once represented by vice-presidential candidate and Speaker of the House Republican Paul Ryan...now by Republican Bryan Steil), but a bit bluer than the 1st becomes after redistricting. Includes Kenosha, Racine and Janesville. It includes some of Milwaukee's south suburbs. It is almost the polar opposite of the 1st in so many ways (even aside from the juxtaposed numbering): it's a lot more diverse (75.2% of the 3rd's population is white as compared to 89.3% of the 1st's), much more (sub)urban, more educated, and has a lot less Obama-Trump, Evers-Trump and Baldwin-Trump voters. This is evident from its voting patterns: despite voting to the right of the 1st in both the 2018 gubernatorial and the 2018 senatorial races, it voted quite a bit to its left in the 2020 presidential election. It was Baldwin+13.48, Evers+4.56, and Biden+1.52.

The 4th district is quite similar to the real-life Milwaukee-centric 4th district (represented by Democrat Gwen Moore). However, the margins are smaller for Democrats (though still massive) since the district sheds some of Milwaukee and its bluer suburbs for the redder, WOW suburbs: it includes a small part of southern Ozaukee County and of northeastern Waukesha County. Nonetheless, very liberal. And it has a higher proportion of suburban 'Biden Democrats' versus the more 'Baldwin/Evers Democrats' you find in the other districts. In other words, Biden comes a lot closer to or does even better than Baldwin and Evers in these parts, as compared to other parts of the state where Evers and especially Baldwin do so much better. The seat gave Biden 70.81%, Baldwin 70.18% (this is, note, the exact same as the Madison district - but the Madison district also gave Biden a noticeably smaller margin: this makes sense since western WI and Madison generally seem to be more friendly to Trump as compared to other GOPers than eastern WI and Milwaukee, which seem to prefer Walker-type Republicans, are) and Evers 66.71% (nearly 2 points worse than Evers did in the Madison district).

The 5th district is similar to the real-life 5th district (represented for 42 years by Republican Jim Sensenbrenner), but it's less red - as discussed above, it loses parts of northeast Waukesha County and southern Ozaukee County, and instead includes some blue areas in Milwaukee County. The seat is also notable since Biden did a lot better than Evers did, despite Evers doing better than Biden statewide and a lot better than Biden in western WI and Madison. Trump did win a comfortable 58.19%, but this is not much better than Baldwin's opponent's 57.13%, and much worse than Scott Walker's 62.4%.

The 6th district is mostly similar to the real-life 6th but also includes some areas that are in the real-life 8th. It stretches north from northern Ozaukee County and includes Sheboygan (residence of Republican Rep. Glenn Grothman) in Sheboygan County, as well as Fond Du Lac, Oshkosh, and other mid-sized cities in eastern and northeastern WI. It stops just short of Appleton (though it includes urban areas to Appleton's west and southwest), but stretches all the way up to Door County, WI's easternmost county and one of just two Trump-Biden counties statewide. This is arguably the reddest district and the only one where Trump broke 60%: he won 60.51%, whereas Walker won a slightly bigger 60.75% and Baldwin's opponent managed 54.52%.

The 7th in Northeast WI is similar to the real-life 8th, represented by Republican Mike Gallagher, though it excludes counties such as Door. Major cities include Green Bay (Gallagher's residence) and Appleton, though it also stretches west to include counties like Florence (one of two where Trump crossed 70% of the total vote in 2020) as well as the reservation for Menominee Native Americans in Menominee County (one of a handful to have never gone Republican, though that might be because of how recently it was established). Trump's 15.3% margin was bigger than Walker's 14.96% margin and a lot bigger than the 2.44% margin Baldwin's opponent managed.

Lastly, we have District 8, in northwest WI, corresponding to the real-life District 7, represented by Republican Tom Tiffany since a 2020 special election. Trump won by 15.68% (slightly more than he won the next-door 7th by), but Walker won by a much smaller 10.64% (a lot less than Walker got in the neigbouring 7th) and Baldwin actually won the district by 0.66%. She would have lost the district if not for the rural, sparse, overwhelmingly white and ancestrally; and inexplicably, still; blue counties of Ashland, Douglas, and Bayfield, WI's northernmost counties and counties who meet a large body of water.

[Schiff for Senate]

Decently-compact map in WI that really benefits Democrats from where they currently are: https://districtr.org/plan/130251

1st district - Lean R. In Western WI (including the 3 blue counties in Northwest WI, La Cross, and Eau Claire). Voted Evers-Baldwin-Trump and Trump only won it by like 5 or 6. In a blue year, this is easily a district that the DCCC can win.
2nd district - Likely D. Madison's western suburbs (and parts of western Dane County and probably parts of Madison proper) and Portage. Voted Evers-Baldwin-Biden and Biden won it by about 8.
3rd district - Safe R. Extremely large district in rural WI. Very red. Voted Walker-Vukmir-Trump. Trump won it by about 26 points.
4th - Safe D. In Madison and to its east. Voted Evers-Baldwin-Biden. Biden won it by about 20 points.
5th - Safe D. Southeast WI. Parts of Kenosha, Racine, Walworth and Milwaukee Counties. Includes parts of Milwaukee and as a result is solidly Democratic. Also includes cities such as Racine and Kenosha. Voted Evers-Baldwin-Biden. Biden won it by about 20 points.
6th - Safe D. Is comprised of parts of Milwaukee (shared with the 5th), Waukesha (shared with the 4th and 7th), Kenosha (shared with the 5th) and Racine (shared with the 5th) Counties. Demographically, only district in the state where black people outnumber Hispanics, as well as the only district where over 20% of the population is black. Voted Evers-Baldwin-Biden. Biden won it by about 20 points.
7th - Safe R. Similar to the real-life 6th and 8th districts. Includes Sheboygan, West Bend, Menoninee Falls. In eastern WI, best described as 'exurban' or 'suburban.' Voted Walker-Vukmir-Trump. Trump won it by about 23 points.
8th - Lean R. Similar to the real-life 8th district (Gallagher's seat) but more urban, less compact, and less conservative. Voted Walker-Baldwin-Trump. But Trump won it by less than 5 points (as is the case in much of eastern WI, including the 6th and 7th districts in this map, Walker did better in his 2018 bid) and it can very plausibly go blue in a good year for the Democrats (like a GOP midterm).

I think 4-4 would be the likely delegation for the most part (2 and 4-6 go blue; 1, 3 and 7-8 go red). A reasonable best-case scenario for the GOP is 5-3 (4-6 go blue; 1-3 and 7-8 go red). A reasonable best-case scenario for the Democrats is 6-2 (all but 3 and 7 go blue).



EDIT: Made a D gerry I wanted to share but didn't want to bump a thread where the last post (this one) is over 4 months old. https://districtr.org/plan/143663. Five Biden districts (three partially in the Madison area; two partially in the Milwaukee area; one in Western WI that voted for him by an extremely thin margin, and likely broke for Trump in 2016 but he's kind of the floor, and other statewide Democrats do quite a bit better), three Trump districts (one a mixture of the current WI06 - Grothman's seat - and WI08 - Gallagher's seat; another that probably is most similar to WI08; and a third that is very large and rural and takes in much of Tiffany's WI07 - excluding the MN-WI border, and those blue counties in the northernmost part of the state, which fall into the 1st District). So - five Biden seats, five Evers seats, and actually 6 Baldwin seats (the five Biden-Evers seats + a Green Bay district that's not that red otherwise). The Milwaukee districts, without my intending for them to, are also kind of nicely demographically divided - one of the seats (the one bluer and further north) is over 30% black, while the other (southern part of Milwaukee (County), as well as Kenosha and Racine and a good bit of Bryan Steil's WI01) is over 20% Hispanic.

EDIT: Another one - https://districtr.org/plan/148311

[ProgressiveModerate]

Fair 7 district WI for 2030. This uses 2020 census numbers so you might need to move some population here and there but the map stands.

District 1: The successor to the current district 1, nicely nested in the Southeast corner in the state. This map cleans up the Awful Rock County split and instead has the district take in more of Milwaukee and Waukesha, making the district more suburban and Milwaukee focused in general.

District 2: Tbh, this was a sort of leftovers district that takes in much of what used to be 2, 6, and 8. Very rural in nature, but takes in some of Madison's outer sphere of influence. Will be a fun district politically due to the heavy polarization between liberal Madison are and some of most Conservative rural counties up in Northern WI.

District 3: The successor to the current WI-03, basically a driftless district. Takes in a lot of bluer rural communities, however, it has to expand a bit inwards.

District 4: District 4 is likely to be the most underpopulated by the end of the decade, so I decided to do a Madison-Milwaukee merge which tbh, falls pretty naturally and creates a district that is maximally urban so that urban Wisconsin can get a voice. As a consequence, WI-04 loses any black functionality it may still have left, but again, the black population of Milwaukee has been on a pretty rapid decline and WI-04 will have to expand anyways.

District 5: This is the successor to the current WI-05, based heavily in Waukesha and basically all of Milwaukee's deep red suburbs and exurbs. It also takes in a few precincts from Milwaukee 4 had to shed to be made into a maximally urban district and make district 5 a bit more competative

District 6: This district was designed to be a coastal district, taking in much of the Fox Valley, and stretching up to Boone County and down to Ozaukee. A lot of these mid-sized communities have been on the rise and are transitioning from more historically industrial towns to more modern communities.

District 7: District 7 takes in the northern part of the state and is basically equivalent to the existing 7. Due to needing to expand, the district now takes in Eau Claire and Stevens Point.

Honestly, I really think this map falls quite nicely. Populations by 2030 will force inevitable changes but the cores of the districts make sense.

Unfortunately, due to crappy geography for Democrats, this map likely produces a 6R-1D delegation but unless you want to do something egregious to overcome Ds disastrous geography in WI, there's not much you can do.



Here's an alternative proposal that places a greater emphasis on compactness and abiding by counties, but at the expense of COI. This map also takes some pretty bold steps to try and help Democrats overcome their horrible geography, most notably by putting Milwaukee and Madison into separate districts when logically, they should be kept together cause they're both blue cities.

[Epaminondas]

This map also takes some pretty bold steps to try and help Democrats overcome their horrible geography, most notably by putting Milwaukee and Madison into separate districts when logically, they should be kept together cause they're both blue cities.

Good joke? Can't tell in writing. Such beautiful baconstrips whet the appetite.

Decently-compact map in WI that really benefits Democrats from where they currently are: https://districtr.org/plan/130251
(...)
EDIT: Another one - https://districtr.org/plan/148311

Has rdistrict switched 2018 governor and senate results?
Well done, solid 5-3 Dem maps, although the Manitowoc-Fond du Lac tentacle is a little meandering.

[Schiff for Senate]

This map also takes some pretty bold steps to try and help Democrats overcome their horrible geography, most notably by putting Milwaukee and Madison into separate districts when logically, they should be kept together cause they're both blue cities.

Good joke? Can't tell in writing. Such beautiful baconstrips whet the appetite.

Decently-compact map in WI that really benefits Democrats from where they currently are: https://districtr.org/plan/130251
(...)
EDIT: Another one - https://districtr.org/plan/148311

Has rdistrict switched 2018 governor and senate results?
Well done, solid 5-3 Dem maps, although the Manitowoc-Fond du Lac tentacle is a little meandering.

I'm 99% sure that's the case.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

How likely is Wisconsin to lose its eighth CD in 2030?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

How the hell is this a fair district?

Madison and Milwaukee are two separate cities and communities of interest. There's absolutely no reason to put them together besides a GOP gerrymander.

[ProgressiveModerate]

How the hell is this a fair district?

Madison and Milwaukee are two separate cities and communities of interest. There's absolutely no reason to put them together besides a GOP gerrymander.

If a district needs to be cut, district 4 is most likely to be underpopulated and will thus have to expand. The district it shares the most in common with is 2, so it's the most logical merge.

(If you couldn't tell already, I'm being sarcastic and makiing fun of Ds geography troubles in WI)

[Nyvin]

Just looking ahead at what might happen if the new court majority strikes down the Senate map.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/55a7886e-0a74-4fac-9e68-7b8608b63ea6

[AustralianSwingVoter]

So we’ll be needing this thread again soon given Janet Protasiewicz.

[Roll Roons]

How exactly do you get a clean map with more than two Biden seats?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

How exactly do you get a clean map with more than two Biden seats?

You could put Rock in with Eau Claire and split up the core of Milwaukee County in two. I dunno how "clean" that would be, though.

[kwabbit]

How exactly do you get a clean map with more than two Biden seats?

It's pretty easy if you change up the typical county combos. If you pair Dane with Jefferson and Dodge, giving WI-03 all of Rock and having it also take in Eau Claire and La Crosse makes it Biden +5.

[ProgressiveModerate]

What about this as a baseline for a fair map? Huge population deviations but all counties are whole so def some tweaks to be made around the margins.

https://davesredistricting.org/join/f2d8ee93-e0bd-4a3f-9649-63f79b7960b2

I think there is a case to be made that Ozaukee can be paired with Milwaukee at this point, especially since it allows for a perfect divide in Milwaukee County because Milwaukee proper and communities to the South/West of Milwaukee proper.

Madison is harder. Splitting Dane down the middle violates a clear community of interest, and to make WI-03 a Biden seat, you need all 3 of Eau Claire, La Crosse, and Rock Counties, but to do so you need some notable testicles (similar to the current WI-03).

[GALeftist]

notable testicles

[Sol]

It's pretty easy to make WI-03 Democratic; you just have to give it Rock (and send WI-02 east). You don't even have to put in Eau Claire.

[ProgressiveModerate]

It's pretty easy to make WI-03 Democratic; you just have to give it Rock (and send WI-02 east). You don't even have to put in Eau Claire.

If you send WI-02 East then redistricting the WOW/Milwaukee area gets funky, since 5 has to be pushed North.

[Sol]

It's pretty easy to make WI-03 Democratic; you just have to give it Rock (and send WI-02 east). You don't even have to put in Eau Claire.

If you send WI-02 East then redistricting the WOW/Milwaukee area gets funky, since 5 has to be pushed North.

Yeah it'll have to take Sheboygan and Fond du Lac, minus like half of one or the other. Not optimal but not crazy either, and more appealing if you don't put WI-04 in with Ozaukee.