2020 Census and Redistricting Thread: Kansas

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

What are we looking at in Kansas for post-2020 redistricting?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/9dd320fe-9e3d-4f3e-a354-3fe1d91af5f3
This is a least-change map. There is only one county split, and that split is inevitable unless you separate Johnson and Wyandotte.

[EastAnglianLefty]

It looks like the Republicans have veto-proof majorities in both houses, but presumably given the moderate-conservative split that wouldn't be sufficient to sustain a veto override?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

It looks like the Republicans have veto-proof majorities in both houses, but presumably given the moderate-conservative split that wouldn't be sufficient to sustain a veto override?

I think the more important factor is that Steve Watkins will want a safer district. So we see an incumbent protection deal where Davids gets Wyandotte and Lawrence counties and then part of Johnson. It's not as though Johnson County's history gives one the impression that it's a firm D stronghold...

[Oryxslayer]

Here's what I think would come from Kansas. There are a lot of things pointing at Incumbent Protection here, or at least some from of mutual cooperation. Dems control the courts. The traditional-radical split in the KS GOP means a low chance of a successful veto override - and that's if Dems don't break the supermajorities in 2020. Watkins wants to lose Douglas.

The only downside I see in hindsight to a map like this is that certain districts might not want to have voters in stranded in certain media markets, so here is a version that cleans up media markets. Such action busts up other COIs in the 2nd.

[EastAnglianLefty]

There's a non-zero chance Watkins loses his primary. Would LaTurner winning the primary make a meaningful difference to what map was preferred?

[Oryxslayer]

There's a non-zero chance Watkins loses his primary. Would LaTurner winning the primary make a meaningful difference to what map was preferred?

LaTurner is from the SE corner, so it probably changes very little. Him winning would banish the chance of the Joplin-Pittsburgh market getting cut, and the market would need to be in the second. There is a low chance that one might stick the SE corner in the fourth and make the second into a NE seat centered on Topeka and Manhattan, but that low chance becomes 0 with LaTurner.

[VPH]

Here's what I think would come from Kansas. There are a lot of things pointing at Incumbent Protection here, or at least some from of mutual cooperation. Dems control the courts. The traditional-radical split in the KS GOP means a low chance of a successful veto override - and that's if Dems don't break the supermajorities in 2020. Watkins wants to lose Douglas.

I think the odds of this are low. As somebody who grew up in Wichita, it makes zero sense to split Harvey or Kingman counties from Sedgwick. While Reno has Hutchinson, Harvey and Kingman are decidedly more in the Wichita bubble. So if you're talking communities of interest, they should be with Sedgwick County.

[Skill and Chance]

It looks like the Republicans have veto-proof majorities in both houses, but presumably given the moderate-conservative split that wouldn't be sufficient to sustain a veto override?

Even if they all cooperate, Republicans only have the supermajority by one seat in the lower house.  It's pretty likely they lose it this year given that the realignment of the eastern suburbs is not yet complete. 

[Libertas Vel Mors]

The likelist imo is a 3-1 incumbent protection. Dems will want to shore up KS-03, and Rs will have to make a deal thanks to Kelly being Governor.

Map:



Stats:

KS-01:
Trump +43.5
Kobach +12.5

KS-02:
Trump +28.2
Kobach +3.6

KS-03:
Clinton +14.8
Kelly +34.0

KS-04:
Trump +28.6
Kobach +2.2

[Oryxslayer]

The likelist imo is a 3-1 incumbent protection. Dems will want to shore up KS-03, and Rs will have to make a deal thanks to Kelly being Governor.

Map:

Stats:

KS-01:
Trump +43.5
Kobach +12.5

KS-02:
Trump +28.2
Kobach +3.6

KS-03:
Clinton +14.8
Kelly +34.0

KS-04:
Trump +28.6
Kobach +2.2

Two issues that I have comments before to someone just copying the 538 map:

Davids lives in Shawnee and Watkins in Topeka. Both are drawn out.

Once you correct for this, it becomes easier to link Lawrence through Johnson than cut Leavenworth.

Doing both of these things produces maps similar to the ones I posted above, depending on the communities you prefer to observe.

[lfromnj]

The likelist imo is a 3-1 incumbent protection. Dems will want to shore up KS-03, and Rs will have to make a deal thanks to Kelly being Governor.

Map:

Stats:

KS-01:
Trump +43.5
Kobach +12.5

KS-02:
Trump +28.2
Kobach +3.6

KS-03:
Clinton +14.8
Kelly +34.0

KS-04:
Trump +28.6
Kobach +2.2

Two issues that I have comments before to someone just copying the 538 map:

Davids lives in Shawnee and Watkins in Topeka.

Once you correct for this, it becomes easier to link Lawrence through Johnson than cut Leavenworth.

Doing both of these things produces maps similar to the ones I posted above, depending on the communities you prefer to observe.

Well this assumes Watkins has any allies in the legislature.

[Oryxslayer]

Here's what I think would come from Kansas. There are a lot of things pointing at Incumbent Protection here, or at least some from of mutual cooperation. Dems control the courts. The traditional-radical split in the KS GOP means a low chance of a successful veto override - and that's if Dems don't break the supermajorities in 2020. Watkins wants to lose Douglas.

I think the odds of this are low. As somebody who grew up in Wichita, it makes zero sense to split Harvey or Kingman counties from Sedgwick. While Reno has Hutchinson, Harvey and Kingman are decidedly more in the Wichita bubble. So if you're talking communities of interest, they should be with Sedgwick County.

Well, it is an incumbent protection map first and a COI map second. I bet you can therefore guess why Reno was preferred over Harvey. Harvey almost voted against the GOP in the special, which is ground for it being sunk in the Big First. The 4th should be safe GOP in all circumstances, and since you shouldn't be cutting counties west of Lawrence....

It also voted for Kelly, but tbh that shouldn't be seen a sin. Her win had good geographic spread and it's hard to make KS04 and KS02 into anything more than marginal Kobach wins. Her win will not be replicated in any meaningful capacity, only when the KSGOP screw up their potential future statewide nominees.

[Sol]

Here's what I think would come from Kansas. There are a lot of things pointing at Incumbent Protection here, or at least some from of mutual cooperation. Dems control the courts. The traditional-radical split in the KS GOP means a low chance of a successful veto override - and that's if Dems don't break the supermajorities in 2020. Watkins wants to lose Douglas.

I think the odds of this are low. As somebody who grew up in Wichita, it makes zero sense to split Harvey or Kingman counties from Sedgwick. While Reno has Hutchinson, Harvey and Kingman are decidedly more in the Wichita bubble. So if you're talking communities of interest, they should be with Sedgwick County.

Well, it is an incumbent protection map first and a COI map second. I bet you can therefore guess why Reno was preferred over Harvey. Harvey almost voted against the GOP in the special, which is ground for it being sunk in the Big First. The 4th should be safe GOP in all circumstances, and since you shouldn't be cutting counties west of Lawrence....

It also voted for Kelly, but tbh that shouldn't be seen a sin. Her win had good geographic spread and it's hard to make KS04 and KS02 into anything more than marginal Kobach wins. Her win will not be replicated in any meaningful capacity, only when the KSGOP screw up their potential future statewide nominees.

I think you're again underrating the importance of quirky local interests. If Kansas' 2010 cycle tells us anything it's that the KSGOP is prone to infighting and will have to appease local concerns. That doesn't mean that they won't cut the counties like that, but not every state map drawers operate with the same careful ruthlessness as far as maximizing partisan advantage goes as you assume.

[Oryxslayer]

Here's what I think would come from Kansas. There are a lot of things pointing at Incumbent Protection here, or at least some from of mutual cooperation. Dems control the courts. The traditional-radical split in the KS GOP means a low chance of a successful veto override - and that's if Dems don't break the supermajorities in 2020. Watkins wants to lose Douglas.

I think the odds of this are low. As somebody who grew up in Wichita, it makes zero sense to split Harvey or Kingman counties from Sedgwick. While Reno has Hutchinson, Harvey and Kingman are decidedly more in the Wichita bubble. So if you're talking communities of interest, they should be with Sedgwick County.

Well, it is an incumbent protection map first and a COI map second. I bet you can therefore guess why Reno was preferred over Harvey. Harvey almost voted against the GOP in the special, which is ground for it being sunk in the Big First. The 4th should be safe GOP in all circumstances, and since you shouldn't be cutting counties west of Lawrence....

It also voted for Kelly, but tbh that shouldn't be seen a sin. Her win had good geographic spread and it's hard to make KS04 and KS02 into anything more than marginal Kobach wins. Her win will not be replicated in any meaningful capacity, only when the KSGOP screw up their potential future statewide nominees.

I think you're again underrating the importance of quirky local interests. If Kansas' 2010 cycle tells us anything it's that the KSGOP is prone to infighting and will have to appease local concerns. That doesn't mean that they won't cut the counties like that, but not every state map drawers operate with the same careful ruthlessness as far as maximizing partisan advantage goes as you assume.

If one was to swap Reno and Harvey, you would end up filling the 4th's remaining pop requirements with rurals to the west so it would be a simple trade, just on that effects the seats partisan baseline.

To that end though, I think you are misunderstanding how incumbent protection maps work. In Kansas, the GOP will be unable to break said supermajority because of their infighting or because they lost it in 2020. the dems have the courts. If the GOP doesn't come to the table, they lose their seats by default. So both factions come to the table.

At this point one can only assume what types of demands will be leveled but here are the most common on incumbent protection plans:

-A Safer seat if said seat has any history of a competitive race
-A seat safe from a primary because it keeps your base whole (or adds more) and cracks bases of potential opponents. Sometimes this means grabbing other legislators homes via a arm.
 - Sometimes the opposite is true and a primary challenger has more collateral that the incumbent, and a seat is drawn to their advantage in a coming primary.
-A Seat that does not 'strand' populations in other media markets. You shouldn't have to go on the air for 20k people if it can be avoided. Even more important for districts with less voters than congressional seats.
-A seat that preserves a substantial percentage of the previous seats voters who know their representative as their incumbent.
-A seat with a specific shape. Either this is compact and rational because the incumbent has a base, or it is the opposite because the incumbent does not. Community lines though should try to be preserved. This is all because of voter outreach and constituent services - the more rational the district, the easier and cheaper these are.

NJ is the prototypical Incumbent protection, at least with 2008 data. MD is the prototypical state where incumbents levy their demands and the legislature must balance these out. In the end, Incumbent protection produces agreements that should only satisfy incumbents, anyone else is secondary.

[Sestak]

The likelist imo is a 3-1 incumbent protection. Dems will want to shore up KS-03, and Rs will have to make a deal thanks to Kelly being Governor.

Map:

Stats:

KS-01:
Trump +43.5
Kobach +12.5

KS-02:
Trump +28.2
Kobach +3.6

KS-03:
Clinton +14.8
Kelly +34.0

KS-04:
Trump +28.6
Kobach +2.2

Two issues that I have comments before to someone just copying the 538 map:

Davids lives in Shawnee and Watkins in Topeka.

Once you correct for this, it becomes easier to link Lawrence through Johnson than cut Leavenworth.

Doing both of these things produces maps similar to the ones I posted above, depending on the communities you prefer to observe.

Well this assumes Watkins has any allies in the legislature.

Yeah doesn't literally the entire KSGOP hate him?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

So could we be looking at the 2nd itself being messed with, to help capsize Watkins, even with Davids getting a better district? And if so, what would the extent of the changes be?

[I’m not Stu]

Democrats control SCOKS. What would a fair map look like?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Democrats control SCOKS. What would a fair map look like?

An optimized district for Davids and a CoI map elsewhere.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/83c6da12-826e-4175-8865-c66248c7e933
this is what a fair map would look like. Davids gets a seat that is basically flipped in PVI, Likely D essentially. Meanwhile no counties are split outside of Johnson County. The new 2nd isn't as purely CoI as the map I posted earlier - including Topeka in the 3rd makes that impossible - but it does look compact and do the best possible job given the circumstances.

[Sol]

Oryxslayer, your belief that legislators will draw perfectly optimized districts for whatever objective is silly. State legislators are swayed by things other than just perfectly meeting some benchmark of incumbent protection or gerrymandering. These can include local pressure, tradition, or simple ignorance. The country's maps are filled with cases where map drawers have "left things on the table" as it were.

There's no certainty in any of this, and to assume that Kansas's legislators will draw a perfectly optimized map incumbent protection map without at least considering local factors or tradition is a bit silly.

[Oryxslayer]

Oryxslayer, your belief that legislators will draw perfectly optimized districts for whatever objective is silly. State legislators are swayed by things other than just perfectly meeting some benchmark of incumbent protection or gerrymandering. These can include local pressure, tradition, or simple ignorance. The country's maps are filled with cases where map drawers have "left things on the table" as it were.

There's no certainty in any of this, and to assume that Kansas's legislators will draw a perfectly optimized map incumbent protection map without at least considering local factors or tradition is a bit silly.

We are going to have to agree to disagree and end here. The job of a redistricting firm is to produce the most ideal map given the specifications of the politicians. If they don't earn their pay, then reputations sour and clients seek other vendors. Those specifications are often more than numerous depending on how many interest groups (partisans, incumbents, people, communities, etc depending on the state process) are laying demands before the public-facing front of redistricting. If something is not specifically detailed...well then...

[Libertas Vel Mors]

The likelist imo is a 3-1 incumbent protection. Dems will want to shore up KS-03, and Rs will have to make a deal thanks to Kelly being Governor.

Map:

Stats:

KS-01:
Trump +43.5
Kobach +12.5

KS-02:
Trump +28.2
Kobach +3.6

KS-03:
Clinton +14.8
Kelly +34.0

KS-04:
Trump +28.6
Kobach +2.2

Two issues that I have comments before to someone just copying the 538 map:

Davids lives in Shawnee and Watkins in Topeka. Both are drawn out.

Once you correct for this, it becomes easier to link Lawrence through Johnson than cut Leavenworth.

Doing both of these things produces maps similar to the ones I posted above, depending on the communities you prefer to observe.

1. The legislature doesn't really like Watkins either way though, he has few allies.

2. The part of Shawnee where Davids is is in the district, I believe

[Nyvin]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/83c6da12-826e-4175-8865-c66248c7e933
this is what a fair map would look like. Davids gets a seat that is basically flipped in PVI, Likely D essentially. Meanwhile no counties are split outside of Johnson County. The new 2nd isn't as purely CoI as the map I posted earlier - including Topeka in the 3rd makes that impossible - but it does look compact and do the best possible job given the circumstances.

I seriously doubt Kansas City and Topeka end up in the same district, especially when Douglas + Wyandotte + most of Johnson makes for such a convenient district for Davids. 

If Republicans don't care about Douglas being in KS-2 they might even push for just a Wyandotte + Johnson district.   The KS Dems will want Douglas in with KS-3 though.

Topeka hasn't been in the same district with KC for at least five decades.   

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://davesredistricting.org/join/83c6da12-826e-4175-8865-c66248c7e933
this is what a fair map would look like. Davids gets a seat that is basically flipped in PVI, Likely D essentially. Meanwhile no counties are split outside of Johnson County. The new 2nd isn't as purely CoI as the map I posted earlier - including Topeka in the 3rd makes that impossible - but it does look compact and do the best possible job given the circumstances.

I seriously doubt Kansas City and Topeka end up in the same district, especially when Douglas + Wyandotte + most of Johnson makes for such a convenient district for Davids.  

If Republicans don't care about Douglas being in KS-2 they might even push for just a Wyandotte + Johnson district.   The KS Dems will want Douglas in with KS-3 though.

Topeka hasn't been in the same district with KC for at least five decades.  

A D+3 seat with Topeka is quite a bit safer for Davids than a D+1.5 one without it. A fair map means you have a firmed up D district to help better ensure a Dem is elected to the House.
It seems unwise to just rely on Johnson County voting for Democratic candidates and leave Davids with a quite marginal constituency.
In the end the county with Topeka is more Dem and more reliably Dem than the central parts of Johnson County.